chrisp65 Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Just now, bickster said: Who said they did? I thought it was her that announced this? There’s absolutely no guarantee that’s true So have we seen the Labour Party say it was for a specific extremely anti semitic tweet then? I’m not playing silly buggers, I hadn’t previously seen that claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted May 31 VT Supporter Share Posted May 31 2 hours ago, magnkarl said: The context is quite clearly different though. Intifada means armed rebellion, terror and resistance, while Zionism means (or meant to the original people fighting for it) that Jews had a right to a homeland. I presume there are many more zionists than people think, just not the rebranded version of it. One implies armed struggle, while the other seeks a homeland for a people who've been mistreated since they were forced out of Egypt. One is also a term used for a group, while the other is a rallying cry used by terrorists. I wouldn't wear either. Apologies for going off topic a little here, but - while the 'mistreatment' (bloody hell, what an understatement) is incontrovertible, the 'forced out of Egypt' bit was - when? - 2,500 years ago? How far back can you go in restoring regions to particular self-defined groups? In what way could - say - Russian Ashkenazi Jews in the 20th Century - claim to be in any way middle eastern? The Anglo-Spanish takeover of North America in the last 300 years was clearly an injustice, but does this mean the Iroquois and Navaho have a sensible claim to having a huge chunk of the country restored to them, forcing out the European interlopers with heavy weaponry? I'd say they arguably have a better case than the Zionists in Palestine - but it would still be a crazy, divisive plan. And to invoke the well-worn cliché, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. That's as true (or untrue) for Hamas as it was for the Stern Gang. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaoDeMings Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Just now, blandy said: She liked a tweet that had that video in it that was on here - Jon Stewart and all the Israel shouters and added that those (IRL) people were professionally organised - so basically going with the kind of Rothschild/ Jews controlling type blood libel type of thing. I’m not on twitter since about 2 years ago so dunno how to find it to embed here. The tweet was specifically about an Israel lobby in British politics which does exist. If it was about a Jewish lobby or some such then of course that would be massively concerning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, blandy said: She liked a tweet that had that video in it that was on here - Jon Stewart and all the Israel shouters and added that those (IRL) people were professionally organised - so basically going with the kind of Rothschild/ Jews controlling type blood libel type of thing. I’m not on twitter since about 2 years ago so dunno how to find it to embed here. Ah, ok, we have differing definitions of extremely anti semitic. Have the Labour Party used that terminology and cited it as the reason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted May 31 Moderator Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, chrisp65 said: So have we seen the Labour Party say it was for a specific extremely anti semitic tweet then? I’m not playing silly buggers, I hadn’t previously seen that claim. Me neither. Everything is either speculation by journalists or stuff she’s put in the public domain. Same with the other fella too No guarantees of anything being true at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted May 31 Moderator Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, chrisp65 said: Ah, ok, we have differing definitions of extremely anti semitic. Have the Labour Party used that terminology and cited it as the reason? Maybe we do. If you say that everyone who holds a different view to you or me or Jon Stewart and voices it, is a lobbyist organised and paid for and (as per the video) manipulating the media into not putting stuff out, that’s kind of not OK. As for what the Labour Party have done, I heard that it formed part of the collective evidence that binned her off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, bickster said: Me neither. Everything is either speculation by journalists or stuff she’s put in the public domain. Same with the other fella too No guarantees of anything being true at all That’s what I thought too. It’s fascinating how the world quickly splits in to innocent victim versus extreme anti semitism. A party I’m not a member of is free to do whatever it wants, obvs, I’m just fascinated by the culture war where there has patently been a power shift and rules can be somewhat flexible, sometimes for liking a mural, and sometimes for declaring yourself a Zionist shitlord. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted May 31 Moderator Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, chrisp65 said: rules can be somewhat flexible, sometimes for liking a mural, and sometimes for declaring yourself a Zionist shitlord. Neither of those two were binned off for it so they appear to have both got away with it. Both were (rightly) criticised for it by a lot of people, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 (edited) 22 minutes ago, blandy said: She liked a tweet that had that video in it that was on here - Jon Stewart and all the Israel shouters and added that those (IRL) people were professionally organised - so basically going with the kind of Rothschild/ Jews “controlling and manipulating” libel type of thing. I’m not on twitter since about 2 years ago so dunno how to find it to embed here. As a minor point of order, they're not "Israel shouters", they're just "shouters". In the second half of the video they do exactly the same thing from other "so-you-don't-care-about-dead-Palestinian-babies" side. Which I think is the whole point. It's not about criticism of Israel being shut down, it's discussion of any sort being shut down. Edited May 31 by ml1dch 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 2 minutes ago, blandy said: Neither of those two were binned off for it so they appear to have both got away with it. Both were (rightly) criticised for it by a lot of people, though. Well, one eventually had the whip removed, was suspended and was not put on the selection list to be an MP, so is standing as an independent. The other has been parachuted in to a safe seat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted May 31 Moderator Share Posted May 31 2 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: Well, one eventually had the whip removed, was suspended and was not put on the selection list to be an MP, so is standing as an independent. The other has been parachuted in to a safe seat. Sure. But not because of liking the mural, but for refusing to withdraw what he said after the report into AS. Same as you, they (Labour) can do their infighting and purges and whatever, and it’s no skin off my nose, I’m not a Labour member. It’s grubby and has been going on forever. The double standards are (for me) as I said, kind of factored in to my views for each of the parties. I only posted that first post mentioning the AS, because to that point it seemed to have not been included as part of the reason she was potted and I thought it perhaps should have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted May 31 Moderator Share Posted May 31 I think there's a good chunk of the Labour party that have been sitting on their hands or biting their tongues or whatever on the basis that in their minds they'd let this stuffed suit win the election on his blank, corporate financed, don't rock the boat, no values ticket, but as soon as it was won would begin the work of trying to push him out. I think with Sunak calling the election early so he can be in California for the start of the school year and with the election already as good as won, Mr Starmer has got his digs in first and is working on clearing the plotters out before they get a chance to start the push, a clever move in the great game of party politics and exactly the type of thing he's good at. Policy and politic have never been further apart. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted May 31 VT Supporter Share Posted May 31 I mean, it's almost like lying your way into power isn't the foundation of a strong relationship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 I want to see the manifesto already, give us some solid policies and the idea that Starmer has an unfairly iron grip over his party becomes a positive as these policies will need to be implemented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted June 1 Moderator Share Posted June 1 1 hour ago, Jareth said: I want to see the manifesto already, give us some solid policies and the idea that Starmer has an unfairly iron grip over his party becomes a positive as these policies will need to be implemented. You can sign up to get an early view of it if you like (I wouldn’t recommend) We're still in the phoney war stage of this election, you'll know when we move to the next phase because that is when it'll be released Expect it to be around the time when nominations close 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dog Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 Genuine Q Which side (as in left or right) has amalgamated more similar parties during the course of history? So if there was a Old Labour, New Labour, Green and others, are they more likely to join each other (not necessarily as a coalition) than parties on the right with similar right leanings (Tories, UKIP, Christian Party etc)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuwabatake Sanjuro Posted June 2 Share Posted June 2 So depressing to see this. The outlet he chose to do it with says a lot about him and the direction of the labour party. They are not doing it for votes now as they are guaranteed a huge majority whatever happens so they are just doing it because they are a horrible right wing party now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Davkaus Posted June 2 Popular Post Share Posted June 2 Well after a decade of the Tories banging on about tackling immigration levels and if anything making it worse, I'd welcome Labour giving it a crack. What was it, 650k met immigration last year. Higher than that the year before. Piling in more and more people, cheering on GDP growth with no interest in building homes or other infrastructure to cope with it, and no plan to integrate such a huge number of people into the country. I can understand the distaste of announcing it in the sun, but managing immigration shouldn't be a left vs right issue 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted June 2 Share Posted June 2 Is this the same Starmer that pledged, in Liverpool, during his leadership campaign, never to speak to the sun? In his own special way, he is very consistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts