Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
No it wasn't. Stop making things up. We already know you are a fuckwit of the first order. We don't need daily proof to remind us of the fact.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
This wasn’t a fringe element, this was a central plank of the Leave prospectus.
And now Leave voters who claim to be shocked by Labour anti-Semitism apparently think Leave xenophobia is just fine.
Are you willing to confront the xenophobic lie that was at the core of the Remain campaign, namely 'the locals aren't willing to do the work' ?
Two possible bets for next US President if you can find decently long odds: Senators Doug Jones of Alabama and Jon Tester of Montana. These are Democrat senators in states that went substantially Trump last time. They stand a good chance of winning if they get nominated. Nomination of a candidate who appeals to Republican voters might seem a tall order in a primary that panders to the activist base, but bear in mind these two got themselves selected in their own states. There are plenty of liberal contenders in Red states who are nowhere near power. "The best candidate to get rid of Trump" might be an attractive message in the Democratic primary.k
I hope everyone will support Muslims in their community due to the hostile and fearful environment these disgraceful "punish a Muslim day" letters threatening muslims in the Uk tomorrow have created amongst families. I'm off to hospital tomorrow but will attend one of the nationwide demonstrations of support to make it #LoveaMuslimDay and oppose all islamophobic hatred in our society.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
Or address the casual Islamophobia of an MP they are in alliance with.
Whataboutery at its finest with a soupçon of twattish metaphor to help things along. What are the literal facts underlying "fell in behind" and "in alliance with"? (No need to answer that; there aren't any). Metaphors are intended to illuminate, not to hide the fact that you have nothing to say.
The fact that Paisley Junior has apologised for his Islamophobia makes you look foolish, I'd call you a twat in reply, but we both know you neither have the warmth or the depth.
In alliance with means the DUP confidence and supply deal the Tories have that keeps them in power. Perhaps you missed it.
You seem to be conflating pb leavers with the conservative party. They are different things on a number of levels. I thought you belonged to the latter?
I wonder if the BBC will give the Guardian letter any coverage?
They seem to be covering Winifred Mandela passing in some detail as do Sky
I saw a BBC newsman earlier doing a live camera link and saying that Winnie "made some mistakes"
I am guessing the same person who wrote this....
South Africa's pride and joy - and my neighbour
Analysis by Milton Nkosi, BBC News, Johannesburg I knew Winnie Madikizela-Mandela personally. We come from the same neighbourhood in Soweto.
To many, she was the pride and joy of the nation, an icon in her own right - never mind the fact she was Nelson Mandela's wife.
Mrs Madikizela-Mandela was also the first black social worker in the country. Her love and desire to help those in need was always burning from deep inside.
But she was not nothing but sweet talk. She met the brutality of racial segregation with fire. Each time the police came to arrest her at her home in Orlando West, she held her own. She never gave in. Not one inch - and sometimes, this landed her in trouble. As anti-apartheid activist Mosioua Lekota noted in her defence: "Those who did nothing under apartheid never made mistakes."
She will be remembered for her fight against an inhumane system, rather than for the mistakes she made in that fight.
Fewer people's jobs are likely to be destroyed by artificial intelligence and robots than has been suggested by a much-cited study, an OECD report says.
An influential 2013 forecast by Oxford University said that about 47% of jobs in the US in 2010 and 35% in the UK were at "high risk" of being automated over the following 20 years.
But the OECD puts the US figure at about 10% and the UK's at 12%.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
Or address the casual Islamophobia of an MP they are in alliance with.
Whataboutery at its finest with a soupçon of twattish metaphor to help things along. What are the literal facts underlying "fell in behind" and "in alliance with"? (No need to answer that; there aren't any). Metaphors are intended to illuminate, not to hide the fact that you have nothing to say.
The fact that Paisley Junior has apologised for his Islamophobia makes you look foolish, I'd call you a twat in reply, but we both know you neither have the warmth or the depth.
In alliance with means the DUP confidence and supply deal the Tories have that keeps them in power. Perhaps you missed it.
You seem to be conflating pb leavers with the conservative party. They are different things on a number of levels. I thought you belonged to the latter?
I wonder if the BBC will give the Guardian letter any coverage?
They seem to be covering Winifred Mandela passing in some detail as do Sky
I saw a BBC newsman earlier doing a live camera link and saying that Winnie "made some mistakes"
I am guessing the same lady who wrote this....
South Africa's pride and joy - and my neighbour
Analysis by Milton Nkosi, BBC News, Johannesburg I knew Winnie Madikizela-Mandela personally. We come from the same neighbourhood in Soweto.
To many, she was the pride and joy of the nation, an icon in her own right - never mind the fact she was Nelson Mandela's wife.
Mrs Madikizela-Mandela was also the first black social worker in the country. Her love and desire to help those in need was always burning from deep inside.
But she was not nothing but sweet talk. She met the brutality of racial segregation with fire. Each time the police came to arrest her at her home in Orlando West, she held her own. She never gave in. Not one inch - and sometimes, this landed her in trouble. As anti-apartheid activist Mosioua Lekota noted in her defence: "Those who did nothing under apartheid never made mistakes."
She will be remembered for her fight against an inhumane system, rather than for the mistakes she made in that fight.
I believe it takes the victim on average 20 minutes to die of necklacing. Outstanding stuff.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
No it wasn't. Stop making things up. We already know you are a fuckwit of the first order. We don't need daily proof to remind us of the fact.
There was a discussion programme on the BBC today on Brexit with members of the group from both sides. As Laura Kuenssberg noted at the end the opinion from everyone was to get on with it and no going back.
