When you sling out accusations of anti-semitism against anyone who fails to fall in line with your views do you think you are making a better case?
That's why I think you are manipulative and dishonest.
And, FYI, I actually don't like Corbyn. I don't like his failure to take a stance on Europe or his failure to provide a robust opposition to this bunch of crooks in government. I just don't think he is an antisemite and I don't like the way you are attacking anyone you don't agree with.
If you defend anti semitism you are an anti Semite. How is that manipulative and dishonest?
Seems like you’ve just lost an argument and throwing your toys out of the pram.
The disciplinary panel was inadequate, it met infrequently and had a massive backlog of cases, particularly antisemitic due to the volume. The NEC agreed on Sept 19th to add 14 more members to this panel to try to solve the issue.
Not much, but counts as doing something. There is a case to be made that the system was inadequate, and couldn't react to what seems to have been some kind of increase in incidents. It should have been, and should be now, much better and much swifter.
The increase is nothing more than the increase in members. The reforms to the process we far greater but that was a particular concern raised by Jewish leaders that met with Corbyn earlier in the year. They have also streamlined the process to speed up anything raised so there appears to have been systematic issues as well. Any change to the process would have to come from the NEC and they had a summer election. So the new NEC, which is considered Corbyn controlled for the first time, started at the begining of September.
Without knowing the process or the findings of that July panel no-one has the full picture as to these current allegations. Yes the Labour party needs to take a long hard look at itself, hopefully these changes are a step in the right direction.
I am interested as to what further changes the posters who feel the party has not done enough need to make. They have clearly stated a number of times that the party is racist but haven't suggested anything other than getting rid of Corbyn.
Off the top of my head.
Expel racists rather than sending them on "training courses" and letting them continue as councillors. Hold them up as examples of how the party deals with racism.
Don't wait for outside agencies to point out the racism, act on it when it first appears. Monitor Labour party facebook and other social media sites. Be proactive and issue guidelines to all labour social media site admins.
Remind all members of how AS is defined by the IHRA definition.
Have awareness training at all CLPs run by the JLM not tiny antisemitic groups like the so called JVL.
Stop denying there is even a problem (we still read the "there's not evidence, it's all a smear" usually followed by some actual racist conspiracy theory about global bankers/zio-nazis/being in the pay of Israel/Centralist/Red Tory/Blairite insults.
Stop harassing whistle blowers in the party who call out antisemitism.
Stop the deselection and votes of no confidence of MPs on the grounds of joining "Enough is Enough" rallies or speaking out about AS
Sanction CLPs who refused to adopt the IHRA definition or, as in one case wouldn't agree a motion to condemn the bombings in Pittsburgh.
The first point you raise is a hard one because I believe some racism is borne out of insensitivity and naivety. A course of education or experience is exactly what someone can need. I speak from personal experience, my grandmother lived most of her life as a racist but realised the error of her ways by her death after meeting my black step-mother. Of course if it is a case that is so severe then that person should be dealt with in a punitive manner at the end of the due process.
I agree that the Labour party has been slow with being proactive in the digital team in this regard. But I can not see how they can ultimately stop harassment, only react to it.
The fact that they hold CPL education courses is surely a good thing? I wonder if any of the other parties do? Now the NEC has adopted the full definition of antisemitism surely these courses will tell that to members?
No-one has denied there is a problem but you. The labour leadership are in agreement, the internal report was in agreement and the independent ones. There is a problem with antisemitism within the Labour party and how it deals with it. But there are factions within the Labour party that has used this to destabilise from within and saying that isn't they same thing as saying there isn't a problem.
When you asked the suggestions for what more could be done, the inference was that there wasn't much more as the party had done so much.
Off the top of my head I gave a list of a lot more.
You dodged the key points in most of your replies ie suggesting that education courses are a good thing but my point was about who was delivering them.
As for "no-one has denied there is a problem but you" that is just false and you know it. There was even a tape of a labour party senior official speaking in a meeting, with Corbyn present, asking if anyone had seen or heard any antisemitism to "prove" it wasn't an issue. The "its all a Israeli/Zio-nazi/Rothchilds/MSN smear" line is trotted out all the time. Read the Ruth Smeath speech, read this thread where it's all downplayed, not real, "show me some evidence" "here's some evidence" "not enough, I need more evidence", "here's some more evidence" and on and on.
Well that wasn't the inference. I was genuinely interested and I said you had only posted to get rid of Corbyn, which you had.
