The future of the Labour Party

[JeMeSouviens]

Same here, I'd just presumed he's keeping his powder dry until the time is right. We're 4 years away from the next election and with an 80 seat majority in the house, there is little chance of effective opposition other than jabbing away at Johnson's government and tiring them enough to land a KO in the closing rounds.

He's just trying to stay out of it for now. As you say, the 4 years away is key.

If KS goes in blazing now, he will be framed as an EU 5th columnist and the narrative when Brexit is totally ***** will be, "it would have been great if Labour hadn't sabotaged it". Labour strategy now seems to be let the Tories have free rein to get us in the **** (because ultimately you can't stop the 80 seat majority anyway) then make them fully own that **** later.

[weecounty hibby]

Sadly what will happen is that Labour will get in after Brexit is a disaster and they will then try to make the best of it. After the usual two terms in office they will get hounded out as the right wing press get stuck into them and then it's back to another ten or twelve years of the ever more right wing Tory party. It's a story we have all seen over the last 50 years or so. And it's another reason why Scotland needs to break free from Westminster and do our own thing

[Ozyhibby]

While there is an 80 seat majority, on the issue of the internal market bill there is a chance to defeat the govt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Starmer sitting out the debate because of potential Covid in the family.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[neil7908]

I think he's done OK and if there was an election tomorrow Labour would get my vote. Having said that, it's a bit how I would feel if I was voting in the US election.

Biden/Starmer are not inspiring devotion in me, they are just better than the alternatives. That might work for lefty voters like me but not sure how it will play out (in the UK at least) with the wider electorate.

[Colr]

Starmer sitting out the debate because of potential Covid in the family.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seeing Ed Milliband now demolish Bodger Johnson must surely give Tories pause for thought regarding de Pfeffel’s abilities!

[heretoday]

If Labour can keep picking off that oaf Johnson there's hope.

[Hibbyradge]

Seeing Ed Milliband now demolish Bodger Johnson must surely give Tories pause for thought regarding de Pfeffel’s abilities!

It might do, but it will also motivate them to circle the wagons.

[Keith_M]

The thing is, as heartening as it is to watch Johnson being ripped to shreds, the Tories can still do whatever they want because of their (Brexit induced) massive majority.

I get the impression that BoJo doesn't even care what the opposition say.

[JeMeSouviens]

The thing is, as heartening as it is to watch Johnson being ripped to shreds, the Tories can still do whatever they want because of their (Brexit induced) massive majority.

I get the impression that BoJo doesn't even care what the opposition say.

Like most narcissists, he doesn't care when he has hundreds of cheering pantomime morons behind him. But in the currently stripped back distanced chamber, the lack of the usual "atmosphere" :rolleyes: means the argument is actually being listened to and he is exposed as hopelessly out of his depth. And he knows it. There's a reason why he never turns up for committees or does 1:1 interviews (except with Laura, obvs).

[marinello59]

A decent performance from Angela Rayner today when she stood in for Starmer at PMQ’s. It’s starting to look like Labour have a decent front bench again.

[hibsbollah]

A decent performance from Angela Rayner today when she stood in for Starmer at PMQ’s. It’s starting to look like Labour have a decent front bench again.

She’s authentic. And persuasive. I’ve always been impressed with her.

[One Day Soon]

After six months Starmer is already ahead of Johnson as preferred choice for PM and has closed the gap between Labour and Tories by 10 points from the point when he took over. Depending on which poll you choose Labour is either three or four points behind the Tories or more or less level.

Without Brexit as a live factor - and Johnson and the Tories will be without Brexit after January - it's likely Labour would be polling ahead. He's already made a huge improvement to Labour the electorate now regard them as a credible opposition again and so do the Tories.

Pity about Leonard dragging things down up here and denying the reality of his own position.

[Hibrandenburg]

After six months Starmer is already ahead of Johnson as preferred choice for PM and has closed the gap between Labour and Tories by 10 points from the point when he took over. Depending on which poll you choose Labour is either three or four points behind the Tories or more or less level.

Without Brexit as a live factor - and Johnson and the Tories will be without Brexit after January - it's likely Labour would be polling ahead. He's already made a huge improvement to Labour the electorate now regard them as a credible opposition again and so do the Tories.

Pity about Leonard dragging things down up here and denying the reality of his own position.

Any UK Labour government is only ever going to be a stopgap between sweaty sock hating Tory governments. As a Scottish born socialist, that's what attracts me to the thought of independence. I like the look of KS and he will definitely win some voters over in Scotland, but it will only be temporary.

[cabbageandribs1875]

Scottish labour at their best

23975


i think i dislike the northern branch of british labour more than their blue brothers

[Ozyhibby]

After six months Starmer is already ahead of Johnson as preferred choice for PM and has closed the gap between Labour and Tories by 10 points from the point when he took over. Depending on which poll you choose Labour is either three or four points behind the Tories or more or less level.

Without Brexit as a live factor - and Johnson and the Tories will be without Brexit after January - it's likely Labour would be polling ahead. He's already made a huge improvement to Labour the electorate now regard them as a credible opposition again and so do the Tories.

Pity about Leonard dragging things down up here and denying the reality of his own position.

That’s as good as it gets for Labour without Tony Blair. Only a little bit behind the Tories.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Colr]

A decent performance from Angela Rayner today when she stood in for Starmer at PMQ’s. It’s starting to look like Labour have a decent front bench again.

So Kier takes him to pieces, Ed Milliband does a demolition job and now Angela Rayner knocks him out.

Next up, the YTS boy will do PMQs.

Boris is useless but it is highlighting strength in depth within Labour which is not reflected in the new UKIP-lite version of the Tory party.

[marinello59]

Scottish labour at their best

23975


i think i dislike the northern branch of british labour more than their blue brothers

What was being voted on and what did the amendment actually call for in full?

[Mon Dieu4]

Starmers complete 180 on another Scottish referendum today won't exactly buy him any new friends up here, it's like they keep banging their own heads off a brick wall and can't work out why they have a sore head

[Mibbes Aye]

Scottish labour at their best

23975


i think i dislike the northern branch of british labour more than their blue brothers

What was being voted on and what did the amendment actually call for in full?

[cabbageandribs1875]

What was being voted on and what did the amendment actually call for in full?


i can't do links on the mobile, the first google link i get is the highland times, labour voted with the tories(as is the norm in scotland) against an SNP amendment to ask for an 8 month furlough extension which the scottish government estimated would save up to 61k jobs, despite calls by both starmer and leonard for an extension.

[Mibbes Aye]

i can't do links on the mobile, the first google link i get is the highland times, labour voted with the tories(as is the norm in scotland) against an SNP amendment to ask for an 8 month furlough extension which the scottish government estimated would save up to 61k jobs, despite calls by both starmer and leonard for an extension.

What was being voted on and what did the amendment actually call for in full?

If it was a Holyrood bill then why would it be an SNP amendment? If it was a Westminster bill then how could MSPs vote against it?

I do a fair bit of work and spend a fair bit of time in Highland. The Inverness Courier isn’t perfect but is a decent local paper. The Highland Times is a rag and can make The National look like a balanced publication.

I get that Nats like their echo chambers, but I think it would be helpful to have a bit more objective evidence here.

I saw the piece in the HT you read and it is ready to shred in a couple of paragraphs. It isn’t journalism, it is puff-piece opinioning without proper evidence to back it up.

There is a significant swing vote in the independence debate but rubbish like that reinforces ‘Stay’ rather than ‘Separate’.

And given that Johnson and Cummings are offering an open goal, that is rather depressing.

[neil7908]

Tom Watson takes a job with a major gambling firm - after spending years campaigning for stricter rules on gambling:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/sep/17/tom-watson-job-adviser-paddy-power-betfair-gambling-former-labour-mp

[neil7908]

Even better:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/sep/18/tom-watson-paddy-power-remarks-dirty

[marinello59]

Even better:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/sep/18/tom-watson-paddy-power-remarks-dirty

Awkward.:greengrin

[One Day Soon]

Awkward.:greengrin

Hypocritical more like. At least it's not Iranian TV or Russia Today so I suppose that's a small mercy.

[Curried]

Hypocritical more like. At least it's not Iranian TV or Russia Today so I suppose that's a small mercy.

Or BBC?

[marinello59]

It’s going to be a loooooong way back for Labour but Starmer’s “conference” speech this morning was a good start. He got some decent digs in at BoJo as well.

[Ozyhibby]

It’s going to be a loooooong way back for Labour but Starmer’s “conference” speech this morning was a good start. He got some decent dogs in at BoJo as well.

His commitment to patriotism should go down well in Scotland. Lots of union flag waiving no doubt. [emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hiber-nation]

His commitment to patriotism should go down well in Scotland. Lots of union flag waiving no doubt. [emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Now there's an idea :greengrin

[marinello59]

His commitment to patriotism should go down well in Scotland. Lots of union flag waiving no doubt. [emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There was absolutely nothing wrong with what he said about his love of country. Did you listen to the speech or just read that he was going to talk about patriotism and decided it was flag waving nonsense? It was far from that.

[Chorley Hibee]

His commitment to patriotism should go down well in Scotland. Lots of union flag waiving no doubt. [emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cringeworthy that the Labour Party is now trying to win the vote of the Britain first cult - instead of concentrating on the real issues facing people now and in the near future.

[marinello59]

Cringeworthy that the Labour Party is now trying to win the vote of the Britain first cult - instead of concentrating on the real issues facing people now and in the near future.

Did you actually watch the speech? It was nothing like that. It was concentrated on what you have just said you wanted it to do.

[Chorley Hibee]

Did you actually watch the speech? It was nothing like that. It was concentrated on what you have just said you wanted it to do.

I did, and I'll quote Lisa Nandy on R4 this morning too:

"We stand up for Britain, we stand up for British people, we stand up for British interests and we will always put that first."

Blinkered, narrow minded, parochial bull**** that is designed to appeal to the very people who will never support Labour regardless.

Looking inward when a co-ordinated internationalist agenda is what these times require.

[marinello59]

I did, and I'll quote Lisa Nancy too on R4 this morning too:

"We stand up for Britain, we stand up for British people, we stand up for British interests and we will always put that first."

Substitute Scotland for Britain and you could attribute that to any one of the SNP MPs at Westminster.

[Chorley Hibee]

Substitute Scotland for Britain and you could attribute that to any one of the SNP MPs at Westminster.

One of the reasons I'm not an SNP voter.

[Ozyhibby]

Substitute Scotland for Britain and you could attribute that to any one of the SNP MPs at Westminster.

May be true but all I’m saying is I don’t think wrapping Labour in the union flag gets back the voters Labour have lost in Scotland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

I did, and I'll quote Lisa Nandy on R4 this morning too:

"We stand up for Britain, we stand up for British people, we stand up for British interests and we will always put that first."

Blinkered, narrow minded, parochial bull**** that is designed to appeal to the very people who will never support Labour regardless.

Looking inward when an co-ordinated Internationalist agenda is what these times require.

I missed this edit.:greengrin
I disagree about the tone of his speech but I agree totally with the bit in bold.

[Smartie]

I only heard little bits of what he was saying in the passing, but from the little I heard, I heard someone I’d take over Boris as PM every day of the week.

We have to accept that England are down a nationalist rabbit hole right now. He has to do what it takes to coax folk back. If that’s a bit empty, patriotic tub thumping then so be it.

[Chorley Hibee]

I only heard little bits of what he was saying in the passing, but from the little I heard, I heard someone I’d take over Boris as PM every day of the week.

We have to accept that England are down a nationalist rabbit hole right now. He has to do what it takes to coax folk back. If that’s a bit empty, patriotic tub thumping then so be it.

Not for me mate, I think it helps legitimise the far right dogma the Tories and Brexit loons have embraced.

The people who will turn to Labour on the back of this stance will be negligible regardless, they'll continue to vote Tory etc.

[Curried]

Sir Keir’s a real “Nowhere Man” who’s all over the shop on Brexit, and quite bizarrely (as a former human rights lawyer) thinks it’s in his gift to decide whether the people of Scotland have the democratic right to determine their own future. LOL. I realy hope he stays for the long term like slippy G.

[marinello59]

Not for me mate, I think it helps legitimise the far right dogma the Tories and Brexit loons have embraced.

The people who will turn to Labour on the back of this stance will be negligible regardless, they'll continue to vote Tory etc.

When his speech was being flagged up yesterday as appealing to patriotism I feared the worst. I’m sick to the back teeth of narrow minded nationalism of all flavours.
That’s really not what I heard today from him, there was no lurch to the right.

[lapsedhibee]

I’m sick to the back teeth of narrow minded nationalism of all flavours.

Would you be ok with broad-minded nationalism, or is all nationalism narrow-minded? :dunno:

[marinello59]

Would you be ok with broad-minded nationalism, or is all nationalism narrow-minded? :dunno:

I don’t think all nationalists are narrow minded. Does that answer your question? :greengrin

[Smartie]

Not for me mate, I think it helps legitimise the far right dogma the Tories and Brexit loons have embraced.

The people who will turn to Labour on the back of this stance will be negligible regardless, they'll continue to vote Tory etc.

I don't think I disagree with you here.

The tone of the speech - from the limited part I heard - really wasn't like that, give or take a couple of lines. It had credibility, substance, and I heard someone that I felt I could relate to.

A couple of throwaway lines that appeal to some folk (but not me) I can deal with.

And I don't think that Leigh, Blyth etc can be written off as Tory strongholds going forward. Brexit has taken them where it has taken them, but the people there will just be waiting for a credible Labour Party to welcome them back. A few glib bits of British bollocks can only help that happen.

What it won't do is bring back their lost voters in Scotland, which remains a massive problem for them, a problem that I'm not sure is fixable.

[lapsedhibee]

I don’t think all nationalists are narrow minded. Does that answer your question? :greengrin
In the same way that Govey answered Hussain's questions, yes. :wink:

[Ozyhibby]

When his speech was being flagged up yesterday as appealing to patriotism I feared the worst. I’m sick to the back teeth of narrow minded nationalism of all flavours.
That’s really not what I heard today from him, there was no lurch to the right.

From what I heard it was mostly about winning. Who couldn’t get behind that? People will be able to project whatever they want onto him for now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[neil7908]

It was soundbite heavy and I still don't know what he stands for and couldn't name you a single policy of his new leadership.

I think he really needs to move on from being just the anti Corbyn and more adult than Boris. Those lines have gone as far as they'll get him imo and I personally as a voter want more.

[Moulin Yarns]

I did, and I'll quote Lisa Nandy on R4 this morning too:

"We stand up for Britain, we stand up for British people, we stand up for British interests and we will always put that first."

Blinkered, narrow minded, parochial bull**** that is designed to appeal to the very people who will never support Labour regardless.

Looking inward when a co-ordinated internationalist agenda is what these times require.

I'm on the independence side, and I have not seen the speach, but labour are a UK party and therefore standing for British interest makes sense. And certainly isn't parochial.

[Smartie]

It was soundbite heavy and I still don't know what he stands for and couldn't name you a single policy of his new leadership.

I think he really needs to move on from being just the anti Corbyn and more adult than Boris. Those lines have gone as far as they'll get him imo and I personally as a voter want more.

The policies will come, and I don't think it's time for them quite yet.

It's a case of setting his stall out - he's not Corbyn, he's not Boris, he's here to win power back.

The detail will be forthcoming, at a time when it is more relevant.

I liked what I saw and heard tbh, and it's a while since I've heard anything I've liked from a Westminster party leader. Maybe it's because the bar has been lowered by some dreadful candidates over the last 15 years or so?

[weecounty hibby]

And I don't think that Leigh, Blyth etc can be written off as Tory strongholds going forward. Brexit has taken them where it has taken them, but the people there will just be waiting for a credible Labour Party to welcome them back. A few glib bits of British bollocks can only help that happen.

What it won't do is bring back their lost voters in Scotland, which remains a massive problem for them, a problem that I'm not sure is fixable.

These paragraphs are totally linked. The first one is doing what Labour in Scotland did, just assume that folk will vote Labour all they want is a good leader, and the second one shows what happens when you believe the first one.

I am a nationalist through and through and want as many disenchanted Labour voters as possible to come over and see that an independent Scotland could be a country that Labour would do well in. I also want an independent England to start to support Labour again and get away from the move to the right that we have seen.

[One Day Soon]

I don't think I disagree with you here.

The tone of the speech - from the limited part I heard - really wasn't like that, give or take a couple of lines. It had credibility, substance, and I heard someone that I felt I could relate to.

A couple of throwaway lines that appeal to some folk (but not me) I can deal with.

And I don't think that Leigh, Blyth etc can be written off as Tory strongholds going forward. Brexit has taken them where it has taken them, but the people there will just be waiting for a credible Labour Party to welcome them back. A few glib bits of British bollocks can only help that happen.

What it won't do is bring back their lost voters in Scotland, which remains a massive problem for them, a problem that I'm not sure is fixable.