Furthermore they were critical of TM but everyone thought that it is beyond Corbyn to deal with.
So I would respectfully suggest to stop fighting against the referendum and move on. If necessary join a group who will campaign to re-join, that would be more honest
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
No it wasn't. Stop making things up. We already know you are a fuckwit of the first order. We don't need daily proof to remind us of the fact.
Turkey is not joining the EU.
Yet wasn't it an applicant to join the EU ? An application which the British government publicly supported ?
I hope everyone will support Muslims in their community due to the hostile and fearful environment these disgraceful "punish a Muslim day" letters threatening muslims in the Uk tomorrow have created amongst families. I'm off to hospital tomorrow but will attend one of the nationwide demonstrations of support to make it #LoveaMuslimDay and oppose all islamophobic hatred in our society.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
Or address the casual Islamophobia of an MP they are in alliance with.
Whataboutery at its finest with a soupçon of twattish metaphor to help things along. What are the literal facts underlying "fell in behind" and "in alliance with"? (No need to answer that; there aren't any). Metaphors are intended to illuminate, not to hide the fact that you have nothing to say.
The fact that Paisley Junior has apologised for his Islamophobia makes you look foolish, I'd call you a twat in reply, but we both know you neither have the warmth or the depth.
In alliance with means the DUP confidence and supply deal the Tories have that keeps them in power. Perhaps you missed it.
You seem to be conflating pb leavers with the conservative party. They are different things on a number of levels. I thought you belonged to the latter?
Next month will be the 21st anniversary of my being a member of the Tory party.
I hope everyone will support Muslims in their community due to the hostile and fearful environment these disgraceful "punish a Muslim day" letters threatening muslims in the Uk tomorrow have created amongst families. I'm off to hospital tomorrow but will attend one of the nationwide demonstrations of support to make it #LoveaMuslimDay and oppose all islamophobic hatred in our society.
Saw that this was happening from my timeline yesterday - a retweet from a Daily Show discussion on it, so I don’t know if it’s getting much coverage in our media, sadly.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
No it wasn't. Stop making things up. We already know you are a fuckwit of the first order. We don't need daily proof to remind us of the fact.
There was a discussion programme on the BBC today on Brexit with members of the group from both sides. As Laura Kuenssberg noted at the end the opinion from everyone was to get on with it and no going back.
Furthermore they were critical of TM but everyone thought that it is beyond Corbyn to deal with.
So I would respectfully suggest to stop fighting against the referendum and move on. If necessary join a group who will campaign to re-join, that would be more honest
In theory people don't want to reverse Brexit, but in practice they don't want to deliver it.
I hope everyone will support Muslims in their community due to the hostile and fearful environment these disgraceful "punish a Muslim day" letters threatening muslims in the Uk tomorrow have created amongst families. I'm off to hospital tomorrow but will attend one of the nationwide demonstrations of support to make it #LoveaMuslimDay and oppose all islamophobic hatred in our society.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
No it wasn't. Stop making things up. We already know you are a fuckwit of the first order. We don't need daily proof to remind us of the fact.
There was a discussion programme on the BBC today on Brexit with members of the group from both sides. As Laura Kuenssberg noted at the end the opinion from everyone was to get on with it and no going back.
Furthermore they were critical of TM but everyone thought that it is beyond Corbyn to deal with.
So I would respectfully suggest to stop fighting against the referendum and move on. If necessary join a group who will campaign to re-join, that would be more honest
In theory people don't want to reverse Brexit, but in practice they don't want to deliver it.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
No it wasn't. Stop making things up. We already know you are a fuckwit of the first order. We don't need daily proof to remind us of the fact.
There was a discussion programme on the BBC today on Brexit with members of the group from both sides. As Laura Kuenssberg noted at the end the opinion from everyone was to get on with it and no going back.
Furthermore they were critical of TM but everyone thought that it is beyond Corbyn to deal with.
So I would respectfully suggest to stop fighting against the referendum and move on. If necessary join a group who will campaign to re-join, that would be more honest
In theory people don't want to reverse Brexit, but in practice they don't want to deliver it.
In practice they don't want the hassle of not delivering it either. We're in a bit of a bind as a result.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
No it wasn't. Stop making things up. We already know you are a fuckwit of the first order. We don't need daily proof to remind us of the fact.
Turkey is not joining the EU.
Yet wasn't it an applicant to join the EU ? An application which the British government publicly supported ?
It is *now* not joining the EU as a result of Erdogan's actions months after the euref. It is clear from what Merkel Juncker Erdogan and Verhofstadt among others have subsequently said that they all assumed at the time of the euref that Turkey was joining. Why we are meant to disregard their views in favour of those of random blowhards on the internet is a puzzle.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
No it wasn't. Stop making things up. We already know you are a fuckwit of the first order. We don't need daily proof to remind us of the fact.
There was a discussion programme on the BBC today on Brexit with members of the group from both sides. As Laura Kuenssberg noted at the end the opinion from everyone was to get on with it and no going back.
Furthermore they were critical of TM but everyone thought that it is beyond Corbyn to deal with.
So I would respectfully suggest to stop fighting against the referendum and move on. If necessary join a group who will campaign to re-join, that would be more honest
In theory people don't want to reverse Brexit, but in practice they don't want to deliver it.
This discussion group emphatically did
What price were they prepared to pay and what was their solution for the Irish border or customs in Dover?