I'm reminded of David Schnider's qwip of "speak to the Jews, just not those ones" but the truth is I don't know the difference between the the JML or the JVL. I don't feel qualified to talk about it rather than I'm ducking anything. I'm interested to know but not just from you because of your inherent bias. The fact that you seek such negativity from someone trying to engage with you says it all.
I've got no time for Peter Willsman for many by reasons, personally I don't think he should be anywhere near the NEC, but momentum dropped their support of him in August. I am also certain he has been around and on the NEC for decades, he isn't the Labour party and Corbyn being at that meeting does not smear him by association.
So to use your quote "I want to hear from people but not someone who disagrees with me".
"Inherent bias" Yes, I'm biased against racism. Happy to say it. Shame not everyone in the labour party is.
Yes, it was Willsman. Regardless that Momentun dropped their support he was one very senior person denying there was any problem so your statement that it was just me is proved false. Corbyn was in the room and didn't say "Actually Peter, that's out of order". You have to wonder why when he is the "most anti-racist MP of the last 40 years" and someone who says racism should be confronted everywhere.
Corbyn is the problem because his leadership enables and protects the racists. His support for Hamas etc emboldens racists to say the things they do, the inaction of him and the party is seen as permission to carry on. The JVL make excuses and carry on the fight that Corbyn was forced to give up by John McDonald ie undermining the IHRA definition and backing CLPs who refuse to adopt it.
The disciplinary panel was inadequate, it met infrequently and had a massive backlog of cases, particularly antisemitic due to the volume. The NEC agreed on Sept 19th to add 14 more members to this panel to try to solve the issue.
Not much, but counts as doing something. There is a case to be made that the system was inadequate, and couldn't react to what seems to have been some kind of increase in incidents. It should have been, and should be now, much better and much swifter.
The increase is nothing more than the increase in members. The reforms to the process we far greater but that was a particular concern raised by Jewish leaders that met with Corbyn earlier in the year. They have also streamlined the process to speed up anything raised so there appears to have been systematic issues as well. Any change to the process would have to come from the NEC and they had a summer election. So the new NEC, which is considered Corbyn controlled for the first time, started at the begining of September.
Without knowing the process or the findings of that July panel no-one has the full picture as to these current allegations. Yes the Labour party needs to take a long hard look at itself, hopefully these changes are a step in the right direction.
I am interested as to what further changes the posters who feel the party has not done enough need to make. They have clearly stated a number of times that the party is racist but haven't suggested anything other than getting rid of Corbyn.
Off the top of my head.
Expel racists rather than sending them on "training courses" and letting them continue as councillors. Hold them up as examples of how the party deals with racism.
Don't wait for outside agencies to point out the racism, act on it when it first appears. Monitor Labour party facebook and other social media sites. Be proactive and issue guidelines to all labour social media site admins.
Remind all members of how AS is defined by the IHRA definition.
Have awareness training at all CLPs run by the JLM not tiny antisemitic groups like the so called JVL.
Stop denying there is even a problem (we still read the "there's not evidence, it's all a smear" usually followed by some actual racist conspiracy theory about global bankers/zio-nazis/being in the pay of Israel/Centralist/Red Tory/Blairite insults.
Stop harassing whistle blowers in the party who call out antisemitism.
Stop the deselection and votes of no confidence of MPs on the grounds of joining "Enough is Enough" rallies or speaking out about AS
Sanction CLPs who refused to adopt the IHRA definition or, as in one case wouldn't agree a motion to condemn the bombings in Pittsburgh.
The first point you raise is a hard one because I believe some racism is borne out of insensitivity and naivety. A course of education or experience is exactly what someone can need. I speak from personal experience, my grandmother lived most of her life as a racist but realised the error of her ways by her death after meeting my black step-mother. Of course if it is a case that is so severe then that person should be dealt with in a punitive manner at the end of the due process.
I agree that the Labour party has been slow with being proactive in the digital team in this regard. But I can not see how they can ultimately stop harassment, only react to it.
The fact that they hold CPL education courses is surely a good thing? I wonder if any of the other parties do? Now the NEC has adopted the full definition of antisemitism surely these courses will tell that to members?
No-one has denied there is a problem but you. The labour leadership are in agreement, the internal report was in agreement and the independent ones. There is a problem with antisemitism within the Labour party and how it deals with it. But there are factions within the Labour party that has used this to destabilise from within and saying that isn't they same thing as saying there isn't a problem.
When you asked the suggestions for what more could be done, the inference was that there wasn't much more as the party had done so much.
Off the top of my head I gave a list of a lot more.
You dodged the key points in most of your replies ie suggesting that education courses are a good thing but my point was about who was delivering them.