The most effective contribution he can make to reviving Labour's fortunes in Scotland is to get Labour to a point where it looks credibly like it could beat the Tories at Westminster. If today's speech takes him down that road, junks the student politics antics of recent years and declares a fresh start for 'Keir Labour' then he's on the front foot. He's already matching or beating Johnson in personal rartings, now he needs to persuade voters they can trust the party as well as the leader.

[Ozyhibby]

The most effective contribution he can make to reviving Labour's fortunes in Scotland is to get Labour to a point where it looks credibly like it could beat the Tories at Westminster. If today's speech takes him down that road, junks the student politics antics of recent years and declares a fresh start for 'Keir Labour' then he's on the front foot. He's already matching or beating Johnson in personal rartings, now he needs to persuade voters they can trust the party as well as the leader.

That sounds like a good plan but just being no Johnson is not enough. I personally doubt very much that is who he will be facing in 2024.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[One Day Soon]

That sounds like a good plan but just being no Johnson is not enough. I personally doubt very much that is who he will be facing in 2024.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I think he will go way beyond not being Johnson. Step by step he's asserting his control over the party. It is very likely that after all of the brutal roller coaster of 2020 the population is going to be in the mood for 'no risk' politics and a period of safe stability. Starmer fits the bill perfectly, if he can be a Clem Attlee figure (boring, intelligent, reliable with some added radical policy) I suspect he will do very well, espcially with Brexit out of the way and off the table from 2021 onwards. With that done and no longer a fault line in domestic politics both the red wall and a lot of other seats will be vulnerable to an offer that looks to rebuild the economy, clean up politics, take a more internationalist outlook from a post-EU position (especially if Biden wins) and show good leadership. One of the Tory weaknesses after their demagogue is that they don't have a lot of credible leadership candidates to follow him.

And spot on that it won't be Johnson in 2024.

[hibsbollah]

I only heard little bits of what he was saying in the passing, but from the little I heard, I heard someone I’d take over Boris as PM every day of the week.

We have to accept that England are down a nationalist rabbit hole right now. He has to do what it takes to coax folk back. If that’s a bit empty, patriotic tub thumping then so be it.

It’s accepted that he has to win back the ‘red wall’ seats. But ‘Patriotic tub thumping’ can easily cross a line into dog whistling, and Lisa Nandy crossed that line yesterday, I assume accidentally, with all that ‘from now on it’s Britain first’ stuff. You only need to be a very occasional watcher of the news to recognise who else’s uses those sorts of throwaways. Irresponsible. And she was my choice for leader. Labour has a responsibility to win, but there also has to be a wider, societal responsibility.

[One Day Soon]

It’s accepted that he has to win back the ‘red wall’ seats. But ‘Patriotic tub thumping’ can easily cross a line into dog whistling, and Lisa Nandy crossed that line yesterday, I assume accidentally, with all that ‘from now on it’s Britain first’ stuff. You only need to be a very occasional watcher of the news to recognise who else’s uses those sorts of throwaways. Irresponsible. And she was my choice for leader. Labour has a responsibility to win, but there also has to be a wider, societal responsibility.

Interesting, she was my choice too. I completely agree, Labour has a duty to win and to win with right on its side. I think some of this stuff may be a function of (lack of) confidence and that the more self-confident they can become the more they will or should assert their own language, their own narrative for the future and their own story of what the UK rather than Britain should be.

[Mibbes Aye]

Opinium poll for tommorow's Observer has Labour three points above the Conservatives.

This builds on Starner being ahead of Johnson on general approval and also 'who would be a better PM?'.

Cue much increased disgruntlement amongst the newest intake of Tory MPs in the marginal seats, and the 1922 Committee.

[Colr]

Opinium poll for tommorow's Observer has Labour three points above the Conservatives.

This builds on Starner being ahead of Johnson on general approval and also 'who would be a better PM?'.

Cue much increased disgruntlement amongst the newest intake of Tory MPs in the marginal seats, and the 1922 Committee.

Starmer and Sturgeon on +19% and +18% respectively. Johnson on -12% Farage on -22%.

[Ozyhibby]

4 years out from an election it’s pretty meaningless. Unlike Labour, the Tories will switch jockeys if there is even a hint they are in trouble well before the next election. I don’t see England voting Labour anytime soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Beefster]

4 years out from an election it’s pretty meaningless. Unlike Labour, the Tories will switch jockeys if there is even a hint they are in trouble well before the next election. I don’t see England voting Labour anytime soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I bet some folk used the same argument when John Smith’s Labour started polling about the Tories in the mid-90s too. I suspect whether it suits the narrative you’re pushing is far more critical to whether you think it’s meaningless or not.

[lucky]

4 years out from an election it’s pretty meaningless. Unlike Labour, the Tories will switch jockeys if there is even a hint they are in trouble well before the next election. I don’t see England voting Labour anytime soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But if Labour were behind lots would be saying how bad Stammer was and the party was finished. England will vote against the Tories because of Johnston. People want leadership not some toff who looks like he does not care. Johnston’s handling of the pandemic has been awful and the people know that and can see through his bluster. The Tories being the Tories I think they get rid of him by summer 2021. But there does not appear to be any front runners amongst them.

[Hibbyradge]

But there does not appear to be any front runners amongst them.

Sunak...

[Bostonhibby]

4 years out from an election it’s pretty meaningless. Unlike Labour, the Tories will switch jockeys if there is even a hint they are in trouble well before the next election. I don’t see England voting Labour anytime soon.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI agree with this in the main but my impression at the moment is that there's a groundswell against Bozo and his gang amongst some labour voters who flipped just to achieve their vision of Brexit.

I'm not sure the blatant duplicity of ministers and anything else they are up to will be enough to sway significant numbers of English Tories to swap as most of the scandals and incompetence seem to already be out there but so is the defence that it "would have been worse with Corbyn".

FWIW Bozo will probably quit and they'll enter the next election with a shiny new right wing agenda proclaiming a successful Brexit whether it actually is or not.If it fits on the side of a bus it must be true.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Kato]

England will vote against the Tories because of Johnston. People want leadership not some toff who looks like he does not care.

It looks very much like they want some toff from here. How much is there majority in HoC again?

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[The Modfather]

It looks very much like they want some toff from here. How much is there majority in HoC again?

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

Are they not all toffs, regardless of actual party, from the same small pool that work their way up the greasy Westminster poll? Starmer went to Oxford and played the violin at school. Not representative of most of the country I’d say. Which isn’t to denigrate Starmer, as he may or may not be a good PM who would governs for the many, not the few. More an observation that when it comes to PM’s they’re all from the same trough anyway regardless of their party.

[Beefster]

Are they not all toffs, regardless of actual party, from the same small pool that work their way up the greasy Westminster poll? Starmer went to Oxford and played the violin at school. Not representative of most of the country I’d say. Which isn’t to denigrate Starmer, as he may or may not be a good PM who would governs for the many, not the few. More an observation that when it comes to PM’s they’re all from the same trough anyway regardless of their party.

He’s was the child of a working class family, went to state school and was intelligent enough to go to a top uni. But aye, he played the violin as a kid according to Wikipedia so we should pretend he was born into an upper class family who sent him to Eton or Westminster.

[Hibbyradge]

Starmer... played the violin at school

That's a belter!

I'm glad no-one on here knows that I dabbled with the oboe...

[The Modfather]

He’s was the child of a working class family, went to state school and was intelligent enough to go to a top uni. But aye, he played the violin as a kid according to Wikipedia so we should pretend he was born into an upper class family who sent him to Eton or Westminster.

If I’ve got it wrong and doing him a disservice, fair enough I’ll hold my hands up and admit I’m wrong.

[The Modfather]

That's a belter!

I'm glad no-one on here knows that I dabbled with the oboe...

Depends what you did with the oboe...

As my other post says, looks like I’ve got it wrong and doing him a disservice.

[Moulin Yarns]

Are they not all toffs, regardless of actual party, from the same small pool that work their way up the greasy Westminster poll? Starmer went to Oxford and played the violin at school. Not representative of most of the country I’d say. Which isn’t to denigrate Starmer, as he may or may not be a good PM who would governs for the many, not the few. More an observation that when it comes to PM’s they’re all from the same trough anyway regardless of their party.


You'r doing the violin a disservice. :wink:

My father in law also played the violin, including at the SEC, Usher Hall and Royal Albert Hall, and he was at least as much a socialist as Starmer. He refused to join the Round Table and Rotary Club unless they also adllowed Jimmy the Binman to join. :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

Did Jimmy play an instrument?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Did Jimmy play an instrument?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As a council employee he was thought by some to play the fiddle*. :wink:





*As a former local authority employee I know a few that could make up the orchestra.

[The Modfather]

So, erm, what about those opinion polls.... :greengrin :violin:

[Colr]

Are they not all toffs, regardless of actual party, from the same small pool that work their way up the greasy Westminster poll? Starmer went to Oxford and played the violin at school. Not representative of most of the country I’d say. Which isn’t to denigrate Starmer, as he may or may not be a good PM who would governs for the many, not the few. More an observation that when it comes to PM’s they’re all from the same trough anyway regardless of their party.

Working class people should not play the violin. They need to stay in their place.

If we need working class violinists, we can get Nigel Kennedy to do his cod-estuary English impersonation whilst donning a football scarf.

[The Modfather]

Working class people should not play the violin. They need to stay in their place.

If we need working class violinists, we can get Nigel Kennedy to do his cod-estuary English impersonation whilst donning a football scarf.

That’s nothing like what I said, but jump on the bandwagon anyway.

[Mibbes Aye]

That's a belter!

I'm glad no-one on here knows that I dabbled with the oboe...

Need photos. Or HD video footage.

I hope you kept your reeds clean.

[Mibbes Aye]

That’s nothing like what I said, but jump on the bandwagon anyway.

I was going to post when I read the violin comment but then saw you were getting enough of a kicking as it was.

For what it's worth, I spent the first eight years of my life living on the ninth floor of a council multi-storey tower block but ended up learning and playing the timpani. I also like quinoa and ballet :greengrin

[The Modfather]

I was going to post when I read the violin comment but then saw you were getting enough of a kicking as it was.

For what it's worth, I spent the first eight years of my life living on the ninth floor of a council multi-storey tower block but ended up learning and playing the timpani. I also like quinoa and ballet :greengrin

I hadn’t realised the violin was as common as it appears to be among all classes. I never came across any in Lochend or Holy Rood High School growing up. Although, for what it’s worth a friend played the saxophone, and I used to be able to play Fur Elise on the piano.

[Bostonhibby]

I hadn’t realised the violin was as common as it appears to be among all classes. I never came across any in Lochend or Holy Rood High School growing up. Although, for what it’s worth a friend played the saxophone, and I used to be able to play Fur Elise on the piano.

Phil Cunningham MBE and his Brother John played the violin at Brunstane and Portobello High, great instrumentalists and achieved a lot from their Magdalene roots.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Phil Cunningham MBE and his Brother John played the violin at Brunstane and Portobello High, great instrumentalists and achieved a lot from their Magdalene roots.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

I thought Phil played the squeeze box to Ally Bain's fiddle.

[Bostonhibby]

I thought Phil played the squeeze box to Ally Bain's fiddle.Much more to him than that[emoji3]

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Tommy Smith is one of the most famous Jazz musicians in the world. He was brought up in Wester Hailes and went to the WHEC.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Smith_(saxophonist)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pretty Boy]

Tommy Smith is one of the most famous Jazz musicians in the world. He was brought up in Wester Hailes and went to the WHEC.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Smith_(saxophonist)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I saw him give a speech at WHEC a few years back. He spoke about how proud he was to come from Wester Hailes and encouraged the students to be likewise.

[Peevemor]

I thought Phil played the squeeze box to Ally Bain's fiddle.Phil & Johnny Cunningham were setting the heather alight all across the globe with Silly Wizard years before Phil hooked up with Aly Bain.

Phil, despite being an accordionist, is one of my musical heroes as well as being a really sound bloke.

[CropleyWasGod]

Tommy Smith is one of the most famous Jazz musicians in the world. He was brought up in Wester Hailes and went to the WHEC.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Smith_(saxophonist)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aye but he's a Hearts ******* 😁

[Ozyhibby]

Aye but he's a Hearts ******* [emoji16]

Good point, well made.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Phil & Johnny Cunningham were setting the heather alight all across the globe with Silly Wizard years before Phil hooked up with Aly Bain.

Phil, despite being an accordionist, is one of my musical heroes as well as being a really sound bloke.

My previously mentioned father in law knew them well.

[Moulin Yarns]

Tommy Smith is one of the most famous Jazz musicians in the world. He was brought up in Wester Hailes and went to the WHEC.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Smith_(saxophonist)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Phenomenal musician. Saw him a few times, best one was in St John's Church in Perth. The acoustics were amazing and made the music even better.

[Curried]

When she’ no taking tips from the Guardia Civil on independence, this Shadow Foreign Secretary is off digging a hole for herself:

https://twitter.com/RobDunsmore/status/1311417877233373184

[Ozyhibby]

Starmer often give the impression of being too serious all the time but here he is cracking the jokes.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201016/31b1e12907489a151b70bfbaa82d2afc.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

We're eventually getting the report on anti semitism within the Labour party today.

18 months to prepare.

I wonder if Sir Keir will hang anyone out to dry.

[One Day Soon]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54730425

'Good morning Mr Starmer. You'll find the stables over there, here is a high-powered jet hose should you wish to use it...

[neil7908]

I admired a lot of the policies and agenda put forward by Labour under Corbyn and he retained my support for considerable time but the report makes for very grim reading.

[G B Young]

I admired a lot of the policies and agenda put forward by Labour under Corbyn and he retained my support for considerable time but the report makes for very grim reading.

It's utterly damning. Thankfully Corbyn and his creed are a fading force.

[JeMeSouviens]

Corbyn - "the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents"

followed by

Starmer - "If there are still those who think there’s no problem with anti-semitism in the Labour Party, that it’s all exaggerated, or a factional attack, then, frankly, you are part of the problem too. And you should be nowhere near the Labour Party either."


Ooft!

[ronaldo7]

Collective failings rather than individual ones according to the EHRC.

Going back to 2015 those involved collectively should be investigated.

Keir might need to give himself a wash.

Let's hope he puts in place procedures to stamp it out.

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201029/805cf027946fe682a235fdf294b1f96f.jpg

He’s not wrong. This is a massive test now for Starmer. He needs to withdraw the whip.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

Corbyn - "the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents"

followed by

Starmer - "If there are still those who think there’s no problem with anti-semitism in the Labour Party, that it’s all exaggerated, or a factional attack, then, frankly, you are part of the problem too. And you should be nowhere near the Labour Party either."


Ooft!

Starmer has one hell of a job on his hand clearing up the mess left by a shameful episode in Labour's history. The Corbynites won't go quietly.

[Hiber-nation]

Corbyn suspended and whip removed pending investigation.

[Bristolhibby]

He’s just suspended Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour Party and removed the whip.

J

[marinello59]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201029/805cf027946fe682a235fdf294b1f96f.jpg

He’s not wrong. This is a massive test now for Starmer. He needs to withdraw the whip.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Looks like he is up to the task.

[Bostonhibby]

He’s just suspended Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour Party and removed the whip.

JIt's a good start.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[One Day Soon]

So he really is serious about winning the next election.

[Ozyhibby]

Good move by Starmer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Keith_M]

I think Starmer's been waiting for an excuse to do something like this for a while.


The Guardian writers have been having wet dreams about this moment.

[JeMeSouviens]

I think Starmer's been waiting for an excuse to do something like this for a while.


The Guardian writers have been having wet dreams about this moment.

:agree:

I think he tested the water with the R L-B thing and this takes it up a notch.

[Vault Boy]

Good move by Starmer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Correct.

Zero tolerance means exactly that, no longer having to put up with your racist grandad who sits in the corner complaining about Jews. Corbyn has no one to blame but himself, yet he'll continue to spout the same **** about it being a media/political conspiracy against his 'brand' of politics.

Very glad to see the back of him. I only hope he forms a new party so that anybody within Labour who still thinks they should be standing by him can piss off there as well.

[Keith_M]

If anyone is interested in what Jeremy Corbyn actually said....


“One anti-Semite is one too many, but the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside the party, as well as by much of the media. That combination hurt Jewish people and must never be repeated.

“My sincere hope is that relations with Jewish communities can be rebuilt and those fears overcome. While I do not accept all of its findings, I trust its recommendations will be swiftly implemented to help move on from this period.”

[Vault Boy]

For full context, Jeremy Corbyn claimed that the media and his political opponents exaggerated antisemitism in the face of this evidence, then refused to retract that statement:

'The EHRC report found the party responsible for three breaches of the Equality Act:

- Political interference in anti-Semitism complaints
- Failure to provide adequate training to those handling anti-Semitism complaints
- Harassment

In a statement, it said: "The equality body's analysis points to a culture within the party which, at best, did not do enough to prevent anti-Semitism and, at worst, could be seen to accept it."

The investigation found evidence of 23 instances of "inappropriate involvement" by Mr Corbyn's office, included staff influencing decisions on suspensions or whether to investigate a claim.

One incident reportedly saw the party leader's staff advising a complaint Mr Corbyn himself - for allegedly supporting an anti-Semitic mural - should be dismissed.'

[BroxburnHibee]

They need to bin every single member of Momentum

[Keith_M]

For full context, Jeremy Corbyn claimed that the media and his political opponents exaggerated antisemitism in the face of this evidence, then refused to retract that statement:

'The EHRC report found the party responsible for three breaches of the Equality Act:

- Political interference in anti-Semitism complaints
- Failure to provide adequate training to those handling anti-Semitism complaints
- Harassment

In a statement, it said: "The equality body's analysis points to a culture within the party which, at best, did not do enough to prevent anti-Semitism and, at worst, could be seen to accept it."

The investigation found evidence of 23 instances of "inappropriate involvement" by Mr Corbyn's office, included staff influencing decisions on suspensions or whether to investigate a claim.

One incident reportedly saw the party leader's staff advising a complaint Mr Corbyn himself - for allegedly supporting an anti-Semitic mural - should be dismissed.'


But he wasn't suspended because of what was said in the report, only for his statement afterwards that: 1) Fully endorsed its recommendations, 2) Said anti-Semitism was unacceptable, and then 3) said the media, and some in his own party, exaggerated the level of anti-Semitism (but not denying it's existence)


I find it hard to argue with any of that, and I have no love whatsoever for Corbyn or Labour.

[Vault Boy]

But he wasn't suspended because of what was said in the report, only for his statement afterwards that: 1) Fully endorsed its recommendations, 2) Said anti-Semitism was unacceptable, and then 3) said the media, and some in his own party, exaggerated the level of anti-Semitism (but not denying it's existence)

I find it hard to argue with any of that, and I have no love whatsoever for Corbyn or Labour.


He was rightfully suspended for saying that antisemitism in the Labour Party was exaggerated in response to a thorough and damning report about antisemitism in Corbyn's Labour Party. How can any reasonable, truly 'anti racist' individual genuinely try to belittle the presence of antisemitism as their direct response to a comprehensive report about it?!

He wasn't suspended for the report, though there's plenty to say he should have been, however it's just as important to provide the context of what he was responding to as it is to provide his full, unedited quote. What use is a quote out of context? Essentially none.

Regardless of where somebody stands politically, Corbyn's record on this is ****ing hideous and it's about time he was booted. You can't sincerely claim to care about antisemitism whilst in the same breath denying its severity.

[neil7908]

I know I'm indulging in a bit of whataboutery here but this is this the same party that stood by Tony Blair after an illegal war?

[hibsbollah]

It’s an obscene charade. Anti semitism has nothing to do with today’s move. It’s a purge, pure and simple.
I’ll be cancelling my membership today, not become of some slavish devotion to that particular individual, but the astonishing statement Starmer has made about ‘not belonging in the Labour Party if you think the media have exaggerated AS in the Labour a Party’. I DO think it’s been exaggerated, I don’t like thought control, and therefore clearly I’ve got no place in it.


Sheermans anti Semitic tweet back in August is the most egregious bit of anti semitism I’ve ever seen in the party, still no media interest, not even a single statement from the leadership. But hes from the right of the party. I think that says it all about any genuine commitment to anti semitism from Starmer.

[Hibbyradge]

I know I'm indulging in a bit of whataboutery here but this is this the same party that stood by Tony Blair after an illegal war?

What point are you making about anti-Semitism?

[Ozyhibby]

I know I'm indulging in a bit of whataboutery here but this is this the same party that stood by Tony Blair after an illegal war?

The whole country stood by Tony Blair after an illegal war in Iraq. He was re-elected in 2005.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

I wonder what Corbyn would have said if the enquiry was into sexual harassment or plain old fashioned racism.

"Och, there might have been a wee bit, but it wisny that bad".

No, it doesn't really wash regardless of which accent you try.

[weecounty hibby]

It’s an obscene charade. Anti semitism has nothing to do with today’s move. It’s a purge, pure and simple.
I’ll be cancelling my membership today, not become of some slavish devotion to that particular individual, but the astonishing statement Starmer has made about ‘not belonging in the Labour Party if you think the media have exaggerated AS in the Labour a Party’. I DO think it’s been exaggerated, I don’t like thought control, and therefore clearly I’ve got no place in it.


Sheermans anti Semitic tweet back in August is the most egregious bit of anti semitism I’ve ever seen in the party, still no media interest, not even a single statement from the leadership. But hes from the right of the party. I think that says it all about any genuine commitment to anti semitism from Starmer.
I don't belong to the labour party but I do agree with you. Is there AS in the labour party? Yes. Was it used by a right wing media against Corbyn. I think so. Where is the same probing and constantly bringing it up about Johnson's clear anti Muslim, anti black and anti gay statements.
I never did like Corbyn and thought he was a very very poor leader of the opposition but he was ****ed over by the press. I suppose he let it happen though as well with a number of own goals

[neil7908]

The whole country stood by Tony Blair after an illegal war in Iraq. He was re-elected in 2005.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Does that mean it's not illegal? All politicians not accountable to the law if they are reelected?

[One Day Soon]

I wonder whether we'll see the launching of a 'New Left' party at the end of all this? There are clearly plenty of potential activist members for it, a leader in waiting, a ready made PLP of various MPs and with Len Murray and Unite in the background the potential for financial backing. Might suit all concerned for a variety of reasons really.

[Ozyhibby]

Does that mean it's not illegal? All politicians not accountable to the law if they are reelected?

Of course it was illegal. I’m pointing out that we are willing to turn a blind eye to illegality when it suits us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Keith_M]

The whole country stood by Tony Blair after an illegal war in Iraq. He was re-elected in 2005.
...


Many people didn't, include some pretty high profile members of his own party.

Yes, he got re-elected, but in the same country that has given us Conservative Governments for 33 years out of the last 40.

That says more about the voters of this country than anything else (which I think is the point you were making)

[Ozyhibby]

I wonder whether we'll see the launching of a 'New Left' party at the end of all this? There are clearly plenty of potential activist members for it, a leader in waiting, a ready made PLP of various MPs and with Len Murray and Unite in the background the potential for financial backing. Might suit all concerned for a variety of reasons really.

Would guarantee a right wing govt in England forever. Scotland has an exit strategy at least. Also, couldn’t they all just join the SWP?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[neil7908]

What point are you making about anti-Semitism?

I've already posted above that the report looks very bad for Corbyn and overall after being an enthusiastic supporter I'm now convinced Labour are better without him as leader.

But chucking him out of the party is pretty extreme (appreciate its only a suspension but I think we know where this will go).

I mention Iraq as Labour stood by Blair, even after the inquiries, damning evidence etc.

Corbyn bad failed here, I'm not disputing that but another poster called it a purge - there is more than a whiff of that to me.

[G B Young]

What an eejit Corbyn is. Beggars belief he was ever in a position to be elected PM.

'Magic grandad' mythology now well and truly crushed. He turned out to be just a nasty old bigot/racist.

Following his 'leadership' of Labour to their worst election defeat in a century it's fair to say his humiliation is well and truly complete.

[Hibs Class]

I wonder whether we'll see the launching of a 'New Left' party at the end of all this? There are clearly plenty of potential activist members for it, a leader in waiting, a ready made PLP of various MPs and with Len Murray and Unite in the background the potential for financial backing. Might suit all concerned for a variety of reasons really.

Now there's a real blast from the past!

[hibsbollah]

What an eejit Corbyn is. Beggars belief he was ever in a position to be elected PM.

'Magic grandad' mythology now well and truly crushed. He turned out to be just a nasty old bigot/racist.

Following his 'leadership' of Labour to their worst election defeat in a century it's fair to say his humiliation is well and truly complete.

Where the evidence that he is either a bigot or a racist? Answer: there isn’t any.
You have jumped all over the tiniest scrap of flimsy AS evidence on this thread for years, but mysteriously you like everyone else are quiet on the Sheerman quotes I posted in August. Unsurprising but poor from you.

[One Day Soon]

Now there's a real blast from the past!

Good grief, that’s twice today. Len Murray here and Jacinda Ahearn on another thread. I’m putting it down to fairly extreme business related stress in the last fortnight.

[Pretty Boy]

Regardless of what this report said it would never be acceptable to one side of the other. Factionalism is killing the Labour movement.

Throughout Corbyns time as leader he was undermined and subject to open hostility from his own MPs and many within the wider party. Now the same people who were so appalled by the treatment of Corbyn are quite happy to turn their guns on Starmer.

The Labour Party has always been an evolving entity and a melting pot of idea and ideologies but it's increasingly clear it is close to broken beyond repair. For as long as each side refuses to accept the need for compromise we will end up with what neither of them want and that's a Tory government.

[Keith_M]

Where the evidence that he is either a bigot or a racist? Answer: there isn’t any.
You have jumped all over the tiniest scrap of flimsy AS evidence on this thread for years, but mysteriously you like everyone else are quiet on the Sheerman quotes I posted in August. Unsurprising but poor from you.


Some people don't need evidence, just the determination to believe.

There's a couple of people on here that are determined to ignore the fact that Jeremy Corbyn said today, in no uncertain terms, that anti-Semitism was unacceptable.

As someone that considers themselves to be a neutral in this whole affair, I also find it hard to argue with his statement that the Media exaggerated the level of anti-Semitism in his party (notice that he didn't deny that it exists) and that certain factions within his party were happy to use that for political reasons.

[ronaldo7]

https://www.jewishpress.com/news/global/uk/uk-jews-call-for-expelling-labor-mp-barry-sheerman-for-silver-shekels-tweets/2020/08/02/

Another antisemitism in the Labour Party story. A few key differences with this one;
1. Sheerman is on the right of the party and has been an enthusiastic critic of Corbyn.
2.Sheerman is a member of Friends of Israel.
3. What Sheerman tweeted was his own words, not a ‘like’ or retweet of someone else’s intention. The words were unambiguously anti Semitic and seem far more damning than the recent Long Bailey thing. But unlike recent ‘scandals’ contained no criticism of the Israeli regime.
4. The tweet was from Sunday. But the story is hard to find on the bbc, hidden away in the regional news. Nothing in the Guardian, usually all over the antisemitism discussion. Labour leadership not been asked about it, so no response required from Starmer.

:dunno:


I look forward to Starmer making a swift decision to remove the whip. He's set the bar so over to you Keir...


Unlikely to face any action according to this:

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/barry-sheerman-unlikely-face-action-18709003

Shocking if true and completely destroys any suggestion of "zero tolerance".

I'm increasingly unsure on Starmer.


So 9 days has passed since Sheermans tweet.
His constituency party has reported him.
The campaign against Antisemitism has reported him.
Still no interest from the press.
Still no questions asked of Starmer.
Almost most odd of all, still no attempt to make political capital out of it from Johnson.

A weird and depressing story, because no ones interested.


From ‘Yorkshire Live’ yesterday;

Asked directly by the Local Democracy Reporting Service if there was one rule for Rebecca Long-Bailey and another for Mr Sheerman, Sir Keir replied: “I made my position on Rebecca Long-Bailey very clear at the time.
“Barry was wrong to tweet in the way that he did. He deeply regrets it. The word is ‘mortified’.
“He’s taking a break from social media and that’s the right thing.”


They're gradually sliding back to the right, and with Murray pulling them along in Scotland. Richard's coat is on a shoogly peg.

Starmer wants to move the Sheerman story on before he has to make a call that he really doesn't want to make.


It’s an obscene charade. Anti semitism has nothing to do with today’s move. It’s a purge, pure and simple.
I’ll be cancelling my membership today, not become of some slavish devotion to that particular individual, but the astonishing statement Starmer has made about ‘not belonging in the Labour Party if you think the media have exaggerated AS in the Labour a Party’. I DO think it’s been exaggerated, I don’t like thought control, and therefore clearly I’ve got no place in it.


Sheermans anti Semitic tweet back in August is the most egregious bit of anti semitism I’ve ever seen in the party, still no media interest, not even a single statement from the leadership. But hes from the right of the party. I think that says it all about any genuine commitment to anti semitism from Starmer.


It seems the zero tolerance only kicks in when he wants it to. Having waited since August to see what he's going to do, which in Sheermans case is clearly **** all. It's clearly a purge, and all those who were very very quiet on here in August will have had their way.

[Mibbes Aye]

Long overdue.

Corbyn was happy to accept all the support of the Labour Party in helping him every time he stood for re-election as an MP yet made a point of voting against his own party several hundred times.

He is a hypocrite, generally acknowledged as intellectually weak and totally in thrall to the likes of Seamas Milne. And there was no leadership, generally or in relation to anti-semitism.

Hopefully he is expelled. Labour is a broad and open movement but it shouldn’t be a vehicle for entryists with a different agenda looking to take advantage. They can GTF too.

[Chorley Hibee]

Some people don't need evidence, just the determination to believe.

There's a couple of people on here that are determined to ignore the fact that Jeremy Corbyn said today, in no uncertain terms, that anti-Semitism was unacceptable.

As someone that considers themselves to be a neutral in this whole affair, I also find it hard to argue with his statement that the Media exaggerated the level of anti-Semitism in his party (notice that he didn't deny that it exists) and that certain factions within his party were happy to use that for political reasons.

He's a man who has dedicated his political life to fighting racism and discrimination of all kinds, yet here he is having his character besmirched in a move that is purely political.

Let's hope the party are as swift with the inquiry into the members of the party who sabotaged their own General election campaign last year.

[G B Young]

Where the evidence that he is either a bigot or a racist? Answer: there isn’t any.
You have jumped all over the tiniest scrap of flimsy AS evidence on this thread for years, but mysteriously you like everyone else are quiet on the Sheerman quotes I posted in August. Unsurprising but poor from you.

I had to look up the Sheerman quotes as I couldn't remember what you were referring to. If he didn't face any sanctions then I agree that was wrong. However, it's hardly comparable to the EHRC report which is far from "flimsy" when it comes to laying bare the scale of the anti-Semitism problems under Corbyn's watch and couldn't be more damning of him and his cohorts:

"We found specific examples of harassment, discrimination and politicalinterference in our evidence, but equally of concern was a lack of leadership within the Labour Party on these issues, which is hard to reconcile with its stated commitment to a zero-tolerance approach to antisemitism. It is hard not to conclude that antisemitism within the Labour Party could have been tackled more effectively if the leadership had chosen to do so."

If that's not evidence of racism what is?

[hibsbollah]

I had to look up the Sheerman quotes as I couldn't remember what you were referring to. If he didn't face any sanctions then I agree that was wrong. However, it's hardly comparable to the EHRC report which is far from "flimsy" when it comes to laying bare the scale of the anti-Semitism problems under Corbyn's watch and couldn't be more damning of him and his cohorts:

"We found specific examples of harassment, discrimination and politicalinterference in our evidence, but equally of concern was a lack of leadership within the Labour Party on these issues, which is hard to reconcile with its stated commitment to a zero-tolerance approach to antisemitism. It is hard not to conclude that antisemitism within the Labour Party could have been tackled more effectively if the leadership had chosen to do so."

If that's not evidence of racism what is?

Read it and think about it. That’s not evidence of him being a racist. If you had any class you would withdraw the accusation. On the other hand the insinuations are everywhere so what’s the point?

[One Day Soon]

Would guarantee a right wing govt in England forever. Scotland has an exit strategy at least. Also, couldn’t they all just join the SWP?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


They probably could though to be fair I think there are many who are on the left and would absolutely not regard themselves as holding SWP politics. It might split the left vote or on the other hand it may have exactly the opposite effect. As you know, I don't really regard independence as much of an exit strategy.

[G B Young]

Some people don't need evidence, just the determination to believe.

There's a couple of people on here that are determined to ignore the fact that Jeremy Corbyn said today, in no uncertain terms, that anti-Semitism was unacceptable.

As someone that considers themselves to be a neutral in this whole affair, I also find it hard to argue with his statement that the Media exaggerated the level of anti-Semitism in his party (notice that he didn't deny that it exists) and that certain factions within his party were happy to use that for political reasons.

Corbyn's failure to condemn anti-Semitism (or even acknowledge its existence within his party) until he was pretty much forced to do so was what allowed the whole issue to spiral out of control.

[Beefster]

Many people didn't, include some pretty high profile members of his own party.

Yes, he got re-elected, but in the same country that has given us Conservative Governments for 33 years out of the last 40.

That says more about the voters of this country than anything else (which I think is the point you were making)

Your maths is a bit wonky. Labour were in power from 1997 to 2010. Yours, A Pedant.

PS doesn’t really blunt your point in your defence.

