Topic: Doesn't matter who you vote for as long as it's for the right reasons!

[Red-Soldier]

Christmas FFS.........

[Yorkykopite]

To be evenhanded in my questioning: what was the organisation that the member you referenced belonged to? What's your source?

It was something called 'Labour against the Witchhunt'. Outlawed by the NEC.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-59373343

[Sangria]

Christmas FFS.........

Direct your frustrations at johnno, who made the original post sparking off this discussion.

[Yorkykopite]

Concentrate Yorky

There is ample evidence in there of a purge of Jewish labour party members for holding 'anti-semetic' views which was the thrust of Johnno's post as you well know.

Your patronising and condescending persona does you no credit. My old dad would have referred to you as a 'clever alec' Is that your Oxbridge education? Or were you more redbrick as you're not as clever as you think? Second thoughts, Oxbridge is probably right

Yes, Oxford. Won a scholarship too. Working-class lad. Council estate. State school. Dad worked in the mills. Mum was a dinner lady. Died dad when I was a kid. There, you have my potted bio.

My dad would have said "smart alec" or "clever dick". (Not about me mind). Never "clever alec". That's crap. He was self-taught, but he got those things right.

He knew how to weight evidence too and how to spot a weak argument when he saw one  The stuff that you and Johnno have posted would have made him groan.

Any road, off now to see Part 3 of 'Get Back' (what a film!)

[TepidT2O]

Well, I've just found this after following Johnno's advice. Why don't you give it a try yourself?

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uk-labour-antisemitism-accused-purging-jews-over-claims

Thankyou for taking the time to give an acceptable source Bobby.

However, this isn’t evidence.

[SP]

The trouble with the expulsions is the only people interested are unreliable sources. Generally the only people commenting are those expelled, and there is the real risk of revisionism to further their aims. I don’t believe there is a remotely objective public source.

[TepidT2O]

The trouble with the expulsions is the only people interested are unreliable sources. Generally the only people commenting are those expelled, and there is the real risk of revisionism to further their aims. I don’t believe there is a remotely objective public source.

This is entirely fair and reasonable

[filopastry]

The trouble with the expulsions is the only people interested are unreliable sources. Generally the only people commenting are those expelled, and there is the real risk of revisionism to further their aims. I don’t believe there is a remotely objective public source.

Given I have actually been at a local meeting where someone ended up being suspended (and eventually readmitted with a warning to future conduct), and have seen various claims that it was only due to comments on Israel/Palestine, I have learnt to take a lot of those claims with a pretty hefty pinch of salt.

[vivabobbygraham]

The trouble with the expulsions is the only people interested are unreliable sources. Generally the only people commenting are those expelled, and there is the real risk of revisionism to further their aims. I don’t believe there is a remotely objective public source.

But we take that letter posted by Yorky as read do we? That was what heralded all the shenanigans. Explain to me how that works?

[Sangria]

But we take that letter posted by Yorky as read do we? That was what heralded all the shenanigans. Explain to me how that works?

Quite apart from the strangeness of being upset that a group that had been displeased with the Labour party was now happy with the Labour party, here is the johnno post that I replied to.

Beyond any comment this. How come there's not a peep of a mention of the expulsion of long standing JEWISH members from this version of the Labour Party led by Starmer? Beyond belief!!

This brought a couple of things to mind. One: why is the identity of the members being expelled cited as a decisive factor? Two: what were they expelled for? I decided not to ask the former, as I didn't have sufficient information. So I asked the latter, to try and get more information.

[vivabobbygraham]

Yes, Oxford. Won a scholarship too. Working-class lad. Council estate. State school. Dad worked in the mills. Mum was a dinner lady. Died dad when I was a kid. There, you have my potted bio.

My dad would have said "smart alec" or "clever dick". (Not about me mind). Never "clever alec". That's crap. He was self-taught, but he got those things right.

He knew how to weight evidence too and how to spot a weak argument when he saw one  The stuff that you and Johnno have posted would have made him groan.