I hope everyone will support Muslims in their community due to the hostile and fearful environment these disgraceful "punish a Muslim day" letters threatening muslims in the Uk tomorrow have created amongst families. I'm off to hospital tomorrow but will attend one of the nationwide demonstrations of support to make it #LoveaMuslimDay and oppose all islamophobic hatred in our society.
Absolutely - disgraceful campaign
Agreed. I had not heard about this until reading about it on here. I howcthe police are taking such incitement to violence extremely seriously. It is simply another form of terrorism
I hope everyone will support Muslims in their community due to the hostile and fearful environment these disgraceful "punish a Muslim day" letters threatening muslims in the Uk tomorrow have created amongst families. I'm off to hospital tomorrow but will attend one of the nationwide demonstrations of support to make it #LoveaMuslimDay and oppose all islamophobic hatred in our society.
I had not heard about this. What despicable stuff.
Two possible bets for next US President if you can find decently long odds: Senators Doug Jones of Alabama and Jon Tester of Montana. These are Democrat senators in states that went substantially Trump last time. They stand a good chance of winning if they get nominated. Nomination of a candidate who appeals to Republican voters might seem a tall order in a primary that panders to the activist base, but bear in mind these two got themselves selected in their own states. There are plenty of liberal contenders in Red states who are nowhere near power. "The best candidate to get rid of Trump" might be an attractive message in the Democratic primary.k
Governors from states Trump won would have the advantage of being non-DC.
John Edwards, Louisiana Steve Bullock, Montana Roy Cooper, North Carolina Tom Wolf, Pennsylvania
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
Far too sensible, particularly when people did make clear where they didn't agree. A child might disagree of course, but that's infants for you.
I hope everyone will support Muslims in their community due to the hostile and fearful environment these disgraceful "punish a Muslim day" letters threatening muslims in the Uk tomorrow have created amongst families. I'm off to hospital tomorrow but will attend one of the nationwide demonstrations of support to make it #LoveaMuslimDay and oppose all islamophobic hatred in our society.
I had not heard about this. What despicable stuff.
Work gave me the option of not coming to work tomorrow.
Genius. Hang around with crackpot anti-Zionists, that will definitely put an end to the furor.
Nah, i'm sure he's gone to tell em off as part of his militant ant anti semitism.
It's all part of his genius plan to show his support for Jewish people by hanging around with a group that wants to abolish the Jewish state. Next-up is probably a meeting with the anti-Zionist Rabbis that the Iranian goverment pals around with.
I hope everyone will support Muslims in their community due to the hostile and fearful environment these disgraceful "punish a Muslim day" letters threatening muslims in the Uk tomorrow have created amongst families. I'm off to hospital tomorrow but will attend one of the nationwide demonstrations of support to make it #LoveaMuslimDay and oppose all islamophobic hatred in our society.
I had not heard about this. What despicable stuff.
Work gave me the option of not coming to work tomorrow.
Sad that such might even be considered a necessary option.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
No it wasn't. Stop making things up. We already know you are a fuckwit of the first order. We don't need daily proof to remind us of the fact.
There was a discussion programme on the BBC today on Brexit with members of the group from both sides. As Laura Kuenssberg noted at the end the opinion from everyone was to get on with it and no going back.
Furthermore they were critical of TM but everyone thought that it is beyond Corbyn to deal with.
So I would respectfully suggest to stop fighting against the referendum and move on. If necessary join a group who will campaign to re-join, that would be more honest
In theory people don't want to reverse Brexit, but in practice they don't want to deliver it.
This discussion group emphatically did
What price were they prepared to pay and what was their solution for the Irish border or customs in Dover?
They were not interested in detail - most just want a deal done
I hope everyone will support Muslims in their community due to the hostile and fearful environment these disgraceful "punish a Muslim day" letters threatening muslims in the Uk tomorrow have created amongst families. I'm off to hospital tomorrow but will attend one of the nationwide demonstrations of support to make it #LoveaMuslimDay and oppose all islamophobic hatred in our society.
I think the best action would be if plod arrested the people involved.
Two possible bets for next US President if you can find decently long odds: Senators Doug Jones of Alabama and Jon Tester of Montana. These are Democrat senators in states that went substantially Trump last time. They stand a good chance of winning if they get nominated. Nomination of a candidate who appeals to Republican voters might seem a tall order in a primary that panders to the activist base, but bear in mind these two got themselves selected in their own states. There are plenty of liberal contenders in Red states who are nowhere near power. "The best candidate to get rid of Trump" might be an attractive message in the Democratic primary.k
Governors from states Trump won would have the advantage of being non-DC.
John Edwards, Louisiana Steve Bullock, Montana Roy Cooper, North Carolina Tom Wolf, Pennsylvania
I've never heard of any of them before but then few people would have heard of Jimmy Carter in 1973 and Bill Clinton in 1989.
Or Obama - an early spot by OGH, of course. A broad ticket, fresh face with some experience but not a Beltway hack would be the smart choice for the Democrats. I just hope they make it...
John Edwards would have no chance - pro-life can't get the nomination in the Democratic party these days.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
No it wasn't. Stop making things up. We already know you are a fuckwit of the first order. We don't need daily proof to remind us of the fact.
Turkey is not joining the EU.
Yet wasn't it an applicant to join the EU ? An application which the British government publicly supported ?
It is *now* not joining the EU as a result of Erdogan's actions months after the euref. It is clear from what Merkel Juncker Erdogan and Verhofstadt among others have subsequently said that they all assumed at the time of the euref that Turkey was joining. Why we are meant to disregard their views in favour of those of random blowhards on the internet is a puzzle.