[Ozyhibby]

Corbyn may or may not be an anti-Semite but he was definitely happy to turn a blind eye to it among his supporters in order to advance his cause. That makes him a ****bag in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RyeSloan]

Read it and think about it. That’s not evidence of him being a racist. If you had any class you would withdraw the accusation. On the other hand the insinuations are everywhere so what’s the point?

So the leadership chose not to tackle it effectively, was found to have repeatedly inappropriately involved in influencing suspensions or we get to investigate and oversaw breaches equality act. Not a good look really is it?

Corbyn himself then goes onto say that the Chakrabarti recommendations were not implemented fast enough. No explanation of why not of course, just another excuse / deflection.

Racist or not his responses have always been qualified by a suggestion that it’s not really that bad so not sure what all the fuss is about. A stance that often leads people to doubt the sincerity of what he has said before re tackling the issue.

The difference in tone and content to his frequent utterings on this subject to Starmer’s today could not be more stark.

Corbyn a racist, well maybe not but Corbyn totally incompetent and never able to fully get to grips with this matter...certainly.

Others will draw their own conclusions as to just why he wasn’t able or willing to do so and who can blame them really, it’s Corbyn himself that has left that door wide open.

[G B Young]

So the leadership chose not to tackle it effectively, was found to have repeatedly inappropriately involved in influencing suspensions or we get to investigate and oversaw breaches equality act. Not a good look really is it?

Corbyn himself then goes onto say that the Chakrabarti recommendations were not implemented fast enough. No explanation of why not of course, just another excuse / deflection.

Racist or not his responses have always been qualified by a suggestion that it’s not really that bad so not sure what all the fuss is about. A stance that often leads people to doubt the sincerity of what he has said before re tackling the issue.

The difference in tone and content to his frequent utterings on this subject to Starmer’s today could not be more stark.

Corbyn a racist, well maybe not but Corbyn totally incompetent and never able to fully get to grips with this matter...certainly.

Others will draw their own conclusions as to just why he wasn’t able or willing to do so and who can blame them really, it’s Corbyn himself that has left that door wide open.

Hard to disagree with any of that.

What I struggle to understand is why those still trying to defend Corbyn seem to see this report as some sort of Starmer-led witch-hunt. It's not an internal probe (like the Chakrabarti whitewash the blessed Jeremy commissioned), but a near two-year investigation by a non-departmental body with "responsibility for the promotion and enforcement of equality and non-discrimination laws". Its conclusions could scarcely be more damning of the Labour leadership on Corbyn's watch:

The EHRC’s lead investigator, Alasdair Henderson, said the failure of leadership must ultimately stop with Corbyn. “As the leader of the party at the time, and given the extent of the failings we found in the political interference within the leader of the opposition’s office, Jeremy Corbyn (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/jeremy-corbyn) is ultimately accountable and responsible for what happened at that time,” Henderson said.

Starmer has been very impressive on this issue since taking charge and while he could be accused of being prepared to turn a blind eye to things while in Corbyn's shadow cabinet, he's made short work of the poisonous Corbynistas now he's in a position to do so.

[G B Young]

Long overdue.

Corbyn was happy to accept all the support of the Labour Party in helping him every time he stood for re-election as an MP yet made a point of voting against his own party several hundred times.

He is a hypocrite, generally acknowledged as intellectually weak and totally in thrall to the likes of Seamas Milne. And there was no leadership, generally or in relation to anti-semitism.

Hopefully he is expelled. Labour is a broad and open movement but it shouldn’t be a vehicle for entryists with a different agenda looking to take advantage. They can GTF too.

:agree:

[Bristolhibby]

I wonder whether we'll see the launching of a 'New Left' party at the end of all this? There are clearly plenty of potential activist members for it, a leader in waiting, a ready made PLP of various MPs and with Len Murray and Unite in the background the potential for financial backing. Might suit all concerned for a variety of reasons really.

Then the U.K. will be governed by Tories in perpetuity.

J

[Keith_M]

Here's an extract from an interview with US scholar Norman G. Finkelstein, who writes extensively on the subject of Anti-Semtism

(full article HERE (https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/american-jewish-scholar-behind-labour-s-antisemitism-scanda/))



Interviewer:

"Let’s zoom out a bit. You’ve written a great deal (http://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520245983) about how antisemitism accusations have been used to discredit and distract from criticism of Israel. Should we see the current campaign against Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Left more generally as the latest episode in that history?"

Response:

"These campaigns occur at regular intervals, correlating with Israel’s periodic massacres and consequent political isolation. If you search your nearest library catalogue for ‘new antisemitism’, you’ll come up with titles from the 1970s proclaiming a ‘new antisemitism’, titles from the 1980s proclaiming a ‘new antisemitism’, titles from the 1990s proclaiming a ‘new antisemitism’, and then a huge uptick, including from British writers, during the so-called Second Intifada from 2001. Let’s not forget, just last year there was a hysteria in the UK (https://www.byline.com/project/13/article/594) over antisemitism. A couple of ridiculous polls purported to find that nearly half of Britons held an antisemitic belief and that most British Jews feared for their future in the UK. Although these polls were dismissed by specialists, they triggered the usual media feeding frenzy, as the Telegraph, the Guardian and the Independent hyperventilated about this ‘rampant (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11343209/Survey-shows-antisemitic-views-are-common-among-Britons.html)’ ‘newantisemitism (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-new-anti-semitism-majority-of-british-jews-feel-they-have-no-future-in-uk-says-new-study-9976310.html)’. It was exposed as complete nonsense when, in April 2015, a reputable poll by Pew (http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2015/06/Pew-Research-Center-European-Union-Report-FINAL-June-2-20151.pdf) found that the level of antisemitism in the UK had remained stable, at an underwhelming seven percent.

This farce happened only last year. One would have imagined that its mongers would be hiding in shame, and that we would enjoy at least a brief respite from the theatrics. But lo and behold, in the blink of an eye, right in the wake of the Pew poll showing that antisemitism in the UK is marginal, the hysteria has started up all over again. The reality is, there is probably more prejudice in the UK against fat people than there is prejudice against Jews."

(continued...)

[Keith_M]

(...continued from previous post)


"Ask yourself a simple, but serious, question. You go for a job interview. Which trait is most likely to work against you: if you’re ugly, if you’re fat, if you’re short, or if you’re Jewish? It’s perhaps a sad commentary on our society’s values, but the trait most likely to elicit a rejection letter is if you’re ugly. Then fat; then short.

The factor least likely to work against you is, if you’re Jewish. On the contrary, aren’t Jews smart and ambitious? Pew found antisemitism levels at seven percent. Is that grounds for a national hysteria? A May 2015 YouGov poll (https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/06/05/european-attitudes-minorities/) found that 40 percent of UK adults don’t like Muslims and nearly 60 percent don’t like Roma. Imagine what it’s like to apply for a job if you’re a Roma! So where is your order of moral priorities?


Many of those involved in last year’s ‘antisemitism’ hysterics are also participants in the current campaign against Corbyn."

"The question you have to ask yourself is, why? Why has this issue been resurrected with a vengeance, so soon after its previous outing was disposed of as a farce? Is it because of a handful of allegedly antisemitic social media postings (https://opendemocracy.net/uk/jamie-stern-weiner/jeremy-corbyn-hasn-t-got-antisemitism-problem-his-opponents-do) from Labour members? Is it because of the tongue-in-cheek map posted by Naz Shah? That’s not believable. The only plausible answer is, it’s political. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the factual situation; instead, a few suspect cases of antisemitism – some real, some contrived – are being exploited for an ulterior political motive. As one senior Labour MP said (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/diane-abbott-labour-antisemitism-problem-smears-ken-livingstone-len-mccluskey-a7008746.html) the other day, it’s transparently a smear campaign.

The ‘antisemitism’ accusations are being driven by the Conservatives ahead of the local and Mayoral elections. But they’re also being exploited by the Labour Right to undermine Corbyn’s leadership, and by pro-Israel groups to discredit the Palestine solidarity movement. "

"You can see this overlap between the Labour Right and pro-Israel groups personified in individuals like Jonathan Freedland, a Blairite hack who also regularly plays the antisemitism card. He’s combined these two hobbies to attack Corbyn. Incidentally, when my book, The Holocaust Industry, came out in 2000, Freedland wrote that I was (http://www.theguardian.com/books/2000/jul/14/historybooks.comment) 'closer to the people who created the Holocaust than to those who suffered in it'. Although he appears to be, oh, so politically correct now, he didn’t find it inappropriate to suggest that I resembled the Nazis who gassed my family."

(continued...)

[Keith_M]

(...continued from previous post)

"We appeared on a television program together. Before the program, he approached me to shake my hand. When I refused, he reacted in stunned silence. Why wouldn’t I shake his hand? He couldn’t comprehend it. It tells you something about these dull-witted creeps. The smears, the slanders – for them, it’s all in a day’s work. Why should anyone get agitated? Later, on the program, it was pointed out that the Guardian, where he worked, had serialised The Holocaust Industry across two issues. He was asked by the presenter, if my book was the equivalent of Mein Kampf, would he resign from the paper? Of course not. Didn’t the presenter get that it’s all a game?"




(There's much more in the article (https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/american-jewish-scholar-behind-labour-s-antisemitism-scanda/), but the parts I quoted are thought provoking)

[hibsbollah]

Starmer has been very impressive on this issue since taking charge

...Except for the case which I’ve just presented to you :faf: Unless by ‘this issue’ you mean ‘the left’ as opposed to, you know, ACTUAL racism and discrimination that Corbyn has been fighting against all his ****ing political life.

Its actually Orwellian the **** we are forced to swallow.

[Vault Boy]

...Except for the case which I’ve just presented to you :faf: Unless by ‘this issue’ you mean ‘the left’ as opposed to, you know, ACTUAL racism and discrimination that Corbyn has been fighting against all his ****ing political life.

Its actually Orwellian the **** we are forced to swallow.

Your dismissal of antisemitism within the Labour Party as not 'ACTUAL' racism is ironically Orwellian in an entirely different way, and I'm sorry to say that it's also the kind of attitude that has led to its continued survival within
our politics.

[hibsbollah]

Your dismissal of antisemitism within the Labour Party as not 'ACTUAL' racism is ironically Orwellian in an entirely different way, and I'm sorry to say that it's also the kind of attitude that has led to its continued survival within
our politics.

At no point did I say anti semitism isn’t real racism. I’m saying calling Corbyn ‘racist’, as a particularly clownish poster on here did earlier, is factually incorrect and devalues the debate, and in fact devalues the meaning of words themselves. So take your straw man somewhere else.

[Vault Boy]

At no point did I say anti semitism isn’t real racism. I’m saying calling Corbyn ‘racist’, as a particularly clownish poster on here did earlier, is factually incorrect and devalues the debate, and in fact devalues the meaning of words themselves. So take your straw man somewhere else.

Absolutely isn't a straw man, in fact, the post I replied to was far more of a straw man, as you're conflating Starmer's approach to antisemitism as ACTUALLY being his approach to leftism, which is nonsense.

If you want to argue that Corbyn had a good enough record on antisemitism and that it's not an issue within Labour, then there are far more constructive ways of doing it than turning a phrase like 'actual racism', it's representative of a wider issue concerning dismissive attitudes towards antisemitism. You'd have a tough time making that argument in my view, particularly in light of this report, but that's for you to deal with.

Those were your words. I don't have to make up any fake propositions.

[hibsbollah]

Absolutely isn't a straw man, in fact, the post I replied to was far more of a straw man, as you're conflating Starmer's approach to antisemitism as ACTUALLY being his approach to leftism, which is nonsense.

If you want to argue that Corbyn had a good enough record on antisemitism and that it's not an issue within Labour, then there are far more constructive ways of doing it than turning a phrase like 'actual racism', it's representative of a wider issue concerning dismissive attitudes towards antisemitism. You'd have a tough time making that argument in my view, particularly in light of this report, but that's for you to deal with.

Those were your words. I don't have to make up any fake propositions.

It’s really not as intractable as you make out.

I do not think Corbyn is a racist.
Corbyn has been accused of being a racist on this thread.
Hence, I used the phrase ‘actual racism’ to differentiate what he is, with what ACTUAL racists are.

You have misconstrued/misunderstood/tried to make an arsey point. I’m not sure exactly which.

I suppose this is how witch hunts start.

[GORDONSMITH7]

I had to look up the Sheerman quotes as I couldn't remember what you were referring to. If he didn't face any sanctions then I agree that was wrong. However, it's hardly comparable to the EHRC report which is far from "flimsy" when it comes to laying bare the scale of the anti-Semitism problems under Corbyn's watch and couldn't be more damning of him and his cohorts:

"We found specific examples of harassment, discrimination and politicalinterference in our evidence, but equally of concern was a lack of leadership within the Labour Party on these issues, which is hard to reconcile with its stated commitment to a zero-tolerance approach to antisemitism. It is hard not to conclude that antisemitism within the Labour Party could have been tackled more effectively if the leadership had chosen to do so."

If that's not evidence of racism what is?

You have avoided hibsbollah's question and the quote you have given here does not in any way indicate that Corbyn is either anti-Semitic or racist. The EHRC report after months of investigation did not come to that conclusion. Perhaps you should have made a personal submission to the EHRC to convince them otherwise.

BIG G

[Vault Boy]

It’s really not as intractable as you make out.

I do not think Corbyn is a racist.
Corbyn has been accused of being a racist on this thread.
Hence, I used the phrase ‘actual racism’ to differentiate what he is, with what ACTUAL racists are.

You have misconstrued/misunderstood/tried to make an arsey point. I’m not sure exactly which.

I suppose this is how witch hunts start.

The post you replied to said nothing about Corbyn being a racist, so your reply didn't seem to be about that. I believe that it's what you intended to refer to now that you've clarified, but reading it didn't make it seem that way at all.

There's nothing arsey about my reply, it's just somebody disagreeing with you. A methodical, independent, and thorough study isn't a witch hunt. Not even close.

[hibsbollah]

It seems the zero tolerance only kicks in when he wants it to. Having waited since August to see what he's going to do, which in Sheermans case is clearly **** all. It's clearly a purge, and all those who were very very quiet on here in August will have had their way.

:top marks

[hibsbollah]

The post you replied to said nothing about Corbyn being a racist, so your reply didn't seem to be about that. I believe that it's what you intended to refer to now that you've clarified, but reading it didn't make it seem that way at all.

There's nothing arsey about my reply, it's just somebody disagreeing with you. A methodical, independent, and thorough study isn't a witch hunt. Not even close.

When you say to me "I'm sorry to say that it's also the kind of attitude that has led to its (racism's) continued survival within our politics", you're not simply disagreeing with me, you're going way further than that. Offensive, baseless pish.

[Vault Boy]

When you say to me "I'm sorry to say that it's also the kind of attitude that has led to its (racism's) continued survival within our politics", you're not simply disagreeing with me, you're going way further than that. Offensive, baseless pish.

And if you were saying what you appeared to be saying, then it would be absolutely true, so what's your point? You clarified your misleading post after the fact, I can't account for that.

It was based firmly on an attitude that I've seen in the Labour Party and wider politics for a number of years now, one that dismisses antisemitism and tries to belittle antisemitic racism. Your post, before it was explained, read exactly like this, try to look at it from an outsider's perspective. I can't fathom how you can leap to take offence to that, given you've now explained your point more clearly and must see I'm not referring to you, but that's not really my problem.

[GORDONSMITH7]

It seems the zero tolerance only kicks in when he wants it to. Having waited since August to see what he's going to do, which in Sheermans case is clearly **** all. It's clearly a purge, and all those who were very very quiet on here in August will have had their way.

Spot on @ronaldo7 and this group of Jews back your assertion....

https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/it-reeks-of-double-standards/


It reeks of double standards
This article highlights the double standards in Keir Starmer reactions to antisemitic tropes, real and imagined.

Steve Reed, Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, idly tweeted a classic antisemitic trope, asking if Jewish businessman porn-baron Richard Desmond were “the puppet-master for the entire Tory cabinet”.

But Keir says it’s OK: Reed didn’t really mean it. (Not like Rebecca Long-Bailey…)

The article also points out the curious case of the attack dogs – the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Jewish Chronicle and the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism – who hounded Rebecca Long-Bailey. A muted response: where they noticed Reed’s tweet at all, they were curiously afraid to bark.

But then Reed is their “friend”, urging all Labour local authorities to adopt the IHRA definition (under which Reed is unambiguously guilty of antisemitism, M’lord).

It reeks of double standards and of weaponisation of accusations of antisemitism against your perceived enemies on the left – but forgiveness if it is your “friends” who are at fault.

Tue 7 Jul 2020

BIG G

[hibsbollah]

And if you were saying what you appeared to be saying, then it would be absolutely true, so what's your point? You clarified your misleading post after the fact, I can't account for that.