Any road, off now to see Part 3 of 'Get Back' (what a film!)

That was my point. It mightn't have been Oxford English but we knew what he meant. He was self taught too. The irony of your reply to it would not have been lost on the great man...

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/WQYSOWEd8_w" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/WQYSOWEd8_w</a>

[vivabobbygraham]

Quite apart from the strangeness of being upset that a group that had been displeased with the Labour party was now happy with the Labour party, here is the johnno post that I replied to.

This brought a couple of things to mind. One: why is the identity of the members being expelled cited as a decisive factor? Two: what were they expelled for? I decided not to ask the former, as I didn't have sufficient information. So I asked the latter, to try and get more information.

I take you back to the original, deliberately incendiary post by Yorky that Johnno took issue with. He replied to it and was then rounded on by the same old, same old bully boys that frequent this thread. Seems to me like he was set up. I fucking hate bullies. I do not profess to know much about the infighting going on over the anti semitism war raging within the labour party other than to understand there is a difference between being pro Palestine and against the State of Israel. Anyway, I took Johnno's advice and googled. I read a particular article and felt it credible enough to post. Apparently it's not credible? Fair enough. So, what is?

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Shanks wouldn't have thought very much of Jezza and his tosspot of a brother.

He'd have seen straight through them both.

[Sangria]

I take you back to the original, deliberately incendiary post by Yorky that Johnno took issue with. He replied to it and was then rounded on by the same old, same old bully boys that frequent this thread. Seems to me like he was set up. I fucking hate bullies. I do not profess to know much about the infighting going on over the anti semitism war raging within the labour party other than to understand there is a difference between being pro Palestine and against the State of Israel. Anyway, I took Johnno's advice and googled. I read a particular article and felt it credible enough to post. Apparently it's not credible? Fair enough. So, what is?

I didn't take much from yorky's post other than that the biggest and oldest Labour-affiliated Jewish group felt that things had improved for them in terms of hospitability within the Labour party. I'm not sure how that's provocative, but johnno responded with the post that I quoted above. I'm not sure how it directly relates to the letter, but what I took from johnno's post were the two points I listed above. Since I deemed I didn't know enough about the subject to ask about point one, I asked about point two instead.

Johnno's links were definitely not credible, nor was his original reply with a description but no sources. His subsequent post merely reiterated the first point I refer to above, that the identity of the person/group was what his post was about, rather than what they did. Note that I asked yorky for a source for his claim too, not just johnno. I gave up on evaluating sources after SP's post, which seems to me to better reflect the overall truth of the matter: barely anyone cares except those directly involved, so you're not likely to get unbiased sources.

I still think that journalistic standards are important to uphold in principle, as IMHO their decline in national media is what's ruining our democracy. If you're going to make factual claims, you should be able to back them up with credible sources. I hold myself to that standard, so I'm not being hypocritical.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

I take you back to the original, deliberately incendiary post by Yorky that Johnno took issue with. He replied to it and was then rounded on by the same old, same old bully boys that frequent this thread. Seems to me like he was set up. I fucking hate bullies. I do not profess to know much about the infighting going on over the anti semitism war raging within the labour party other than to understand there is a difference between being pro Palestine and against the State of Israel. Anyway, I took Johnno's advice and googled. I read a particular article and felt it credible enough to post. Apparently it's not credible? Fair enough. So, what is?

I can't speak for anyone else, but for myself I am honestly confused.

Given what was said before I want to break it down. Who do people with Johnno's view think that normal punters like me should vote for come the general election.

That's the question. It's that simple.

[Yorkykopite]

I didn't take much from yorky's post other than that the biggest and oldest Labour-affiliated Jewish group felt that things had improved for them in terms of hospitability within the Labour party.

That's all there was to it. Survey results from the Jewish Labour Movement saying that things had improved vastly inside the Labour party. Yet it was enough to bring a couple of posters out in hives.