As observed earlier, AM is a fuckwit. There is no counter argument to any of his positions, AM is always firmly entrenched on what he perceives to be the moral high ground and his pomposity is astounding.
So just so I get this right, Corbyn can meet with Jewish people, but they must be incredibly pro capitalism and very pro Israel....
They also must not criticise other Jewish people, unless those Jewish people happen to be pro Palestine...
Meeting with Jewish people who don't fit those rules is.... somewhat related to anti-semitism...?
Also, just to clarify, on one Guido tweet it said somebody shouted 'F capitalism' at one point. Is a Jewish person shouting that an anti-semitic trope?
I'm not generally one to blame advisers for things - leaders have to lead after all - but presumably Milne is in charge of damage control, being the director of comms, so what in the hell is up to not being very very careful how Corbyn reacts and who he meets with on all of this?
I don't think them being against capitalism is something that will matter to anybody, and it is a jewish group, but if it has said the extreme things claimed (being opposed to Israel is fine, saying it 'needs to be properly disposed of' probably is not a good way of saying that), in particular that they have dismissed the current scandal as manipulations by the Tories and right wing of Labour, and attacked the jewish groups who do think there is an issue, it at the least does not come across as well as it could have
Two possible bets for next US President if you can find decently long odds: Senators Doug Jones of Alabama and Jon Tester of Montana. These are Democrat senators in states that went substantially Trump last time. They stand a good chance of winning if they get nominated. Nomination of a candidate who appeals to Republican voters might seem a tall order in a primary that panders to the activist base, but bear in mind these two got themselves selected in their own states. There are plenty of liberal contenders in Red states who are nowhere near power. "The best candidate to get rid of Trump" might be an attractive message in the Democratic primary.k
Governors from states Trump won would have the advantage of being non-DC.
John Edwards, Louisiana Steve Bullock, Montana Roy Cooper, North Carolina Tom Wolf, Pennsylvania
I've never heard of any of them before but then few people would have heard of Jimmy Carter in 1973 and Bill Clinton in 1989.
I think you're right. I have also found out Tester is up for re-election in 2018 and probably won't win. Another one to keep an eye on is Sherrod Brown of Ohio, populist, rust belt and in with Bernie Sanders.
PS it looks like Cooper and Bullock are actively seeking nomination
Two possible bets for next US President if you can find decently long odds: Senators Doug Jones of Alabama and Jon Tester of Montana. These are Democrat senators in states that went substantially Trump last time. They stand a good chance of winning if they get nominated. Nomination of a candidate who appeals to Republican voters might seem a tall order in a primary that panders to the activist base, but bear in mind these two got themselves selected in their own states. There are plenty of liberal contenders in Red states who are nowhere near power. "The best candidate to get rid of Trump" might be an attractive message in the Democratic primary.k
Governors from states Trump won would have the advantage of being non-DC.
John Edwards, Louisiana Steve Bullock, Montana Roy Cooper, North Carolina Tom Wolf, Pennsylvania
I've never heard of any of them before but then few people would have heard of Jimmy Carter in 1973 and Bill Clinton in 1989.
Carter and Clinton were candidates after their party had been out of the White House for 8 and 12 years respectively so they were more willing to take a gamble on a relative unknown.
The Democrats will have been out of the White House for just 4 years in 2020. Of the candidates nominated at the election after losing the White House to take on the incumbent President by either main party over the last 40 years, Romney, Kerry, Dole, Mondale and Reagan, all were experienced and well known figures
There are a small number of anti-Zionist Jews (some politcal and some religious). Corbyn chose to meet them. I would not consider that a good choice for demonstrating support of the Jewish people.
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
No it wasn't. Stop making things up. We already know you are a fuckwit of the first order. We don't need daily proof to remind us of the fact.
Turkey is not joining the EU.
Yet wasn't it an applicant to join the EU ? An application which the British government publicly supported ?
It is *now* not joining the EU as a result of Erdogan's actions months after the euref. It is clear from what Merkel Juncker Erdogan and Verhofstadt among others have subsequently said that they all assumed at the time of the euref that Turkey was joining. Why we are meant to disregard their views in favour of those of random blowhards on the internet is a puzzle.
It's a mystery why an apparently intelligent person cannot distinguish between a policy of being open to Turkish membership, and even of pushing Turkey to make progress on meeting the accession criteria, and the likelihood of Turkey actually joining.
Biden might beat Trump in the general election but he first has to get past Sanders and Warren in the Democratic Primaries which will be no easy task for him
And Clinton - she wants to run again by all accounts.
What the Democrats need is a new Obama - someone fresh, not a Washington insider.
I highly doubt Hillary will run again and even if she did I doubt the Democrats would nominate her again.
The latest Democratic primary poll has it Biden 27%, Sanders 16%, Winfrey 13%, Clinton 13%, Warren 10%, Booker 4%, Harris 4%, Cuomo 2%, Gillibrand 1%
Admittedly they are very strong numbers for Joe Biden - I’m surprised. Thanks for posting.
I think he regrets not running in 2016, had he done so he might well have been President now
Very much so. I understand his stated reasons for not running at the time - although how much he was knobbled by the Clinton campaign we’ll probably never know - but he’s probably left it too late now. He’d be 78 on Inauguration Day 2021.
I'm not sure about that at all; if a compelling younger candidate doesn't emerge, I think Biden will likely run.... and win. In any event, backed him at 27 - and laid the stake at 13.