It was based firmly on an attitude that I've seen in the Labour Party and wider politics for a number of years now, one that dismisses antisemitism and tries to belittle antisemitic racism. Your post, before it was explained, read exactly like this, try to look at it from an outsider's perspective. I can't fathom how you can leap to take offence to that, given you've now explained your point more clearly and must see I'm not referring to you, but that's not really my problem.

Well, you've tarred me with a brush that isnt justified, so, yeah, I do take offence to that. I note that you're now backtracking slightly and blaming me for not being clear enough initially, instead of actually providing me with an apology.

If you've seen this attitude of belittling of antisemitic racism, maybe you could give examples of where and when? And how my post relates to that?

[Vault Boy]

Well, you've tarred me with a brush that isnt justified, so, yeah, I do take offence to that. I note that you're now backtracking slightly and blaming me for not being clear enough initially.

If you've seen this attitude of belittling of antisemitic racism, maybe you could give examples of where and when? And how my post relates to that?

I made it very clear that I was speaking about the attitude of classing antisemitism as not 'actual racism,' and I stand by that entirely, you won't find me backtracking, let alone apologising. What has happened since is that you've explained that's not what you were saying. Your post was in reply to somebody's post that didn't mention Corbyn being antisemitic, on a page of the thread on which nobody mentioned Corbyn as being antisemitic, yet you claimed your reply to be about those that call Corbyn antisemitic - so I think the responsibility is on you to make it clear that's what you were talking about in your original post. You've done that now, hence why I haven't claimed that you, personally, are helping to perpetuate antisemitism within the Party.

I attended dozens of CLP meetings, for a number of different areas of the country during Jeremy Corbyn's leadership. I've been in many online Labour groups, involved in dozens of regional campaign groups, and in doing so have worked, socialised, and volunteered with a huge variety of Labour Party members. The amount of antisemitic sentiment within a significant portion of these groups was horrendous, and I've personally reported individuals for this behaviour. If you'd like to see examples of people brushing off antisemitism now, I'd look no further than the replies on Twitter to the announcements from Labour, Keir, or indeed any news outlet reporting on the story.

[allmodcons]

What an eejit Corbyn is. Beggars belief he was ever in a position to be elected PM.

'Magic grandad' mythology now well and truly crushed. He turned out to be just a nasty old bigot/racist.

Following his 'leadership' of Labour to their worst election defeat in a century it's fair to say his humiliation is well and truly complete.


A truly shocking post with absolutely nothing to substantiate your claims that Corbyn is a bigot or racist.



Long overdue.

Corbyn was happy to accept all the support of the Labour Party in helping him every time he stood for re-election as an MP yet made a point of voting against his own party several hundred times.

He is a hypocrite, generally acknowledged as intellectually weak and totally in thrall to the likes of Seamas Milne. And there was no leadership, generally or in relation to anti-semitism.

Hopefully he is expelled. Labour is a broad and open movement but it shouldn’t be a vehicle for entryists with a different agenda looking to take advantage. They can GTF too.

Doesn't sound much like a broad and open movement judging by your comments.

I think it would fair to say that many on the left of this broad movement voted against Blair and his New Labour cohorts. Was it not Tony Benn who said that Blair "transformed the Labour Party from being a radical alternative to the Conservatives into a quasi-Thatcherite sect".

To consider Corbyn an "entryist" when he was first elected in 1983 seems a little harsh to me? He was elected 14 years before the first New Labour Government and stood solidly on a far left ticket since the Election in 1983. His agenda in 1983 would have been pretty well aligned with the Labour Party he was a part of back then.

He is neither a bigot, a racist nor anti-Semitic.

Not that you do, but there is a serious problem with many including an anti-Corbyn media happy to conflate a distaste for the actions of consecutive Israeli Governments with anti-Semitism.

[hibsbollah]

I made it very clear that I was speaking about the attitude of classing antisemitism as not 'actual racism,' and I stand by that entirely, you won't find me backtracking. What has happened since is that you've explained that's not what you were saying. Your post was in reply to somebody who didn't mention Corbyn being antisemitic, on a page of the thread on which nobody mentioned Corbyn as being antisemitic, yet you claimed your reply to be about those that call Corbyn antisemitic - so I think the responsibility is on you to make it clear that's what you were talking about in your original post. You've done that now, hence why I haven't claimed that you, personally, are helping to perpetuate antisemitism within the Party.

I attended dozens of CLP meetings, for a number of different areas of the country during Jeremy Corbyn's leadership. I've been in many online Labour groups, involved in dozens of regional campaign groups, and in doing so have worked, socialised, and volunteered with a huge variety of Labour Party members. The amount of antisemitic sentiment within a significant portion of these groups was horrendous, and I've personally reported individuals for this behaviour. If you'd like to see examples of people brushing off antisemitism now, I'd look no further than the replies on Twitter to the announcements from Labour, Keir, or indeed any news outlet reporting on the story.

Your second paragraph is interesting. Because my personal experience of the Labour Party, and in particular the left of the party and the left of politics in general, is exactly the opposite. Despite being brought up in a political environment, having a social circle interested in politics, studying politics at Uni, working in politics and government in various guises, and being involved in the Left in an informal way and the Labour Party as a member, I have genuinely never once encountered an anti Semitic sentiment, view or opinion. In 30 years. Truth. That doesnt mean it doesnt exist. But from my experience it absolutely is not a widespread phenomenon.

Denying it is as serious as others make out, or arguing that the media has exaggerated the problem is very different to 'brushing it off'.

[Vault Boy]

Your second paragraph is interesting. Because my personal experience of the Labour Party, and in particular the left of the party and the left of politics in general, is exactly the opposite. Despite being brought up in a political environment, having a social circle interested in politics, studying politics at Uni, working in politics and government in various guises, and being involved in the Left in an informal way and the Labour Party as a member, I have genuinely never once encountered an anti Semitic sentiment, view or opinion. In 30 years. Truth. That doesnt mean it doesnt exist. But from my experience it absolutely is not a widespread phenomenon.

Denying it is as serious as others make out, or arguing that the media has exaggerated the problem is very different to 'brushing it off'.

On your last point, I think they're very much cut from the same cloth in a lot of cases, but there's not a lot of value in discussing that, I feel.

I'm glad that you haven't come across antisemitism within your political life. Have all of your political encounters been in Scotland? I ask because, whilst I've spread to all corners within England to work/volunteer politically, I've never done so in Scotland. It's clear that there's a significant divide in politics north and south of the boarder, so I wonder if that influences the differing experiences.

I'll never forget seeing members of a particular CLP in Essex, gladly sharing swastikas made from the Israeli flag between one another on the group's Facebook page. For the sake of balance, the guilty individuals were kicked out of the party pretty quickly after my friend reported them, though I've no idea whether they were able to rejoin at some point afterwards or not.

[G B Young]

From the Independent. Sums it up better than I can:

How could this possibly have happened to Jeremy Corbyn, the least racist person ever?

None of this is Jeremy Corbyn’s fault, of course – he has been fighting racism all his life, don’t you know

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-antisemitism-report-equality-human-rights-commission-luciana-berger-keir-starmer-b1426543.html

[G B Young]

Your dismissal of antisemitism within the Labour Party as not 'ACTUAL' racism is ironically Orwellian in an entirely different way, and I'm sorry to say that it's also the kind of attitude that has led to its continued survival within
our politics.

Indeed. 'History's oldest hatred' yet not deemed to be 'real racism' by too many.

Interesting to read that this is only the second time the EHRC have launched an investigation into a political party. The only other time involved the BNP.

[Vault Boy]

Indeed. 'History's oldest hatred' yet not deemed to be 'real racism' by too many.

Interesting to read that this is only the second time the EHRC have launched an investigation into a political party. The only other time involved the BNP.

I must note that this isn't what HB was saying, as discussed above.

However yes I've seen this touted by plenty of apologists elsewhere, unfortunately. Leading the largest political party in Europe to break equality laws really has to be taken very seriously.

[Pretty Boy]

I don't think the EHRC report makes any assertion that Jeremy Corbyn is a racist, a bigot or an anti semite. Getting bogged down in arguments about whether he is simply muddies the waters and detracts from the failings the report did reference.

In their own right each of the issues highlighted are not only serious but have also been deemed to be unlawful and as leader Corbyn may not have been responsible for such a culture, among a minority or otherwise, but he was responsible for the reaction of the party to it. Was there a motivation for opponents within the party to 'overstate' anti semitism and a failure to deal with it? Of course. What is the motivation for the EHRC to view all the evidence presented to them and conclude both the problem and a failure to deal with it existed though?

I'd argue Labour as a party left themselves wide open to criticism when not implementing the recommendations of the Chakrabarti investigation in good time. The aftermath of that included various committee hearings and they were pretty unequivocal in stating that whilst systemic antisemitism didn't exist within the Labour Party the failure to respond to and deal with the incidents that did occur again left Labour wide open to accusations of institutional bigotry. That came in Corbyns watch.

I'm not particularly impressed by Starmers inconsistent approach towards the incidents highlighted on this thread. However the findings of the report, and less importantly Corbyns typically uncompromising response, are the real issue here and that shouldn't be lost.

[cabbageandribs1875]

i see a GoFundMe page set up to pay corbyns legal fees against some pananorama reporter that's suing him for libel has reached £360k

[neil7908]

This whole episode is furthering my fear that we are moving towards the Americanisation of our politics. Anyone on the left is now a radical communist who doesn't somehow fit in a party founded on the basis of socialism.

We are going to end up with one centre right party and one hard right party like our friends across the Atlantic, with each party and leader held to vastly different standards.

I've never been an enthusiastic supporter of independence but I can't see any pathway now to affecting real change in this country.

[heretoday]

Labour eats itself up from inside yet again.
The anti-Semitic stuff is complete and utter nonsense. I never saw any sign of it in the Labour party.
Opposing Israel's behaviour towards the
Palestinians is not, repeat not, anti-Semitic. It's like being branded anti-Catholic for criticising Bavarian Nazis in the thirties.

[G B Young]

Labour eats itself up from inside yet again.
The anti-Semitic stuff is complete and utter nonsense. I never saw any sign of it in the Labour party.
Opposing Israel's behaviour towards the
Palestinians is not, repeat not, anti-Semitic. It's like being branded anti-Catholic for criticising Bavarian Nazis in the thirties.

Have you read the EHRC report?

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/investigation-into-antisemitism-in-the-labour-party.pdf

[Pretty Boy]

Labour eats itself up from inside yet again.
The anti-Semitic stuff is complete and utter nonsense. I never saw any sign of it in the Labour party.
Opposing Israel's behaviour towards the
Palestinians is not, repeat not, anti-Semitic. It's like being branded anti-Catholic for criticising Bavarian Nazis in the thirties.

Is your experience the gold standard? I've seen a few people say 'I never saw any antisemitism in the Labour Party' across a few platforms now and imply that means it doesn't exist. A poster quoting a current Labour MP in this very thread disproves that notion.

There have been at least 2 published reports along with selct Committee investigations and hearings that have concluded antisemitism in some form did exist within the Labour Party and that there was a failure to adequately deal with it. Given the scope of their investigations and the access to evidence they have I think it's fair to conclude they paint a more vivid picture than anecdotal evidence from individuals, on either side of the argument, dratiling their own experiences.

[hibsbollah]

Is your experience the gold standard? I've seen a few people say 'I never saw any antisemitism in the Labour Party' across a few platforms now and imply that means it doesn't exist. A poster quoting a current Labour MP in this very thread disproves that notion.

There have been at least 2 published reports along with selct Committee investigations and hearings that have concluded antisemitism in some form did exist within the Labour Party and that there was a failure to adequately deal with it. Given the scope of their investigations and the access to evidence they have I think it's fair to conclude they paint a more vivid picture than anecdotal evidence from individuals, on either side of the argument, dratiling their own experiences.

AS does exist in the Labour Party, because it’s part of wider society. If you had investigations and published reports into any large organisation you’d find AS. The question is not whether it’s there but whether it’s there disproportionately. In my lifetime it’s the far right that is the natural home for these people, in a violent form that you see expressed at Charlottesville and in active terror groups across the world including the UK. That’s where I see actual evidence of it and yesterday’s report doesn’t provide anything to change my mind. My scepticism about the background to these investigations doesn’t mean if I see evidence of it l, including in valid anti Israel political campaigning, I won’t challenge it as strongly as I would any other form of racism.

[RyeSloan]

Is your experience the gold standard? I've seen a few people say 'I never saw any antisemitism in the Labour Party' across a few platforms now and imply that means it doesn't exist. A poster quoting a current Labour MP in this very thread disproves that notion.

There have been at least 2 published reports along with selct Committee investigations and hearings that have concluded antisemitism in some form did exist within the Labour Party and that there was a failure to adequately deal with it. Given the scope of their investigations and the access to evidence they have I think it's fair to conclude they paint a more vivid picture than anecdotal evidence from individuals, on either side of the argument, dratiling their own experiences.

My gold standard is that if Len McCluskey doesn’t like it then it must be the right thing to do!

Your general point is a good one though, lots of stuff on poor old Jeremy that seem to completely miss the point about the content of the report.

The third point that was said it have broken the quality act was this:

“Harassment, including the use of anti-Semitic tropes and suggesting that complaints of anti-Semitism were fake or smears”

To then immediately comment in his response that the whole thing was grossly exaggerated and just political seems wholly Inappropriate.

[marinello59]

Labour eats itself up from inside yet again.
The anti-Semitic stuff is complete and utter nonsense. I never saw any sign of it in the Labour party.
Opposing Israel's behaviour towards the
Palestinians is not, repeat not, anti-Semitic. It's like being branded anti-Catholic for criticising Bavarian Nazis in the thirties.

The evidence suggests that anti-Semitism has been a problem, we've had two reports now confirming it. Jeremy Corbyn has said it existed. I don't think Corbyn himself is in any way anti-Semitic but he failed to get to grips with those who were. We will all have opinions about how widespread it is but denying it is there would be silly.
I thought Corbyn was a poor leader but I did like his policies, RLB would have been my choice as his replacement which for me makes it all the sadder seeing the mess they have left behind. Corbyn did not need to make those comments yesterday, he could have made a bland covering statement and left his successor to articulate how seriously the party were taking this. Instead he poured petrol on to an already raging fire.

[Hibbyradge]

Labour eats itself up from inside yet again.
The anti-Semitic stuff is complete and utter nonsense. I never saw any sign of it in the Labour party.
Opposing Israel's behaviour towards the
Palestinians is not, repeat not, anti-Semitic. It's like being branded anti-Catholic for criticising Bavarian Nazis in the thirties.

Why didn't you say sooner?

You could have saved the EHCR a heck of a lot of time and effort.

[GORDONSMITH7]

The membership of the largest political party in Europe with some 580,000 members , voted twice to elect Corbyn, many thousands working hard to secure a Labour victory in both elections on the one hand while on the other hand the full force of the Establishment, Business Institutions, the billionaire owned crappy Tory MSM, Pro Israel Organisations and journals attacked Corbyn from the moment that he became Leader of the the Labour Party. The complainant to the EHRC was the right wing uber pro Israel, Campaign against Antisemitism which is determined to destroy the Labour Left. Surprise, surprise, coincidentally within a few hours of getting Corbyn's head, a new 72 page letter of complaint against 32 people including 11 Labour MPs was sent by them to Starmer. It was leaked to a far right website. Let the Witch-hunt commence!
The roll of the Labour right wing MP'S in Parliament has been utterly pernicious. Two attempted coups and the most vociferious of them piling onto the pages of the Tory press and TV openly baying for Corbyn's blood. They have been rewarded by Sir Keir Rodney Starmer KCB QC MP giving them Shadow Cabinet positions.All this was enough evidence that the party machinery was single-mindedly dedicated to one aim, to destroy Corbyn and the left of the Party.
New Labour architect Peter Mandelson and close ally of Blair, famously openly stated at a Jewish Chronicle event in London “I work every single day to bring forward the end of Corbyn’s tenure in office.”
Then came the leaked Labour Party 800+ page document, which has not been mentioned, showing unequivocally the Blairites in charge at the top of the Party machinery, apart from, bullying, racism and misogyny were actively working for a Labour defeat at both elections and that hostility towards Corbyn contributed to the party’s ineffective handling of antisemitism complaints.The report is being investigated, none have been suspended from Party membership.
Don't hold you breath

BIG G

[lapsedhibee]

KCB QC
Relevance? :dunno:

[lucky]

I’ve been a Labour Party member for over 30 years and I can say I’ve never heard one anti-Semitic comment in any meeting or social event. There is huge support for a free Palestine and heavy criticism of the Israeli government and its policies. I’ve been to Palestine and see the hardship that the people suffer at the hands of an occupying army. The policies of the Israeli government are abhorrent in my opinion but I’m not anti Semitic just anti suppression.

McCluskey will shout loud and cry about the unfair suspension of Corbyn but the reality is most unions are affiliated to the Labour Party through their rule books and it will be the members that decide if they stop affiliating not the General Secretaries.