[Yorkykopite]

I take you back to the original, deliberately incendiary post by Yorky that Johnno took issue with. He replied to it and was then rounded on by the same old, same old bully boys that frequent this thread. Seems to me like he was set up. I fucking hate bullies.

I have to say a word about this too. Of late you have chased me around all the threads on RAWK trying to get a reaction. Not sure why. I wouldn't call it 'bullying'. It's too pitiable for that. But it is unusual.

And now you're at it again. Making personal comments about my background and accusing me of being a bully (yet again). Of course you never have the courage to quote any "bullying" posts. That says a lot I feel.

[Jshooters]

Oh no he wouldn't matey. He's never yet offended his Labour Friends of Israel. So much for his care and compassion and that's one of the reasons I cannot be doing with Sir Starmer - there are others too.

And yet here he is being criticised for criticising Israel

[Sangria]

That's all there was to it. Survey results from the Jewish Labour Movement saying that things had improved vastly inside the Labour party. Yet it was enough to bring a couple of posters out in hives.

There's an article in the Guardian which mentions part of the findings, but which some may find even more provocative.

Labour’s David Lammy apologises for nominating Jeremy Corbyn to be leader
Shadow foreign secretary tells Limmud festival ‘if I knew what I do now, I never would have nominated him’

David Lammy has apologised for nominating Jeremy Corbyn to be Labour leader in 2015 and said he is “staggered” that some individuals with deeply antisemitic views remain in the Labour party.

Speaking at this year’s Limmud festival, a Jewish event, the shadow foreign secretary said he “never believed” Corbyn would become leader and that his nomination was “a mistake”.

“I regret nominating Jeremy Corbyn and if I knew what I do now, I never would have nominated him,” Lammy told an online audience of about 300, in comments first reported in Jewish News.

“I never believed he would become leader. That was a mistake and I am sorry for that.”

Lammy went on to say he was “fully behind” Keir Starmer and said of his leadership: “I don’t believe the overall culture is toxic any more … but until the party is genuinely welcome for everyone, we remain on a journey.”

His comments came after a recent survey of Jewish Labour Movement members found strong support for Starmer’s efforts to tackle antisemitism since he became leader last year.

Roughly 70% of the survey’s 363 respondents said Labour was a safe space for Jewish people under Starmer’s leadership, compared with just 4% who felt the same under Corbyn.

But Lammy said Labour was still “on a journey” when it came to improving relations with Britain’s Jewish groups and that certain individuals with antisemitic views remained in the party.

“I’ve met some of these individuals and am frankly staggered some are still in the party,” the Tottenham MP said.

“But as a lawyer, I understand that people appeal and go to court. There is a process, which can feel slow and tortuous sometimes, but it must be undertaken.”

Describing himself as a subscriber to the “rainbow coalition approach to politics”, he said he was proud of the Jewish community for standing “shoulder to shoulder” with leaders including Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu in their fight against apartheid.

“The Jewish community understood the fascism that was at the heart of apartheid and the pernicious evil of discrimination. The tradition that I’m from is Jewish friends recognising and being active alongside historically discriminated groups.

“It means black communities like mine understanding prejudices existing against Jewish communities.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/28/david-lammy-apologises-for-nominating-corbyn-to-be-labour-leader

[vivabobbygraham]

I have to say a word about this too. Of late you have chased me around all the threads on RAWK trying to get a reaction. Not sure why. I wouldn't call it 'bullying'. It's too pitiable for that. But it is unusual.

And now you're at it again. Making personal comments about my background and accusing me of being a bully (yet again). Of course you never have the courage to quote any "bullying" posts. That says a lot I feel.