Corbyn is either 1, a raging anti-Semite, 2, fantastically stupid, or 3. morally arrogant to the point he believes any position he takes is justifiable, or 4. has decided he doesn't want the leader job so fuck it
I suspect a mixture of mainly 3, with a chunk of 4, with an intriguing hint of 1 and 2
He's mainly 2, and this leads naturally to 3 and also 1.
I'm not sure if he realises the leader role means being in charge. He's waiting for Seumas to tell him what to do.
So just so I get this right, Corbyn can meet with Jewish people, but they must be incredibly pro capitalism and very pro Israel....
They also must not criticise other Jewish people, unless those Jewish people happen to be pro Palestine...
Meeting with Jewish people who don't fit those rules is.... somewhat related to anti-semitism...?
Also, just to clarify, on one Guido tweet it said somebody shouted 'F capitalism' at one point. Is a Jewish person shouting that an anti-semitic trope?
I don't think that is quite it. Frankly, not liking capitalism seems incredibly irrelevant, who the hell cares? But it is claimed this group have said the current scandal is a bout of 'faux-outrage' and down to 'manipulations by people whose express loyalty is to the Conservative Party and the right wing of the Labour party'.
Now, it might well be argued some outrage has been overdone, and that those groups named are hoping to exploit this current scandal...except Corbyn has said there is a problem, so meeting with people who it is alleged have claimed there isn't a problem, does not look like he is backing his words with actions.
So just so I get this right, Corbyn can meet with Jewish people, but they must be incredibly pro capitalism and very pro Israel....
They also must not criticise other Jewish people, unless those Jewish people happen to be pro Palestine...
Meeting with Jewish people who don't fit those rules is.... somewhat related to anti-semitism...?
Also, just to clarify, on one Guido tweet it said somebody shouted 'F capitalism' at one point. Is a Jewish person shouting that an anti-semitic trope?
Yet another day when pb’s Leavers see fit to opine on how Labour supporters should address anti-Semitism without feeling able to identify any steps they can take to address the xenophobia they fell in behind during the referendum campaign.
There is a difference between holding a specific opinion, belief or view, such as antisemitism and voting for a complex constitutional change.
When I vote Labour, Conservative or green in an election I don't agree with every clause, proposal or policy in the manifesto.
In the same way Yes voters were free to vote Yes without endorsing all the half baked views that were showered over the media and airwaves in support of yes, No voters can not be assumed to endorse the detritus and objectionable views of some No supporters.
To support any campaign or manifesto in totality you need to be a sheep or lemming.
Xenophobia was at the core of both Leave campaigns, which sought to frighten voters with untrue stories that millions of Muslims were set to immigrate to Britain if it stayed in the EU.
No it wasn't. Stop making things up. We already know you are a fuckwit of the first order. We don't need daily proof to remind us of the fact.
Turkey is not joining the EU.
Yet wasn't it an applicant to join the EU ? An application which the British government publicly supported ?
It is *now* not joining the EU as a result of Erdogan's actions months after the euref. It is clear from what Merkel Juncker Erdogan and Verhofstadt among others have subsequently said that they all assumed at the time of the euref that Turkey was joining. Why we are meant to disregard their views in favour of those of random blowhards on the internet is a puzzle.
It's a mystery why an apparently intelligent person cannot distinguish between a policy of being open to Turkish membership, and even of pushing Turkey to make progress on meeting the accession criteria, and the likelihood of Turkey actually joining.
It was very misleading to imply at the time that Turkey's joining was imminent - even then it was clear it would be decades away at best, if ever, and it's moved further away since.
Most Corbynistas hate capitalism and want to build a socialist Britain and they also hate the establishment Jews and the Israeli government so no surprise here really
So just so I get this right, Corbyn can meet with Jewish people, but they must be incredibly pro capitalism and very pro Israel....
They also must not criticise other Jewish people, unless those Jewish people happen to be pro Palestine...
Meeting with Jewish people who don't fit those rules is.... somewhat related to anti-semitism...?
Also, just to clarify, on one Guido tweet it said somebody shouted 'F capitalism' at one point. Is a Jewish person shouting that an anti-semitic trope?
I really enjoy reading your posts even though we are not on the same page all the time but surely you must recognise in the context of the present crisis in labour it was just plain wrong to listen to these comments without standing up and objecting.
I’m beginning to think Corbyn might actually be what his opponents have called him.
You'll have to narrow it down - he's been called many things, some of which remains unwarranted, other things less so.
This is all hearkening back to the early days of his leadership though, when his team were unable to stop a bad news story from running for days and days. They've had a bit of an easier time of it since the GE
I’m beginning to think Corbyn might actually be what his opponents have called him.
You'll have to narrow it down - he's been called many things, some of which remains unwarranted, other things less so.
This is all hearkening back to the early days of his leadership though, when his team were unable to stop a bad news story from running for days and days. They've had a bit of an easier time of it since the GE
Frankly, I think the word ‘antisemitism’ goes over many heads.
It’s harder to misunderstand ‘Jewhater’. Maybe that’s the word we should use.
So just so I get this right, Corbyn can meet with Jewish people, but they must be incredibly pro capitalism and very pro Israel....
They also must not criticise other Jewish people, unless those Jewish people happen to be pro Palestine...
Meeting with Jewish people who don't fit those rules is.... somewhat related to anti-semitism...?
Also, just to clarify, on one Guido tweet it said somebody shouted 'F capitalism' at one point. Is a Jewish person shouting that an anti-semitic trope?
I don't think that is quite it. Frankly, not liking capitalism seems incredibly irrelevant, who the hell cares? But it is claimed this group have said the current scandal is a bout of 'faux-outrage' and down to 'manipulations by people whose express loyalty is to the Conservative Party and the right wing of the Labour party'.
Now, it might well be argued some outrage has been overdone, and that those groups named are hoping to exploit this current scandal...except Corbyn has said there is a problem, so meeting with people who it is alleged have claimed there isn't a problem, does not look like he is backing his words with actions.
And that is the thing - we can dismiss the possibility all this furore is made up smears to destabilise Corbyn, since he himself, and Momentum, have said otherwise. But for the sake of argument if it is being aggravated by smears or exaggerations, and he is the man he believes himself to be and his supporters hope him to be, he could do better than add fuel to the fire.
Yes, opponents will make mountains out of molehills, that is unavoidable in politics, but there are steps he could take to minimise the number of molehills. If this group has said the extreme things claimed, not meeting with them would have been a prudent move.
On a somewhat lighter note, it must be hard for people who despite capitalism so much to live within a capitalist system day in and day out, while even most people dissatisfied with aspects of the system don't think getting rid of it is the answer.
Bit like you can find some quite bizarre groups worshiping the Austrian Street Artist.
Are they like Jews for Jesus?
Or tories for nick Palmer...
I encountered a group at university who were hard core Stalin worshippers - to the point that they believed that the Doctors Plot was a real, zionist plot. That had killed their Beloved Leader. And therefore the planned pogrom was the right thing etc... Yes, Jewish....
So just so I get this right, Corbyn can meet with Jewish people, but they must be incredibly pro capitalism and very pro Israel....
They also must not criticise other Jewish people, unless those Jewish people happen to be pro Palestine...
Meeting with Jewish people who don't fit those rules is.... somewhat related to anti-semitism...?
Also, just to clarify, on one Guido tweet it said somebody shouted 'F capitalism' at one point. Is a Jewish person shouting that an anti-semitic trope?
I don't think that is quite it. Frankly, not liking capitalism seems incredibly irrelevant, who the hell cares? But it is claimed this group have said the current scandal is a bout of 'faux-outrage' and down to 'manipulations by people whose express loyalty is to the Conservative Party and the right wing of the Labour party'.
Now, it might well be argued some outrage has been overdone, and that those groups named are hoping to exploit this current scandal...except Corbyn has said there is a problem, so meeting with people who it is alleged have claimed there isn't a problem, does not look like he is backing his words with actions.
The statement 'he current scandal is a bout of 'faux-outrage' and down to 'manipulations by people whose express loyalty is to the Conservative Party and the right wing of the Labour party'.' doesn't actually state there is no anti-semitism within the party. It is perfectly possible that both that position and what Corbyn said are true.
There were pockets of anti-semitism within Labour when Corbyn took over but the current scandal didn't exist at the time. If that is their point then that is true.
Which contradicts neither Corbyn's nor their statement unless you specifically read into Corbyn's statement that the media have not tried to make more out of the issue, which I don't think you can.
Most Corbynistas hate capitalism and want to build a socialist Britain and they also hate the establishment Jews and the Israeli government so no surprise here really
I have the sense the Jewdas group are opposed not to the notion of a Jewish State but to the State as it is currently governed.
They are clearly not anti-Semitic but are opposed to the State of Israel as it exists, as it is governed and as it comports itself.
Politically and tactically at this time, it seems odd for Corbyn to be associating with the group albeit in his own constituency. For those determined to oppose him, it's just another stick with which to beat him or to create a picture of the man.
The statement 'he current scandal is a bout of 'faux-outrage' and down to 'manipulations by people whose express loyalty is to the Conservative Party and the right wing of the Labour party'.' doesn't actually state there is no anti-semitism within the party. It is perfectly possible that both that position and what Corbyn said are true.
There were pockets of anti-semitism within Labour when Corbyn took over but the current scandal didn't exist at the time. If that is their point then that is true.
Of course this needs to be judged in the context of their other views, but let us take this optimistic analysis of what they meant - and I don't doubt you are correct about interpreting Momemtum's statement - but that is also one of the points I was making. There is an issue, but the extent of it, and how much Corbyn is the problem, is more up for debate, and it is possible that people think it is being exaggerated. However, if you were a media adviser to Corbyn for instance, surely you would suggest he not open himself up to easy attack by meeting with people who at first glance appear to be suggesting the whole thing is a mere manipulation?
Assuming the very best of Corbyn, and accepting opponents will seek to find something to criticise no matter what, meeting with Jewdas, given at the least the tenor of their statements, gives even more impartial media something to ask him about to clarify if he agrees this is the work of the Tories and his internal opponents.
On a practical level it is a misstep, even if in fact things are not as they appear.
Most Corbynistas hate capitalism and want to build a socialist Britain and they also hate the establishment Jews and the Israeli government so no surprise here really
Politically and tactically at this time, it seems odd for Corbyn to be associating with the group albeit in his own constituency. For those determined to oppose him, it's just another stick with which to beat him or to create a picture of the man.
Exactly so. Inadvisable at best, even if they are not as bad as a known partisan is making them seem. And if they are even half as bad as that partisan is making them seem, it was hugely inadvisable.
Corbyn must be trolling. It's the only explanation which fits the facts.
PS I think I've guessed Mike's 280/1.
I'm not sure it is trolling so much as deliberately sending a message to all in politics and the media that he doesn't care what they thinks and he will follow his own righteous agenda without compromise with anyone else.