[The Harp Awakes]

The membership of the largest political party in Europe with some 580,000 members , voted twice to elect Corbyn, many thousands working hard to secure a Labour victory in both elections on the one hand while on the other hand the full force of the Establishment, Business Institutions, the billionaire owned crappy Tory MSM, Pro Israel Organisations and journals attacked Corbyn from the moment that he became Leader of the the Labour Party. The complainant to the EHRC was the right wing uber pro Israel, Campaign against Antisemitism which is determined to destroy the Labour Left. Surprise, surprise, coincidentally within a few hours of getting Corbyn's head, a new 72 page letter of complaint against 32 people including 11 Labour MPs was sent by them to Starmer. It was leaked to a far right website. Let the Witch-hunt commence!
The roll of the Labour right wing MP'S in Parliament has been utterly pernicious. Two attempted coups and the most vociferious of them piling onto the pages of the Tory press and TV openly baying for Corbyn's blood. They have been rewarded by Sir Keir Rodney Starmer KCB QC MP giving them Shadow Cabinet positions.All this was enough evidence that the party machinery was single-mindedly dedicated to one aim, to destroy Corbyn and the left of the Party.
New Labour architect Peter Mandelson and close ally of Blair, famously openly stated at a Jewish Chronicle event in London “I work every single day to bring forward the end of Corbyn’s tenure in office.”
Then came the leaked Labour Party 800+ page document, which has not been mentioned, showing unequivocally the Blairites in charge at the top of the Party machinery, apart from, bullying, racism and misogyny were actively working for a Labour defeat at both elections and that hostility towards Corbyn contributed to the party’s ineffective handling of antisemitism complaints.The report is being investigated, none have been suspended from Party membership.
Don't hold you breath

BIG G

Gordon, as you know I'm no Labour voter, but I agree with a lot of that mate. To me there's a blurred line between justifiably criticising the state of Israel on their actions and being anti-semetic. I suspect a lot of the feeling that exists in the Labour Party is driven by Israel's foreign policy rather than racism.

When you look at the anti-catholic stuff that still goes on in particularly NI and Scotland it makes anti-semitism in the Labour Party look like a storm in a tea cup.

As long as the British State continues to discriminate against Catholics in legislation, e.g., The Act of Settlement, and somehow that's ok and defensible, I will remain cynical.

[Mibbes Aye]

The membership of the largest political party in Europe with some 580,000 members , voted twice to elect Corbyn, many thousands working hard to secure a Labour victory in both elections on the one hand while on the other hand the full force of the Establishment, Business Institutions, the billionaire owned crappy Tory MSM, Pro Israel Organisations and journals attacked Corbyn from the moment that he became Leader of the the Labour Party. The complainant to the EHRC was the right wing uber pro Israel, Campaign against Antisemitism which is determined to destroy the Labour Left. Surprise, surprise, coincidentally within a few hours of getting Corbyn's head, a new 72 page letter of complaint against 32 people including 11 Labour MPs was sent by them to Starmer. It was leaked to a far right website. Let the Witch-hunt commence!
The roll of the Labour right wing MP'S in Parliament has been utterly pernicious. Two attempted coups and the most vociferious of them piling onto the pages of the Tory press and TV openly baying for Corbyn's blood. They have been rewarded by Sir Keir Rodney Starmer KCB QC MP giving them Shadow Cabinet positions.All this was enough evidence that the party machinery was single-mindedly dedicated to one aim, to destroy Corbyn and the left of the Party.
New Labour architect Peter Mandelson and close ally of Blair, famously openly stated at a Jewish Chronicle event in London “I work every single day to bring forward the end of Corbyn’s tenure in office.”
Then came the leaked Labour Party 800+ page document, which has not been mentioned, showing unequivocally the Blairites in charge at the top of the Party machinery, apart from, bullying, racism and misogyny were actively working for a Labour defeat at both elections and that hostility towards Corbyn contributed to the party’s ineffective handling of antisemitism complaints.The report is being investigated, none have been suspended from Party membership.
Don't hold you breath

BIG G

Of course Starmer is an MP. Being a QC was an achievement in his protessional career before politics It sounds like you are trying to smear him as privileged.

Why not reference that Jeremy and his brother Piers were privately-educated?

Corbyn was a hypocrite and intellectually incompetent. The Labour movement will be better for getting rid of entryists who want to piggyback. They can GTF and form their own party. This all feels like a retread of Militant. Mandelson was vital in ensuring thirteen years of Labour government which made huge strides, I don't blame him for wanting shot of the absolute disaster of Jeremy Corbyn.



.

[GORDONSMITH7]

Of course Starmer is an MP. Being a QC was an achievement in his protessional career before politics It sounds like you are trying to smear him as privileged.

Why not reference that Jeremy and his brother Piers were privately-educated?

Corbyn was a hypocrite and intellectually incompetent. The Labour movement will be better for getting rid of entryists who want to piggyback. They can GTF and form their own party. This all feels like a retread of Militant. Mandelson was vital in ensuring thirteen years of Labour government which made huge strides, I don't blame him for wanting shot of the absolute disaster of Jeremy Corbyn.



.

Where is your evidence of entryism, the Daily Mail,or has been politicians/come TV clowns like Alan Johnson. Mandelson was indeed vital.....in being an architect with Blair and Campbell in executing the UK participation in an illegal War which resulted in over 1,000,000 Iraqi men, women and kids being murdered, sectarian barbarism which ushered in ISIS and the rest is history. How these hero's can sleep at night I do not know.

BIG G

[Colr]

Blair was credited as being instrumental in ending the conflict in Kosovo, and boys born following the war were sometimes given the name Toni or Tonibler. In 2010, Blair made a visit to Kosovo where he met several boys bearing the name.

[GORDONSMITH7]

Blair was credited as being instrumental in ending the conflict in Kosovo, and boys born following the war were sometimes given the name Toni or Tonibler. In 2010, Blair made a visit to Kosovo where he met several boys bearing the name.

Any word on what he is called in Baghdad,Basra and Mosul.

BIG G

[Mibbes Aye]

Where is your evidence of entryism, the Daily Mail,or has been politicians/come TV clowns like Alan Johnson. Mandelson was indeed vital.....in being an architect with Blair and Campbell in executing the UK participation in an illegal War which resulted in over 1,000,000 Iraqi men, women and kids being murdered, sectarian barbarism which ushered in ISIS and the rest is history. How these hero's can sleep at night I do not know.

BIG G

I am sorry but your posts aren’t worth replying to, and I regret that because this should be a place for healthy debate. Nevertheless.....

You can’t answer my points and you throw back insults. And when all else fails, chuck in Iraq.

It is no wonder Labour struggles to get elected. I am a CLP member, if you are that unhappy with Labour and the general mood of the party, why not leave, rather than using the party as an indulgence for your own preferences?

Thirteen years of social progress was an achievement. Would you have rather had thirteen more years of the Tories? I suspect not, but it must be nice to have the vanity project of saying “but Iraq” everytime, and let’s face it, that covers a lot of bitterness from people who resented Blair, Brown, Campbell and Mandelson making Labour electable in massive terms, and taking the narrative away from the supposed ‘real’ Labour.

Times have changed. They continue to change. It is a shame that not everyone seems equipped for that.

[neil7908]

I am sorry but your posts aren’t worth replying to, and I regret that because this should be a place for healthy debate. Nevertheless.....

You can’t answer my points and you throw back insults. And when all else fails, chuck in Iraq.

It is no wonder Labour struggles to get elected. I am a CLP member, if you are that unhappy with Labour and the general mood of the party, why not leave, rather than using the party as an indulgence for your own preferences?

Thirteen years of social progress was an achievement. Would you have rather had thirteen more years of the Tories? I suspect not, but it must be nice to have the vanity project of saying “but Iraq” everytime, and let’s face it, that covers a lot of bitterness from people who resented Blair, Brown, Campbell and Mandelson making Labour electable in massive terms, and taking the narrative away from the supposed ‘real’ Labour.

Times have changed. They continue to change. It is a shame that not everyone seems equipped for that.

Pretty poor to suggest Labour members should be leave if they aren't happy - did you leave when Corbyn was elected? No wing of the party has a right to claim they are the "real" Labour.

Corbyn has been an MP longer than you have been a party member. He's has gone and its clear Starmer is in charge but some are desperate to purge honest Labour voters. After years of seeing those to be right in Labour pushing against Corbyn its ironic his supporters are now told to shut up and follow the leader.

I'll reserve judgement on Starmer until I see his policies - right now he's just not Corbyn. That's fine for some but not enough for me right now.

[Rocky]

Pretty poor to suggest Labour members should be leave if they aren't happy - did you leave when Corbyn was elected? No wing of the party has a right to claim they are the "real" Labour.

Corbyn has been an MP longer than you have been a party member. He's has gone and its clear Starmer is in charge but some are desperate to purge honest Labour voters. After years of seeing those to be right in Labour pushing against Corbyn its ironic his supporters are now told to shut up and follow the leader.

I'll reserve judgement on Starmer until I see his policies - right now he's just not Corbyn. That's fine for some but not enough for me right now.

The people who back the *current* leadership absolutely have the right to claim they're the "real" Labour. Anybody else is simply aiding the tories. All this guff is plain and simply the reason why I'm no longer affiliated to any party and am a reluctant independence supporter and SNP voter. You lot have collectively failed.

[Pretty Boy]

The people who back the *current* leadership absolutely have the right to claim they're the "real" Labour. Anybody else is simply aiding the tories. All this guff is plain and simply the reason why I'm no longer affiliated to any party and am a reluctant independence supporter and SNP voter. You lot have collectively failed.

I'm broadly the same as you. I still view myself as a Labour voter who currently doesn't vote for Labour if that makes sense. With the exception of the 2015 election (I voted Labour) I have reluctantly voted SNP for the last few years.

As it stands I am unlikely to vote at all at next year's Holyrood elections and that's an odd feeling as it will be the 1st time I haven't done so since I was eligible to vote.

[Rocky]

I'm broadly the same as you. I still view myself as a Labour voter who currently doesn't vote for Labour if that makes sense. With the exception of the 2015 election (I voted Labour) I have reluctantly voted SNP for the last few years.

As it stands I am unlikely to vote at all at next year's Holyrood elections and that's an odd feeling as it will be the 1st time I haven't done so since I was eligible to vote.
The thought of someone not voting makes me so sad but I can't disagree with your logic. Anybody still backing Corbyn is contributing to that, regardless of the rights and wrongs. Labour needs to figure out what on earth it stands for instead of constantly playing a tactical game of waiting till the tories **** up badly enough that they can capitalise. Get the party culture properly focused on a mildly capitalist version of socialism, with a commitment to PR in Westminster and a pledge to rejoin the EU and I'll be on that train. It'll be lonely to begin with but it's their job to win people over and they have four godforsaken years to do it.

[G B Young]

Of course Starmer is an MP. Being a QC was an achievement in his protessional career before politics It sounds like you are trying to smear him as privileged.

Why not reference that Jeremy and his brother Piers were privately-educated?

Corbyn was a hypocrite and intellectually incompetent. The Labour movement will be better for getting rid of entryists who want to piggyback. They can GTF and form their own party. This all feels like a retread of Militant. Mandelson was vital in ensuring thirteen years of Labour government which made huge strides, I don't blame him for wanting shot of the absolute disaster of Jeremy Corbyn.



.

I've mentioned before on this thread that there's a depressingly narrow-minded faction on the left for whom the 'Sir' is enough to smear Starmer as in some way posh/privileged when in fact he's very much of down to earth stock.

You're spot on about Corbyn. The party would be far healthier if he and his odious cohorts such as McDonnell, Milne and McCluskey formed no part of it. I haven't voted Labour since Corbyn's disastrous elevation to the leader's role but I could see myself voting for them again in four years if Starmer continues to make such healthy headway.

[GORDONSMITH7]

Pretty poor to suggest Labour members should be leave if they aren't happy - did you leave when Corbyn was elected? No wing of the party has a right to claim they are the "real" Labour.

Corbyn has been an MP longer than you have been a party member. He's has gone and its clear Starmer is in charge but some are desperate to purge honest Labour voters. After years of seeing those to be right in Labour pushing against Corbyn its ironic his supporters are now told to shut up and follow the leader.

I'll reserve judgement on Starmer until I see his policies - right now he's just not Corbyn. That's fine for some but not enough for me right now.

Summed up concisely. Splendid points. I have been a card carrying Labour Party member/activist since the time Starmer was an 8 year old playing conkers in the playground and decline the generous offer to leave. I will attend my Constituency Labour Party AGM online next month, a first. Then again I expect that I will soon see Hibs win the Scottish Cup for the second time within 4 years,a first.
51 years a Labour Party member and 56 years attending Easter Road. Nae wonder I take a drink!

BIG G

[The Harp Awakes]

I've mentioned before on this thread that there's a depressingly narrow-minded faction on the left for whom the 'Sir' is enough to smear Starmer as in some way posh/privileged when in fact he's very much of down to earth stock.

You're spot on about Corbyn. The party would be far healthier if he and his odious cohorts such as McDonnell, Milne and McCluskey formed no part of it. I haven't voted Labour since Corbyn's disastrous elevation to the leader's role but I could see myself voting for them again in four years if Starmer continues to make such healthy headway.

The problem for the Labour Party of course is that getting rid of the 4 you mention is meaningless. The grass root support is left wing and will be intolerant of Starmer and his cohorts.

It looks very like Labour are becoming as unelectable in England as they have been in Scotland since the turn of the Century.

My biggest hate is the Tories. I will vote SNP until we get a referendum and we secure independence. When we are independent I will likely vote Labour or Green.

I'd encourage all like-minded left wing sympathisers to do the same and join the Yes movement. Only then will we be rid of the right wing elitists who have a say in our affairs.

[Mibbes Aye]

Summed up concisely. Splendid points. I have been a card carrying Labour Party member/activist since the time Starmer was an 8 year old playing conkers in the playground and decline the generous offer to leave. I will attend my Constituency Labour Party AGM online next month, a first. Then again I expect that I will soon see Hibs win the Scottish Cup for the second time within 4 years,a first.
51 years a Labour Party member and 56 years attending Easter Road. Nae wonder I take a drink!

BIG G

Some people are part of the problem, some people are part of the solution.

Dismissing Starmer is pathetic. If you want to do it on policy then go ahead. Labour doesn’t need people who hang on to self-serving notions that they thought they would get under Corbyn.

Labour needs pragmatists like Atlee, Wilson and Blair. That is how genuine progressive social change occurred in the twentieth century.

But yeah, “Iraq” :aok:

[One Day Soon]

The problem for the Labour Party of course is that getting rid of the 4 you mention is meaningless. The grass root support is left wing and will be intolerant of Starmer and his cohorts.

It looks very like Labour are becoming as unelectable in England as they have been in Scotland since the turn of the Century.

My biggest hate is the Tories. I will vote SNP until we get a referendum and we secure independence. When we are independent I will likely vote Labour or Green.

I'd encourage all like-minded left wing sympathisers to do the same and join the Yes movement. Only then will we be rid of the right wing elitists who have a say in our affairs.

“It looks very like Labour are becoming as unelectable in England”. This on the day they took a five point lead over the Tories.

[Dalianwanda]

https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/ehrc-labour-antisemitism-starmer-corbyn-soul?fbclid=IwAR2_YyvtcYDTLISHEqv7vLVx7rIHzYQjf5lm HNBJK_Pc-R7aLOth340X3a4

[allmodcons]

Some people are part of the problem, some people are part of the solution.

Dismissing Starmer is pathetic. If you want to do it on policy then go ahead. Labour doesn’t need people who hang on to self-serving notions that they thought they would get under Corbyn.

Labour needs pragmatists like Atlee, Wilson and Blair. That is how genuine progressive social change occurred in the twentieth century.

But yeah, “Iraq” :aok:

I don't think you can refer to Blair as a pragmatist and quote him in the same company as Wilson and not expect Iraq to get a mention.

I seriously don't want to get in to a debate about Iraq and can understand why a Blairite wouldn't want to either but would remind you that it was Harold Wilson, despite immense pressure from the USA, that refused to get the UK involved in the Vietnam War. Contrast that with Tony Blair who took us into an illegal war to satisfy the American war machine.

Regarding the current issue (i.e. - the suspension of Corbyn), you are promoting a purge of the Left whilst telling us that the Labour Party is a broad church! Your reference to Corbyn as an 'entryist' just isn't fair. When he joined the Labour Party and later became an MP his politics would have been mainstream Labour. To suggest that Corbyn somehow 'piggy backed' on New Labour is just not true. He was an elected MP way before Blair and New Labour came to power and never hid his contempt for what he saw as a lurch to the right.

From the Cambridge Dictionary: Entryist - a member of a political group who joins another party or group with the intention, often secret, of changing its principles and plans.