Oh, give it a rest you clown. I'm not the only one who see's right through you, I just make it more apparent. You and your little clique who rule the roost in here without sanction, ganging up on posters with your 'where's the evidence' shouts everytime someone has an alternative view to yours. Your incessant anti Corbyn rhetoric goes largely unchallenged but when it is you trot out the old anti semetic line. Yesterday was a prime example. One or two posters made some positive remarks about Corbyn's recent Christmas video and then bingo, your friends of Israel post with the stats. Coincidence? Maybe you're so obsessed with Corbyn you don't realise what you're doing...but I doubt that.

On the personal stuff, diddums. I'm sure fair minded posters will make their own minds up as to who is being personal in this thread and others. Of course, they will not be privvy to the pm's from you where there are a collection of private remarks from you to me when your mask slips, as it does occasionally on the board. As for chasing you over all the threads, I can think of only one that we both frequent regularly and I am very appreciative of your support for our brilliant midfielder. The comment about whippets though? Bit stereotypical don't you think? You couldn't even take that joke in good faith. Ah, well, a humourless Yorky bar, who'd have thunk it?

[TepidT2O]

The polling about Jewish peoples perceptions had just come out. It’s excellent news, because they overwhelmingly no longer feel racially abused by the Labour Party.
This is a good thing. Forwards, not backwards.

[vivabobbygraham]

The polling about Jewish peoples perceptions had just come out. It’s excellent news, because they overwhelmingly no longer feel racially abused by the Labour Party.
This is a good thing. Forwards, not backwards.

Another link for you to dismiss, Tepid but one keeps trying all in the interest of fairness don't you know...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/20/jewish-woman-accused-antisemitism-labour-threatens-sue-anti-zionism

[Yorkykopite]

One or two posters made some positive remarks about Corbyn's recent Christmas video and then bingo, your friends of Israel post with the stats. Coincidence? Maybe you're so obsessed with Corbyn you don't realise what you're doing...but I doubt that.

I was one of the posters who made positive comments "you clown". In doing so I even went on to say that there was no reason to question his motives. There was nothing "malicious" about Corbyn's message I said.

But typically that is what you have just done now regarding the letter from the Jewish Labour Movement (not 'Friends of Israel'). It's not the message that interests you. It's my motives, my reasons for posting it (to hurt you presumably!). The reason (since you insist of having one) I posted it is that the letter had just popped into my email tray. It was also in the Times newspaper that morning. It was current news. This is the thread for current news.

I also happen to think it's good news. So, why on earth not?

[TepidT2O]

Another link for you to dismiss, Tepid but one keeps trying all in the interest of fairness don't you know...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/20/jewish-woman-accused-antisemitism-labour-threatens-sue-anti-zionism

Personally I think that what she’s been banned for is racist.  Jewish or not.

[Yorkykopite]

On the personal stuff, diddums. I'm sure fair minded posters will make their own minds up as to who is being personal in this thread and others. Of course, they will not be privvy to the pm's from you where there are a collection of private remarks from you to me when your mask slips, as it does occasionally on the board.

More innuendo from you I see.

I called you a "weasel" in my PM didn't I? For calling for me to be banned from RAWK. What else? Come on, cough it up

And this was after you filled my own in tray with insults and threats.

[vivabobbygraham]

I was one of the posters who made positive comments "you clown". In doing so I even went on to say that there was no reason to question his motives. There was nothing "malicious" about Corbyn's message I said.

But typically that is what you have just done now regarding the letter from the Jewish Labour Movement (not 'Friends of Israel'). It's not the message that interests you. It's my motives, my reasons for posting it (to hurt you presumably!). The reason (since you insist of having one) I posted it is that the letter had just popped into my email tray. It was also in the Times newspaper that morning. It was current news. This is the thread for current news.

I also happen to think it's good news. So, why on earth not?

But I did not originally comment on it. It was when the pack engulfed Johnno's reply that I followed his advice and googled to find a whole litany of posts and links that I read backing up his claims, only for them to be dismissed out of hand. I was sent another link this morning by a poster which I have sent to Tepid. I'm sure there will be celebrations in the labour party offices at this good news. Something else for Sir Keir to write about in his column with the rag. Yippee!