The only way to get rid of Corbyn is if the voters deliver an enormously bad result for Labour on May 3rd.
They had a pretty bad time last May too, it didn't exactly faze them then (nor should it have, as it turns out).
Perhaps I am naiive, but I struggle to see how even a run of negative headlines is going to hugely impact people's local government voting intention, it is just so easy for anybody who is concerned to focus on what they want to happen in their own areas, regardless of what is happening at the top.
And the polls, such as we can trust any polls, says Labour members think Corbyn is handling things just fine, will prospective Labour voters be that much different? Especially with a whole bunch coming up where Labour's brand is flying pretty high?
Depends on exactly what they are calling for, if they want the deaths of the people in Israel than that is wrong whether those making the call are Jewish or not
Inadvisable in the current situation probably yes. Although seen a report that suggests there is more anti-semitism within the Conservative party, as a ratio anyway and more anti-semitism on the right than the left.
Thank you I enjoy your posts as well. The capitalism one not at all although I guess you mean the booing of mainstream Jews he should have objected to?
I guess it depends what exactly we are talking about I get the feeling Blair would have probably got a bigger boo for example. If they were just booing all other Jewish people rather than just some mainstream pretty anti-Corbyn figures or other figures known to them then I'm not sure it is much of a crime.
The other stuff mentioned I think is more their declared goals, or at least the stuff they might have stated previously that Guido thinks is most damning rather than things they were saying in the meeting to Corbyn.
Inadvisable in the current situation probably yes. Although seen a report that suggests there is more anti-semitism within the Conservative party, as a ratio anyway and more anti-semitism on the right than the left.
Then I hope the right are or are about to launch action to deal with it in appropriate and robust fashion. The best outcome from all this would be that all parties are identifying if they have, as Labour put it, pockets of antisemitism in their ranks, and tackling it. If the right are not doing that, it doesn't really absolve Labour if they fail to tackle it, they would just not be the worst.
For those on the left struggling with why this Jewdas thing might bother some, imagine if some right wing politician, plagued with accusations of anti-black racism, met with a group of black people called "the Uncle Toms", who celebrated the British Empire and cursed Nelson Mandela.
Can you see how that might be spitting in the faces of black people who were upset with the alleged racism?
The other stuff mentioned I think is more their declared goals, or at least the stuff they might have stated previously that Guido thinks is most damning rather than things they were saying in the meeting to Corbyn.
That seems to be the case, but is another reason he should be very cautious right now - this whole row erupted because of not paying close enough attention to what people or groups were saying which he (says he) did not see but which were not acceptable. So past statements is pretty important right now for him, particularly if they are representative.
Keep digging, guys. It's absolutely hilarious to watch you making the hole bigger and bigger, especially since anti-semitism is one of the more minor of the attacks which could fairly be made against Corbyn's circle.
LMAO, so now the PB wisdom is that Corbyn is antisemitic for meeting with......a Jewish group.
No, the wisdom is that given that group at the least and on the most positive interpretation seems pretty dismissive of the current scandal which he is trying to address, it was an unwise group to meet with at this time. And if the more negative interpretations of the group are true, it will extend the story even more.
LMAO, so now the PB wisdom is that Corbyn is antisemitic for meeting with......a Jewish group.
No, the wisdom is that given that group at the least and on the most positive interpretation seems pretty dismissive of the current scandal which he is trying to address, it was an unwise group to meet with at this time.
Has anyone asked Corbyn whether he thinks Israel should exist at all?
Depends on exactly what they are calling for, if they want the deaths of the people in Israel than that is wrong whether those making the call are Jewish or not
Inadvisable in the current situation probably yes. Although seen a report that suggests there is more anti-semitism within the Conservative party, as a ratio anyway and more anti-semitism on the right than the left.
Thank you I enjoy your posts as well. The capitalism one not at all although I guess you mean the booing of mainstream Jews he should have objected to?
I guess it depends what exactly we are talking about I get the feeling Blair would have probably got a bigger boo for example. If they were just booing all other Jewish people rather than just some mainstream pretty anti-Corbyn figures or other figures known to them then I'm not sure it is much of a crime.
The other stuff mentioned I think is more their declared goals, or at least the stuff they might have stated previously that Guido thinks is most damning rather than things they were saying in the meeting to Corbyn.
The point really is that Corbyn does not seem to have the intellect to see how meetings like this can damage him. I am not sure if anyone has remarked on this but someone in that meeting has leaked that recording to damage Corbyn
Comments
I didn't read it is turning into the defence de jour
I'm off to hospital tomorrow but will attend one of the nationwide demonstrations of support to make it #LoveaMuslimDay and oppose all islamophobic hatred in our society.
South Africa's pride and joy - and my neighbour
Analysis by Milton Nkosi, BBC News, Johannesburg
I knew Winnie Madikizela-Mandela personally. We come from the same neighbourhood in Soweto.
To many, she was the pride and joy of the nation, an icon in her own right - never mind the fact she was Nelson Mandela's wife.
Mrs Madikizela-Mandela was also the first black social worker in the country. Her love and desire to help those in need was always burning from deep inside.
But she was not nothing but sweet talk. She met the brutality of racial segregation with fire. Each time the police came to arrest her at her home in Orlando West, she held her own.
She never gave in. Not one inch - and sometimes, this landed her in trouble. As anti-apartheid activist Mosioua Lekota noted in her defence: "Those who did nothing under apartheid never made mistakes."
She will be remembered for her fight against an inhumane system, rather than for the mistakes she made in that fight.