For what it's worth, I get that Labour will have to move back towards the centre ground if they are to become re-electable. This is something the SNP came to realise many years ago, They have, since then, gobbled up a huge swathe of the vote that goes with being in the centre ground yet you are one of the main complainants on these boards that the SNP are a centrist party with little leftist credentials.

It seems to me that you want it one way in the UK and another in Scotland?

[Jack]

When the left are in control of the party there's a witch-hunt against the centralists. When the centralists are in control of the party there's a witch-hunt against the left. Each side whingeing when they are being witch-hunted.

If Labour showed the passion and spent as much time fighting the torys instead of themselves we might not have had so many tory governments.

And with so many tory governments fueling the push for Scottish independence its ironic the unionist Labour Party in-fighting is helping heap coals on the fire.

[GORDONSMITH7]

I don't think you can refer to Blair as a pragmatist and quote him in the same company as Wilson and not expect Iraq to get a mention.

I seriously don't want to get in to a debate about Iraq and can understand why a Blairite wouldn't want to either but would remind you that it was Harold Wilson, despite immense pressure from the USA, that refused to get the UK involved in the Vietnam War. Contrast that with Tony Blair who took us into an illegal war to satisfy the American war machine.

Regarding the current issue (i.e. - the suspension of Corbyn), you are promoting a purge of the Left whilst telling us that the Labour Party is a broad church! Your reference to Corbyn as an 'entryist' just isn't fair. When he joined the Labour Party and later became an MP his politics would have been mainstream Labour. To suggest that Corbyn somehow 'piggy backed' on New Labour is just not true. He was an elected MP way before Blair and New Labour came to power and never hid his contempt for what he saw as a lurch to the right.

From the Cambridge Dictionary: Entryist - a member of a political group who joins another party or group with the intention, often secret, of changing its principles and plans.

For what it's worth, I get that Labour will have to move back towards the centre ground if they are to become re-electable. This is something the SNP came to realise many years ago, They have, since then, gobbled up a huge swathe of the vote that goes with being in the centre ground yet you are one of the main complainants on these boards that the SNP are a centrist party with little leftist credentials.

It seems to me that you want it one way in the UK and another in Scotland?

Well presented response mate.

BIG G

[allmodcons]

When the left are in control of the party there's a witch-hunt against the centralists. When the centralists are in control of the party there's a witch-hunt against the left. Each side whingeing when they are being witch-hunted.

If Labour showed the passion and spent as much time fighting the torys instead of themselves we might not have had so many tory governments.

And with so many tory governments fueling the push for Scottish independence its ironic the unionist Labour Party in-fighting is helping heap coals on the fire.

Long may it continue :wink:

[GORDONSMITH7]

https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/ehrc-labour-antisemitism-starmer-corbyn-soul?fbclid=IwAR2_YyvtcYDTLISHEqv7vLVx7rIHzYQjf5lm HNBJK_Pc-R7aLOth340X3a4

Thank you for making this excellent article available to us Dalian. It cuts across the utter guff spewed out by the MSM over the past 24 hours swallowed by the gullible. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but would recommend some posters should read this then re read their posts. The glaring omissions of the EHRC report are extremely important. Reference to the Leaked Party Report and the Blairite sabatures who controlled the Party machinery till 2018 is the first that has been put into context regarding these events.I did mention it in detail in a post yesterday. The madness and politically motivated paying £600,000 of Party members money by Starmer to the BBC Panorama whisleblowers, despite the Labour Party's legal team informing him that the Party would win, is also there. Before anyone jumps to the conclusion that this is left wing propaganda. Nothing can be further from the truth. Obourn is a brilliant conservative journalist and former political editor of the Telegraph.It highlights the utter farce of Corbyns suspension.
What it does omit to say though,is that David Evans the Blairite new General Secretary and Starmer have somewhat jumped the gun. Irony of ironies, in the very pages of the EHRC report which I have seen, it says...

"Statements made by elected polticians have enhanced protection under Article 10.....Article 10 will protect Labour Party members express their opinions on internal Party members,such as the scale of anti semitism within the Party based on their own experiece and within the Law." Brilliant.

Oops you would not think that an experienced Human Right lawyer would not know or have seen this. Maybe that's why yesterday he was flying round giving interviews rather sheepishly saying that the decision was not his but David Evan's. Thin ice indeed.

BIG G

[The Modfather]

I've mentioned before on this thread that there's a depressingly narrow-minded faction on the left for whom the 'Sir' is enough to smear Starmer as in some way posh/privileged when in fact he's very much of down to earth stock.

You're spot on about Corbyn. The party would be far healthier if he and his odious cohorts such as McDonnell, Milne and McCluskey formed no part of it. I haven't voted Labour since Corbyn's disastrous elevation to the leader's role but I could see myself voting for them again in four years if Starmer continues to make such healthy headway.

He plays the violin, which... ach, on second thoughts never mind :greengrin

[G B Young]

I don't think you can refer to Blair as a pragmatist and quote him in the same company as Wilson and not expect Iraq to get a mention.

I seriously don't want to get in to a debate about Iraq and can understand why a Blairite wouldn't want to either but would remind you that it was Harold Wilson, despite immense pressure from the USA, that refused to get the UK involved in the Vietnam War. Contrast that with Tony Blair who took us into an illegal war to satisfy the American war machine.

Regarding the current issue (i.e. - the suspension of Corbyn), you are promoting a purge of the Left whilst telling us that the Labour Party is a broad church! Your reference to Corbyn as an 'entryist' just isn't fair. When he joined the Labour Party and later became an MP his politics would have been mainstream Labour. To suggest that Corbyn somehow 'piggy backed' on New Labour is just not true. He was an elected MP way before Blair and New Labour came to power and never hid his contempt for what he saw as a lurch to the right.

From the Cambridge Dictionary: Entryist - a member of a political group who joins another party or group with the intention, often secret, of changing its principles and plans.

For what it's worth, I get that Labour will have to move back towards the centre ground if they are to become re-electable. This is something the SNP came to realise many years ago, They have, since then, gobbled up a huge swathe of the vote that goes with being in the centre ground yet you are one of the main complainants on these boards that the SNP are a centrist party with little leftist credentials.

It seems to me that you want it one way in the UK and another in Scotland?

Tartan Tories who effectively laid out the welcome mat for Thatcher back in 79...:wink:

[ronaldo7]

https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/ehrc-labour-antisemitism-starmer-corbyn-soul?fbclid=IwAR2_YyvtcYDTLISHEqv7vLVx7rIHzYQjf5lm HNBJK_Pc-R7aLOth340X3a4


Thank you for making this excellent article available to us Dalian. It cuts across the utter guff spewed out by the MSM over the past 24 hours swallowed by the gullible. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but would recommend some posters should read this then re read their posts. The glaring omissions of the EHRC report are extremely important. Reference to the Leaked Party Report and the Blairite sabatures who controlled the Party machinery till 2018 is the first that has been put into context regarding these events.I did mention it in detail in a post yesterday. The madness and politically motivated paying £600,000 of Party members money by Starmer to the BBC Panorama whisleblowers, despite the Labour Party's legal team informing him that the Party would win, is also there. Before anyone jumps to the conclusion that this is left wing propaganda. Nothing can be further from the truth. Obourn is a brilliant conservative journalist and former political editor of the Telegraph.It highlights the utter farce of Corbyns suspension.
What it does omit to say though,is that David Evans the Blairite new General Secretary and Starmer have somewhat jumped the gun. Irony of ironies, in the very pages of the EHRC report which I have seen, it says...

"Statements made by elected polticians have enhanced protection under Article 10.....Article 10 will protect Labour Party members express their opinions on internal Party members,such as the scale of anti semitism within the Party based on their own experiece and within the Law." Brilliant.

Oops you would not think that an experienced Human Right lawyer would not know or have seen this. Maybe that's why yesterday he was flying round giving interviews rather sheepishly saying that the decision was not his but David Evan's. Thin ice indeed.

BIG G


Thanks for the article Dalian. It's excellent, and covers areas of information which really should have been more fully covered by the report.

The failure of the EHRC to take into context the leadership from McNicol up to 2018 when he then handed over to Formby are critical imo.

"These dates are significant. Until the spring of 2018, Labour Party headquarters was under the control of Ian McNicol, who had been general secretary since 2011. According to an internal Labour Party report, leaked to the press in March this year, McNicol and his team were ferociously hostile to the Corbyn leadership."

"The bureaucracy at Southside (Labour HQ) had been acting as if they were a law – and organisation – unto themselves," wrote Pogrund and Maguire. They detailed how, during the 2017 election, officials, including Sam Matthews – who headed the disputes team that handled antisemitism complaints – were secretly “funnelling hundreds of thousands of pounds of resources into the seats of devout opponents of the leadership."

In other words, for two thirds of the period under investigation by the EHRC, Labour HQ and the complaints procedure were under the control of individuals not just resistant to the authority of the leadership but, allegedly, working actively to undermine it. Remarkably, the EHRC report makes absolutely no reference to this context at all."

"In one of its most remarkable passages, the EHRC simply reproduces these allegations, almost verbatim, along with the accompanying statistics. It then briefly states: "Some former staff members denied these allegations of inaction," before adding: "Delays in progressing complaints were also common in our complaint sample."

This is vital. Matthews, McNicol and a number of other employees from Labour Party HQ at this time were the leading "whistleblowers" in Panorama’s enormously influential Is Labour Anti-Semitic? programme in July 2019. When the Corbyn leadership pushed back against their claims, Matthews and others took them to court. Earlier this year, Starmer apologised to them and settled out of court, paying them large sums of money."

This is another piece of the pie which doesn't sit with the current narrative that its all Corbyns fault.

"The EHRC report also alleges unwarranted interference by Corbyn’s team. It says this happened in 23 of the 70 cases it studied. But in many of the examples it cites it is clear the leader’s office was interfering, not to prevent investigations for antisemitism, but to speed them up."

This says it all really.

"There was, in fact, a sharp rise in the number of suspensions for antisemitism during this period of increased leadership interference. Again, the report entirely fails to mention the political significance of the transition from McNicol and Formby. Indeed, neither McNicol, Matthews or anyone else in senior positions at party HQ before April 2018 is mentioned by name at any point in the EHRC report.

Soon after Formby took over, Matthews and a number of other staff members resigned. Matthews has said he was effectively driven out by officials less keen to confront antisemitism and told Panorama he contemplated suicide. From the spring of 2018 onwards, with Formby in control, the number of formal investigations, suspensions and expulsions for antisemitism all rose exponentially.

Forty five members were expelled in 2019, compared to one in 2017, according to Labour party statistics."

I look forward to the day that Sir Keir and friends does the U turn and reinstates a long standing Labour party member.

Anyone heard if Sheerman is still in the party?:rolleyes:

[allmodcons]

Tartan Tories who effectively laid out the welcome mat for Thatcher back in 79...:wink:

I will bite, simply to tell you to grow up or piss off.

[stantonhibby]

I will bite, simply to tell you to grow up or piss off.

Bit harsh considering there was a wee winking emoji. I don't agree with GBY's politics at all but he puts his points across respectfully.
I enjoy the debate on here but without folk like him it would just become an SNP echo chamber.

[Bristolhibby]

I am sorry but your posts aren’t worth replying to, and I regret that because this should be a place for healthy debate. Nevertheless.....

You can’t answer my points and you throw back insults. And when all else fails, chuck in Iraq.

It is no wonder Labour struggles to get elected. I am a CLP member, if you are that unhappy with Labour and the general mood of the party, why not leave, rather than using the party as an indulgence for your own preferences?

Thirteen years of social progress was an achievement. Would you have rather had thirteen more years of the Tories? I suspect not, but it must be nice to have the vanity project of saying “but Iraq” everytime, and let’s face it, that covers a lot of bitterness from people who resented Blair, Brown, Campbell and Mandelson making Labour electable in massive terms, and taking the narrative away from the supposed ‘real’ Labour.

Times have changed. They continue to change. It is a shame that not everyone seems equipped for that.

The thing with Iraq (and I got duped too, 21 year old, I believed there were WMDs), is that even if the Tories were in power, we still would have gone to war. And putting Labour on some sort of higher pedestal doesn’t help.

The Left are always intent on eating themselves. Striving for a frankly impossible dream of socialist perfection. Where anything but that 100% is unacceptable.

We know that transformative ideal simply does not sit with the British electorate. So compromise is essential.

You cannot affect change without Power. And power is achieved by being elected. Sitting on the back benches and being always “right” (see Corbyn for 40 odd years), does not translate into the Power required.

The Tories (as much as cants that they are) are brilliant when it comes to focusing on their enemy (Labour). Labour are not. Sometimes you have to hold your nose to get things done.

J

[Ozyhibby]

Some people are part of the problem, some people are part of the solution.

Dismissing Starmer is pathetic. If you want to do it on policy then go ahead. Labour doesn’t need people who hang on to self-serving notions that they thought they would get under Corbyn.

Labour needs pragmatists like Atlee, Wilson and Blair. That is how genuine progressive social change occurred in the twentieth century.

But yeah, “Iraq” :aok:

I agree with you totally on what Blair was and he is what Labour should be but you can’t just dismiss Iraq that easily. It was a disgusting episode that has cost many lives (no matter what counting method) and diminished Britain as a country. It weakened the Labour Party in Scotland, the effect of which you are well aware off. It also made us less safe. We can no longer act abroad as we once did. The public are so sceptical of any military action that we now have to avoid it even when it’s justified. The decision to invade Iraq and the way they mislead the public undermined politics in the UK and undermined the union. Blair can never and should never be separated from his decision to invade Iraq. It’s a great shame but it is what it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[allmodcons]

Bit harsh considering there was a wee winking emoji. I don't agree with GBY's politics at all but he puts his points across respectfully.
I enjoy the debate on here but without folk like him it would just become an SNP echo chamber.

I thought he was just being childish and didn't address anything in my post.

[RyeSloan]

I thought he was just being childish and didn't address anything in my post.

Ach stop being a snowflake [emoji6] [emoji2957]

[Radium]

I have not voted Labour since 2005 and now regularly vote SNP. Reason, socially conscious policies and independence. Nothing that Labour has done in the last decade has made me reconsider that position.

Watching a second far left Labour leader (in my lifetime) hand swathes of England to a far right Conservative party reinforces my belief in independence. Last time around the tories stumbled on till ‘97.

The only saving grace for the Labour Party at the moment is that Nick Clegg destroyed the Liberals with his disastrous decision to take a minority position in a coalition government. It means that they may be able to get some gains as the tories continue to show their true colours.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

I don't think you can refer to Blair as a pragmatist and quote him in the same company as Wilson and not expect Iraq to get a mention.

I seriously don't want to get in to a debate about Iraq and can understand why a Blairite wouldn't want to either but would remind you that it was Harold Wilson, despite immense pressure from the USA, that refused to get the UK involved in the Vietnam War. Contrast that with Tony Blair who took us into an illegal war to satisfy the American war machine.

Regarding the current issue (i.e. - the suspension of Corbyn), you are promoting a purge of the Left whilst telling us that the Labour Party is a broad church! Your reference to Corbyn as an 'entryist' just isn't fair. When he joined the Labour Party and later became an MP his politics would have been mainstream Labour. To suggest that Corbyn somehow 'piggy backed' on New Labour is just not true. He was an elected MP way before Blair and New Labour came to power and never hid his contempt for what he saw as a lurch to the right.

From the Cambridge Dictionary: Entryist - a member of a political group who joins another party or group with the intention, often secret, of changing its principles and plans.




For what it's worth, I get that Labour will have to move back towards the centre ground if they are to become re-electable. This is something the SNP came to realise many years ago, They have, since then, gobbled up a huge swathe of the vote that goes with being in the centre ground yet you are one of the main complainants on these boards that the SNP are a centrist party with little leftist credentials.

It seems to me that you want it one way in the UK and another in Scotland?

You need to read my posts properly.

I called Corbyn a hypocrite, ineffectual and incompetent. My reference to entryists was directed at those who flooded in like parasites because they saw a vehicle to give their own agenda some traction.

As for Iraq and the 'American war machine', that's a lazy trope.

I am no fan of the Iraq war but there are some facts that some seem happy to ignore. Inconvenient truths, if you will.

Blair made a speech when Clinton was in power and Al Gote was the presumptive successor, yes, Al Gore, that notorious miltaristic hawk.

Blair's speech laid out his thoughts that liberal democracies had a moral duty to intervene in other soverign nations to essentially impose the Western version of rights and democracy.

We can agree or disagree about his view and it was rather Messianic but it was clear, whether right or wrong.

And so Britain did, and I don't recall uproar when we used military force in Kosovo and Sierra Leone.

There was however an element of smugness amongst some, including people in my own party, after 9/11. An element of 'they got what was coming', which was saddening.

I don't think Blair committed to Iraq because he was in thrall to Bush. I also don't think there is anyone on here who was in the room when the necessary discussions were taking place.