[Millie]

Can you two give it a rest now, please.  Otherwise the threat to close down the News and Current will come to fruition.

[vivabobbygraham]

More innuendo from you I see.

I called you a "weasel" in my PM didn't I? For calling for me to be banned from RAWK. What else? Come on, cough it up

And this was after you filled my own in tray with insults and threats.

Threats? Of what?

[Millie]

Threats? Of what?

See my post above yours, thanks.

[Yorkykopite]

But I did not originally comment on it. It was when the pack engulfed Johnno's reply that I followed his advice and googled to find a whole litany of posts and links that I read backing up his claims, only for them to be dismissed out of hand. I was sent another link this morning by a poster which I have sent to Tepid. I'm sure there will be celebrations in the labour party offices at this good news. Something else for Sir Keir to write about in his column with the rag. Yippee!

The claim was that Jewish members were being banned from the Labour party because they had criticised the State of Israel.

Outlandish claims need supporting evidence.

I accept that both you and Johnno supplied some links. But none of the links provided that evidence. It's as simple as that.

If you do find genuine evidence I am happy to discuss it and I am open to changing my mind too. Indeed I'll say now that if Jewish (or any) members have been expelled from the Labour party because they have criticised the State of Israel I will line up in solidarity with them. 

[vivabobbygraham]

The claim was that Jewish members were being banned from the Labour party because they had criticised the State of Israel.

Outlandish claims need supporting evidence.

I accept that both you and Johnno supplied some links. But none of the links provided that evidence. It's as simple as that.

If you do find genuine evidence I am happy to discuss it and I am open to changing my mind too. Indeed I'll say now that if Jewish (or any) members have been expelled from the Labour party because they have criticised the State of Israel I will line up in solidarity with them.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/20/jewish-woman-accused-antisemitism-labour-threatens-sue-anti-zionism

[Andy @ Allerton!]

But I did not originally comment on it. It was when the pack engulfed Johnno's reply that I followed his advice and googled to find a whole litany of posts and links that I read backing up his claims, only for them to be dismissed out of hand. I was sent another link this morning by a poster which I have sent to Tepid. I'm sure there will be celebrations in the labour party offices at this good news. Something else for Sir Keir to write about in his column with the rag. Yippee!

Which pack is that?

You seem to think there is an organised team on RAWK 'out to get you'

How exciting!

Doesn't seem very likely though. I question Johnno now and then when he confuses me as I'm not really sure what he's saying sometimes. Maybe it's because I'm thick, but he seems to give out mixed messages like 'oppose the Tories at all costs' but 'Don't vote for Labour'

As I'm a bit dim, those two statements appear to condradict each other. I created this thread so that people could chime in and discuss current or recent or even older events. Largely I think that it's been an interesting thread that's gone off the rails here and there, but a lot of good info has been discussed. Quite often that's got me going off to other websites to read up on stuff and in other occasions, I've bought books relating to the subject as I like to try and learn stuff.

That's why, when I'm confused about what the script is, I'm asking questions. You seem to be saying that people asking questions can't be permitted and that it's some sort of vile vendetta. As I said, that seems a bit unlikely to me.

[oldfordie]

Which pack is that?

You seem to think there is an organised team on RAWK 'out to get you'

How exciting!

Doesn't seem very likely though. I question Johnno now and then when he confuses me as I'm not really sure what he's saying sometimes. Maybe it's because I'm thick, but he seems to give out mixed messages like 'oppose the Tories at all costs' but 'Don't vote for Labour'

As I'm a bit dim, those two statements appear to condradict each other. I created this thread so that people could chime in and discuss current or recent or even older events. Largely I think that it's been an interesting thread that's gone off the rails here and there, but a lot of good info has been discussed. Quite often that's got me going off to other websites to read up on stuff and in other occasions, I've bought books relating to the subject as I like to try and learn stuff.