Furthermore they were critical of TM but everyone thought that it is beyond Corbyn to deal with.
So I would respectfully suggest to stop fighting against the referendum and move on. If necessary join a group who will campaign to re-join, that would be more honest
https://twitter.com/MsHelicat/status/980916319406129153
John Edwards, Louisiana
Steve Bullock, Montana
Roy Cooper, North Carolina
Tom Wolf, Pennsylvania
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_governors
I've never heard of any of them before but then few people would have heard of Jimmy Carter in 1973 and Bill Clinton in 1989.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43620717 Sad that such might even be considered a necessary option.
John Edwards would have no chance - pro-life can't get the nomination in the Democratic party these days.
They also must not criticise other Jewish people, unless those Jewish people happen to be pro Palestine...
Meeting with Jewish people who don't fit those rules is.... somewhat related to anti-semitism...?
Also, just to clarify, on one Guido tweet it said somebody shouted 'F capitalism' at one point. Is a Jewish person shouting that an anti-semitic trope?
I don't think them being against capitalism is something that will matter to anybody, and it is a jewish group, but if it has said the extreme things claimed (being opposed to Israel is fine, saying it 'needs to be properly disposed of' probably is not a good way of saying that), in particular that they have dismissed the current scandal as manipulations by the Tories and right wing of Labour, and attacked the jewish groups who do think there is an issue, it at the least does not come across as well as it could have
Is going to be a bit hard to call a Jewish organisation an anti-Semitic organisation.
http://jewdas.org/about/
PS it looks like Cooper and Bullock are actively seeking nomination
The Democrats will have been out of the White House for just 4 years in 2020. Of the candidates nominated at the election after losing the White House to take on the incumbent President by either main party over the last 40 years, Romney, Kerry, Dole, Mondale and Reagan, all were experienced and well known figures
Bit like you can find some quite bizarre groups worshiping the Austrian Street Artist.
In any event, backed him at 27 - and laid the stake at 13.
I'm not sure if he realises the leader role means being in charge. He's waiting for Seumas to tell him what to do.
Now, it might well be argued some outrage has been overdone, and that those groups named are hoping to exploit this current scandal...except Corbyn has said there is a problem, so meeting with people who it is alleged have claimed there isn't a problem, does not look like he is backing his words with actions.
Place your bets on when he quietly gets reinstated
This is all hearkening back to the early days of his leadership though, when his team were unable to stop a bad news story from running for days and days. They've had a bit of an easier time of it since the GE
It’s harder to misunderstand ‘Jewhater’. Maybe that’s the word we should use.
Yes, opponents will make mountains out of molehills, that is unavoidable in politics, but there are steps he could take to minimise the number of molehills. If this group has said the extreme things claimed, not meeting with them would have been a prudent move.
There were pockets of anti-semitism within Labour when Corbyn took over but the current scandal didn't exist at the time. If that is their point then that is true.
Momentum in their statement also said
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/02/labour-antisemitism-more-widespread-than-thought-momentum-says
_____________________________________
However, Momentum’s national coordinating group said it was possible both to accept that antisemitism was a problem on parts of the left while also accepting that Corbyn had been attacked “using this issue as a way to undermine his leadership”.
____________________________________
Which contradicts neither Corbyn's nor their statement unless you specifically read into Corbyn's statement that the media have not tried to make more out of the issue, which I don't think you can.
PS I think I've guessed Mike's 280/1.
They are clearly not anti-Semitic but are opposed to the State of Israel as it exists, as it is governed and as it comports itself.
Politically and tactically at this time, it seems odd for Corbyn to be associating with the group albeit in his own constituency. For those determined to oppose him, it's just another stick with which to beat him or to create a picture of the man.
Assuming the very best of Corbyn, and accepting opponents will seek to find something to criticise no matter what, meeting with Jewdas, given at the least the tenor of their statements, gives even more impartial media something to ask him about to clarify if he agrees this is the work of the Tories and his internal opponents.
On a practical level it is a misstep, even if in fact things are not as they appear.
Perhaps I am naiive, but I struggle to see how even a run of negative headlines is going to hugely impact people's local government voting intention, it is just so easy for anybody who is concerned to focus on what they want to happen in their own areas, regardless of what is happening at the top.
And the polls, such as we can trust any polls, says Labour members think Corbyn is handling things just fine, will prospective Labour voters be that much different? Especially with a whole bunch coming up where Labour's brand is flying pretty high?
@Floater
Depends on exactly what they are calling for, if they want the deaths of the people in Israel than that is wrong whether those making the call are Jewish or not
@SeanT
Inadvisable in the current situation probably yes. Although seen a report that suggests there is more anti-semitism within the Conservative party, as a ratio anyway and more anti-semitism on the right than the left.
@Big_G_NorthWales
Thank you I enjoy your posts as well. The capitalism one not at all although I guess you mean the booing of mainstream Jews he should have objected to?
I guess it depends what exactly we are talking about I get the feeling Blair would have probably got a bigger boo for example. If they were just booing all other Jewish people rather than just some mainstream pretty anti-Corbyn figures or other figures known to them then I'm not sure it is much of a crime.
The other stuff mentioned I think is more their declared goals, or at least the stuff they might have stated previously that Guido thinks is most damning rather than things they were saying in the meeting to Corbyn.
Can you see how that might be spitting in the faces of black people who were upset with the alleged racism?
Which, again, is coming from people I distinctly remember defending the "Sadiq Khan is dangerous because he's Muslim" campaign.
https://twitter.com/angelasmithmp/status/980930274405085184