I do think that Saddam Hussein was committing atrocities against Kurds in the north and Marsh Arabs in the south. And Iraq was a tinderbox, given the balance of power between Sunni and Shia, only maintained through dictatorship. And post-Saddam, Saudi Arabia and Iran would look for proxy power, not much differently from the way te USA and the USSR did in several nations, across a number of continents during the Cold War.

Blair took us into Iraq, I suspect, because he believed it was right (whether that was right or wrong). Having given Brown essentially complete control over domestic policy, foreign policy was his main outlet. The Americans had their own agendas. I don't think it is any more complicated than that.

[Vault Boy]

You need to read my posts properly.

I called Corbyn a hypocrite, ineffectual and incompetent. My reference to entryists was directed at those who flooded in like parasites because they saw a vehicle to give their own agenda some traction.

As for Iraq and the 'American war machine', that's a lazy trope.

I am no fan of the Iraq war but there are some facts that some seem happy to ignore. Inconvenient truths, if you will.

Blair made a speech when Clinton was in power and Al Gote was the presumptive successor, yes, Al Gore, that notorious miltaristic hawk.

Blair's speech laid out his thoughts that liberal democracies had a moral duty to intervene in other soverign nations to essentially impose the Western version of rights and democracy.

We can agree or disagree about his view and it was rather Messianic but it was clear, whether right or wrong.

And so Britain did, and I don't recall uproar when we used military force in Kosovo and Sierra Leone.

There was however an element of smugness amongst some, including people in my own party, after 9/11. An element of 'they got what was coming', which was saddening.

I don't think Blair committed to Iraq because he was in thrall to Bush. I also don't think there is anyone on here who was in the room when the necessary discussions were taking place.

I do think that Saddam Hussein was committing atrocities against Kurds in the north and Marsh Arabs in the south. And Iraq was a tinderbox, given the balance of power between Sunni and Shia, only maintained through dictatorship. And post-Saddam, Saudi Arabia and Iran would look for proxy power, not much differently from the way te USA and the USSR did in several nations, across a number of continents during the Cold War.

Blair took us into Iraq, I suspect, because he believed it was right (whether that was right or wrong). Having given Brown essentially complete control over domestic policy, foreign policy was his main outlet. The Americans had their own agendas. I don't think it is any more complicated than that.

Very good post.

[Itsnoteasy]

Ach stop being a snowflake [emoji6] [emoji2957]

FFS don't call anyone a snowflake, that's a whole new thread that could kick off. I called someone that on .net a while back, didn't go down to well.

[neil7908]

You need to read my posts properly.

I called Corbyn a hypocrite, ineffectual and incompetent. My reference to entryists was directed at those who flooded in like parasites because they saw a vehicle to give their own agenda some traction.

As for Iraq and the 'American war machine', that's a lazy trope.

I am no fan of the Iraq war but there are some facts that some seem happy to ignore. Inconvenient truths, if you will.

Blair made a speech when Clinton was in power and Al Gote was the presumptive successor, yes, Al Gore, that notorious miltaristic hawk.

Blair's speech laid out his thoughts that liberal democracies had a moral duty to intervene in other soverign nations to essentially impose the Western version of rights and democracy.

We can agree or disagree about his view and it was rather Messianic but it was clear, whether right or wrong.

And so Britain did, and I don't recall uproar when we used military force in Kosovo and Sierra Leone.

There was however an element of smugness amongst some, including people in my own party, after 9/11. An element of 'they got what was coming', which was saddening.

I don't think Blair committed to Iraq because he was in thrall to Bush. I also don't think there is anyone on here who was in the room when the necessary discussions were taking place.

I do think that Saddam Hussein was committing atrocities against Kurds in the north and Marsh Arabs in the south. And Iraq was a tinderbox, given the balance of power between Sunni and Shia, only maintained through dictatorship. And post-Saddam, Saudi Arabia and Iran would look for proxy power, not much differently from the way te USA and the USSR did in several nations, across a number of continents during the Cold War.

Blair took us into Iraq, I suspect, because he believed it was right (whether that was right or wrong). Having given Brown essentially complete control over domestic policy, foreign policy was his main outlet. The Americans had their own agendas. I don't think it is any more complicated than that.

Given we are discussing an independent report currently being used to damn a former Labour leader (Corbyn), I find it odd for you to post the above, ignoring the multiple findings of the Chilcot enquiry. This was also a stunning a report showing a complete failure of leadership. Here is a quick summary of the findings:

"the document stated that at the time of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, Saddam Hussein did not pose an urgent threat to British interests, that intelligence regarding weapons of mass destruction was presented with unwarranted certainty, that peaceful alternatives to war had not been exhausted, that the United Kingdom and the United States had undermined the authority of the United Nations Security Council, that the process of identifying the legal basis was "far from satisfactory", and that a war was unnecessary".

His legacy is tarnished, as its Corbyns.

[allmodcons]

FFS don't call anyone a snowflake, that's a whole new thread that could kick off. I called someone that on .net a while back, didn't go down to well.

I'm not at all offended 😪 but jeezo there are a lot of 'snowflakes' on the main board tonight.

[One Day Soon]

I'm not at all offended 😪 but jeezo there are a lot of 'snowflakes' on the main board tonight.

It’s Snowflake City, capital of the Republic of Snowflakia on the continent Snowland over there.

In other news Labour jumped to a five point lead in the last poll I saw and that was BEFORE the current events of Corbyn suspending himself and Johnson demonstrating that he is the complete dilettante we all know him to be.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Tartan Tories who effectively laid out the welcome mat for Thatcher back in 79...:wink:

Don't you think that you are better than this, even if it was tongue in cheek?

[Ozyhibby]

Did Starmer call for Scotland to go into lockdown as well this morning?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

Don't you think that you are better than this, even if it was tongue in cheek?

Patronise much?

Why do people complain in that manner when someone mentions the SNPs role in Thatcher's election? Obviously it touches a nerve to have that episode brought up, but that's 2 of you who have given ad hominem replies.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Patronise much?

Why do people complain in that manner when someone mentions the SNPs role in Thatcher's election? Obviously it touches a nerve to have that episode brought up, but that's 2 of you who have given ad hominem replies.

The SNP didn't have a role in Thatcher's election. The Tories were going to win that election whether or not the vote of no confidence happened or not.

[Hibbyradge]

The SNP didn't have a role in Thatcher's election. The Tories were going to win that election whether or not the vote of no confidence happened or not.

Possibly, possibly not, but it was the SNP that forced the election.

I support the SNP and independence but there's no point getting snippy about what happened. That was then, this is now.

It's almost irrelevant which is why I was surprised that it was still touching nerves to such an extent.

[Moulin Yarns]

Possibly, possibly not, but it was the SNP that forced the election.

I support the SNP and independence but there's no point getting snippy about what happened. That was then, this is now.

It's almost irrelevant which is why I was surprised that it was still touching nerves to such an extent.

If I remember correctly, the SNP forced the vote to bring down the Labour government at the time. The election itself was not influenced by the SNP. So the election of the tory government under Thatcher was down to the UK electorate.

[Hibrandenburg]

If I remember correctly, the SNP forced the vote to bring down the Labour government at the time. The election itself was not influenced by the SNP. So the election of the tory government under Thatcher was down to the UK electorate.

Correct. As someone who has never voted for any party other than Labour in the UK, I don't get the claim that the SNP were pro Tory because they were anti Labour. Surely they're allowed to be anti both and pro self?

[Hibbyradge]

If I remember correctly, the SNP forced the vote to bring down the Labour government at the time. The election itself was not influenced by the SNP. So the election of the tory government under Thatcher was down to the UK electorate.

Yes, that's correct up to a point. The SNP brought down the Labour government thereby further damaging their credibility and electability, and by doing so, they paved the way for Thatcher.

I had been a member and I was furious with them at the time.

[G B Young]

Possibly, possibly not, but it was the SNP that forced the election.

I support the SNP and independence but there's no point getting snippy about what happened. That was then, this is now.

It's almost irrelevant which is why I was surprised that it was still touching nerves to such an extent.

Precisely. Thatcher couldn't have pushed through the no confidence vote without SNP support - and every single SNP MP voted with the Tories to edge them home by a single vote.

As you say, those are the facts and it's surprising how touchy some folk get about them even when the event is recalled in jest.

[Ozyhibby]

Yes, that's correct up to a point. The SNP brought down the Labour government thereby further damaging their credibility and electability, and by doing so, they paved the way for Thatcher.

I had been a member and I was furious with them at the time.

Did that Labour govt have any credibility left?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

Did that Labour govt have any credibility left?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It had no credibility and less than 6 months to run.

So the SNP* can take the blame for the first 6 months of Thatcherism. The rest is on Labour. :wink:




* and Libs who always seem to get off in these discussions. Presumably on account of their perpetual irrelevance. :dunno:

[ronaldo7]

Precisely. Thatcher couldn't have pushed through the no confidence vote without SNP support - and every single SNP MP voted with the Tories to edge them home by a single vote.

As you say, those are the facts and it's surprising how touchy some folk get about them even when the event is recalled in jest.

It's quite strange how the SNP keep getting blamed for ushering in Thatcher.

The Lib/Lab pact lasted only a year before the Liberals decided that a general election was the way to go, and would support any vote of no confidence in the Labour government.

The winter of discontent where the Labour popularity went out the window, just like the lights, and the dead bodies piling up.

The government survived a motion of no confidence in December 1978 by ten votes after negotiating the support of the Ulster Unionists. (Draft legislation was before the House to give Northern Ireland more Parliamentary seats; it cleared the House of Commons on 17 January 1979.)

On 1 March 1979 a Referendum on the Scotland Act saw a majority vote for devolution, but a threshold imposed by Labour anti-devolution MPs requiring 40% of the electorate to be in favour was not reached due to low turnout

The Labour government decided not to implement the act.

Just some of the facts you may have missed even if recalled in jest.

Sir Albert Broughton (Labour) abstained. The tories won by 1 vote.

[Bristolhibby]

Precisely. Thatcher couldn't have pushed through the no confidence vote without SNP support - and every single SNP MP voted with the Tories to edge them home by a single vote.

As you say, those are the facts and it's surprising how touchy some folk get about them even when the event is recalled in jest.

Late to the party here, but if you are in opposition (as the SNP were) is not the whole point to try and get elected and get into Power. (I know this is Westminster in the 70s). What opposition party in their right mind wouldn’t push for an election? Or at least show that they want one?

That’s a whole different story to be “siding with the Tories”.

J

[One Day Soon]

Late to the party here, but if you are in opposition (as the SNP were) is not the whole point to try and get elected and get into Power. (I know this is Westminster in the 70s). What opposition party in their right mind wouldn’t push for an election? Or at least show that they want one?

That’s a whole different story to be “siding with the Tories”.

J

Man, anyone who voted for an early election knowing it would open the door to Thatcher is carrying a lot on their conscience.

[ronaldo7]

Man, anyone who voted for an early election knowing it would open the door to Thatcher is carrying a lot on their conscience.

Or New labour, carrying on her legacy.
Big Gordon loved her. 💰 🐔

[One Day Soon]

Or New labour, carrying on her legacy.
Big Gordon loved her. 💰 🐔

Even by your standards that’s weak.

[ronaldo7]

Even by your standards that’s weak.

My standards?

Any further forward on your fishing trip on Prestwick?

[allmodcons]

Possibly, possibly not, but it was the SNP that forced the election.

I support the SNP and independence but there's no point getting snippy about what happened. That was then, this is now.

It's almost irrelevant which is why I was surprised that it was still touching nerves to such an extent.

For the record HR, it didn't touch any nerve of mine. Quite the opposite in fact, I found his comment tedious, lazy and childish.

[G B Young]

It's quite strange how the SNP keep getting blamed for ushering in Thatcher.

The Lib/Lab pact lasted only a year before the Liberals decided that a general election was the way to go, and would support any vote of no confidence in the Labour government.

The winter of discontent where the Labour popularity went out the window, just like the lights, and the dead bodies piling up.

The government survived a motion of no confidence in December 1978 by ten votes after negotiating the support of the Ulster Unionists. (Draft legislation was before the House to give Northern Ireland more Parliamentary seats; it cleared the House of Commons on 17 January 1979.)

On 1 March 1979 a Referendum on the Scotland Act saw a majority vote for devolution, but a threshold imposed by Labour anti-devolution MPs requiring 40% of the electorate to be in favour was not reached due to low turnout

The Labour government decided not to implement the act.

Just some of the facts you may have missed even if recalled in jest.

Sir Albert Broughton (Labour) abstained. The tories won by 1 vote.

Ach well, with all that to blame Labour for it's maybe no surprise the SNP decided to vote with Maggie...:wink:

Think it's been discussed on here before, but the story behind the Sir Alfred Broughton situation is one which revealed an honour among whips which one can't really imagine existing today:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20080858

[Kato]

I don't if anyone remembers but the SNP had some very strange individuals as members in the 1970's (insert joke about here 2020's here.)

Some of them took the "Nationalist" term to extremes and there was a very unreconstructed anti-English rump in there too. There was also a cosy shortbread tin lid picture faction as well but they were a very mixed-bunch and the SNP of today is a different thing altogether.

[Mibbes Aye]

Or New labour, carrying on her legacy.
Big Gordon loved her. 💰 🐔

That is weak and poor, even by your standards.

[ronaldo7]

Even by your standards that’s weak.


That is weak and poor, even by your standards.

:hmmm: Group think in Scottish Labour is still a thing. :wink:

You New Labour boys don't like getting reminded that Gordon was very fond of Margaret.

It seems nerves are being touched all over this thread.:aok:

[One Day Soon]

:hmmm: Group think in Scottish Labour is still a thing. :wink:

You New Labour boys don't like getting reminded that Gordon was very fond of Margaret.

It seems nerves are being touched all over this thread.:aok:



I'll tell you what, this SNP fax machine has top notch AI driving its posts. :greengrin

[ronaldo7]

I'll tell you what, this SNP fax machine has top notch AI driving its posts. :greengrin

We're onto dial up now. Go Maggie.

[marinello59]

I don't if anyone remembers but the SNP had some very strange individuals as members in the 1970's (insert joke about here 2020's here.)

Some of them took the "Nationalist" term to extremes and there was a very unreconstructed anti-English rump in there too. There was also a cosy shortbread tin lid picture faction as well but they were a very mixed-bunch and the SNP of today is a different thing altogether.

It was far from a rump of anti-English supporters in their North East heartlands, it was absolutely rancid. I’ll give Salmond credit for silencing the racists amongst his support when he appeared up there.

[Hibbyradge]

Go Maggie.

Nice to see you revisiting your roots, Ronnie.

[Kato]

It was far from a rump of anti-English supporters in their North East heartlands, it was absolutely rancid. I’ll give Salmond credit for silencing the racists amongst his support when he appeared up there.It was a sizeable rump. I used to watch their party conference back then purely as entertainment as it was a ferrago of weirdos.

The members that would only speak Gaelic when addressing the conference were a real state. Kailyard nonsense.

Christopher Greive stoked a lot of misplaced grievances

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

Nice to see you revisiting your roots, Ronnie.

Watch out now Dave. Speaking about roots whilst referencing Maggie.

Anyone know how the labour councillors in Aberdeen are getting along?

Still in cahoots with their pals?

[ronaldo7]

Ach well, with all that to blame Labour for it's maybe no surprise the SNP decided to vote with Maggie...:wink:

Think it's been discussed on here before, but the story behind the Sir Alfred Broughton situation is one which revealed an honour among whips which one can't really imagine existing today:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20080858

:greengrin

[marinello59]

Watch out now Dave. Speaking about roots whilst referencing Maggie.

Anyone know how the labour councillors in Aberdeen are getting along?

Still in cahoots with their pals?

Suspended from the Labour Party until May 2022 so they can’t stand in the next election.

[ronaldo7]

Suspended from the Labour Party until May 2022 so they can’t stand in the next election.

I knew you'd have the answer.

Cheers.

Independents then?

[CloudSquall]

Good luck getting the tik tok and Instagram generation onboard the Labour train with the "tartan Tory 1979" chat, I'm sure they'll find that extremely relevant in today's world:greengrin

[Keith_M]

Has anybody mentioned Hitler yet?


:dunno:

[Hibbyradge]

Watch out now Dave. Speaking about roots whilst referencing Maggie.



What does that mean?

[Hibbyradge]

Good luck getting the tik tok and Instagram generation onboard the Labour train with the "tartan Tory 1979" chat, I'm sure they'll find that extremely relevant in today's world:greengrin

I'm not sure anyone us trying to get people onboard anything.

I'm just being entertained by the unnecessary squirming and retorts.

I was a member of the SNP in the 70s, I voted and campaigned for Yes, and I voted SNP in the last few elections when I was in Edinburgh.

I'm still disgusted at what they did in 1979, but that's in the past. That folk still defend it, or mitigate, amuses me.