That's why, when I'm confused about what the script is, I'm asking questions. You seem to be saying that people asking questions can't be permitted and that it's some sort of vile vendetta. As I said, that seems a bit unlikely to me.

It's actually a crucial question that doesn't get asked enough.
It's one of the reasons I despise Ken Loach so much, leaving out his racist holocaust denial. he has spent decades making a very nice living producing heart breaking TV/Movie dramas attacking the Tory's cruel policy's on society, yet he has refused to vote Labour many times. one reason in particular was just absurd.
Labour subs paid by direct debit. selling out to the capitalist system.
Seems he has 2 heads like Worzel Gummidge. his preaching head to tell us how much he cares and his left wing political head when all those people suffering aren't a consideration. nahh I can't stomach that, I think you loose the right to preach about how much you care when you refuse to support the only party who can actually do something about it.

[Millie]

Andy you are. not the only one who is confused.  How on earth, especially with the FPTP system, do you get rid of the Tories if some people are finding any opportunity to slag off the Labour Party?

[Yorkykopite]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/20/jewish-woman-accused-antisemitism-labour-threatens-sue-anti-zionism

Thanks for that. It's certainly not without interest.

The woman was banned for anti-semitism of course. That was the explanation given by the Labour party itself. But her case certainly exists on that blurry and deeply political line between what constitutes anti-semitism and what is anti-zionism. The line has achieved some definition in recent months because of the (bleated) decision of the LP to adhere to the IHRA definition of anti-semitism. In my view, which is now officially Labour's own view, a good deal of anti-semitism used to hide behind anti-zionism, because 'anti-zionism' seemed more acceptable. But I accept that the IHRA definition is controversial.

Slightly annoyingly we don't actually get to read all of the woman's tweets in that article. Maybe they are sub-judice pr something? Have you seen them?

[vivabobbygraham]

Thanks for that. It's certainly not without interest.

The woman was banned for anti-semitism of course. That was the explanation given by the Labour party itself. But her case certainly exists on that blurry and deeply political line between what constitutes anti-semitism and what is anti-zionism. The line has achieved some definition in recent months because of the (bleated) decision of the LP to adhere to the IHRA definition of anti-semitism. In my view, which is now officially Labour's own view, a good deal of anti-semitism used to hide behind anti-zionism, because 'anti-zionism' seemed more acceptable. But I accept that the IHRA definition is controversial.

Slightly annoyingly we don't actually get to read all of the woman's tweets in that article. Maybe they are sub-judice pr something? Have you seen them?

No, I haven't. I am learning this only in response to Johnno's post that followed yours and the google search that ensued. I abhor discrimination in any form but would the labour party's alleged systemic anti semitism stop me voting for it? No. I do abhor its leader who, in my opinion, betrayed the good people of my City for writing in that fucking scumbag tabloid. Starmer is a fraud, a charlatan who has taken my vote for granted. I will never forgive him and I will never vote Labour while he is the leader of the party safe in the knowledge he would never be elected as Prime Minister of this God forsaken Country with or without my vote anyway.

[TepidT2O]

No, I haven't. I am learning this only in response to Johnno's post that followed yours and the google search that ensued. I abhor discrimination in any form but would the labour party's alleged systemic anti semitism stop me voting for it? No. I do abhor its leader who, in my opinion, betrayed the good people of my City for writing in that fucking scumbag tabloid. Starmer is a fraud, a charlatan who has taken my vote for granted. I will never forgive him and I will never vote Labour while he is the leader of the party safe in the knowledge he would never be elected as Prime Minister of this God forsaken Country with or without my vote anyway.

Who would you have instead? Realistically…

[Alan_X]

Fuck me.


Locked.

[Alan_X]

I know it's hard to believe but bringing back Corbyn and making Palestine a core issue will not get Labour elected.

Arguing about it on a LIverpool website is about as pointless as it's possible to get.

[SP]

The arrogant fucking entitlement of the arseholes. That Johnson smirk may finally bring him down.