As for "no-one has denied there is a problem but you" that is just false and you know it. There was even a tape of a labour party senior official speaking in a meeting, with Corbyn present, asking if anyone had seen or heard any antisemitism to "prove" it wasn't an issue. The "its all a Israeli/Zio-nazi/Rothchilds/MSN smear" line is trotted out all the time. Read the Ruth Smeath speech, read this thread where it's all downplayed, not real, "show me some evidence" "here's some evidence" "not enough, I need more evidence", "here's some more evidence" and on and on.
Well that wasn't the inference. I was genuinely interested and I said you had only posted to get rid of Corbyn, which you had.
I'm reminded of David Schnider's qwip of "speak to the Jews, just not those ones" but the truth is I don't know the difference between the the JML or the JVL. I don't feel qualified to talk about it rather than I'm ducking anything. I'm interested to know but not just from you because of your inherent bias. The fact that you seek such negativity from someone trying to engage with you says it all.
I've got no time for Peter Willsman for many by reasons, personally I don't think he should be anywhere near the NEC, but momentum dropped their support of him in August. I am also certain he has been around and on the NEC for decades, he isn't the Labour party and Corbyn being at that meeting does not smear him by association.
So to use your quote "I want to hear from people but not someone who disagrees with me".
"Inherent bias" Yes, I'm biased against racism. Happy to say it. Shame not everyone in the labour party is.
Yes, it was Willsman. Regardless that Momentun dropped their support he was one very senior person denying there was any problem so your statement that it was just me is proved false. Corbyn was in the room and didn't say "Actually Peter, that's out of order". You have to wonder why when he is the "most anti-racist MP of the last 40 years" and someone who says racism should be confronted everywhere.
Corbyn is the problem because his leadership enables and protects the racists. His support for Hamas etc emboldens racists to say the things they do, the inaction of him and the party is seen as permission to carry on. The JVL make excuses and carry on the fight that Corbyn was forced to give up by John McDonald ie undermining the IHRA definition and backing CLPs who refuse to adopt it.
Actually I said not just from you rather than just not, so I can understand your bias. I get it, you are passionate and sometimes the increase in blood pressure must blur the words.
Imagine the uproar if some one said something about another forum member “acting up like a monkey” in the wind rush scandal thread. They rightly would’ve been condemned.
I don't know whether or not Corbyn (the subject of this thread) is antisemitic or not, although the lack of meaningful action, on his watch, does bring it into question.
What isn't in denial is that the Labour Party does harbour antisemites, and I'm sure there are also antisemites in other parties, and that there has been a lack of action on Labour's part to rid itself of this shame.
I don't know whether or not Corbyn (the subject of this thread) is antisemitic or not, although the lack of action, on his watch, does bring it into question.
What isn't in denial is that the Labour Party does harbour antisemites, and I'm sure there are also antisemites in other parties, and that there has been a lack of action on Labour's part to rid itself of this shame.
If part of the problem is the system in place and that is the responsibility of the NEC which up until September has been controlled by factions from the centre of the party, how can you lay that at Corbyn's door?
As much as I'd burn95% of the Labour party you can't say the party is anti semetic,or Corbyn---- it's their reaction to anti semetic people within the organisation and the slowness of doing anything which brings in the charges.
Very sadly at this time the UK is in desperate need of leadership either by HM Gov or HM Oppersition and we have in May and Corbyn anything but leaders
The reporting of the Labour 'dossier' by LBC on September 4th and it's handing over to Cressida Dick was not the first time it had been reported.
A month previously on August 7th (only a couple of weeks after the Labour 'Disputes Panel' at which it had been presented) the Guardian reported 'Leaked Labour papers reveal scale of challenge to tackle antisemitism', which quoted a 'Labour source' saying:
“The new code of conduct means we will not have to go to the full NEC disputes committee, but a smaller antisemitism subgroup. It will mean we have the potential to kick people out super fast, instead of waiting months for a full disputes meeting and just getting through 11 of 70.”
While another Guardian article on September 19th - 'Labour NEC backs plan to speed up handling of antisemitism claims' - reported that:
"Labour’s ruling national executive committee has approved a plan to double the size of the party’s key disciplinary body, in order to speed up the handling of antisemitism claims.
The backlog of disciplinary cases against party members was one of the concerns raised by Jewish leaders when they met Jeremy Corbyn this year.
At a marathon NEC meeting.....it was agreed that membership of the national constitutional committee (NCC), which decides cases, would be doubled, with 14 additional members elected" [from which 3 person panels to hear cases are drawn].
This may not be as swift or 'summary' as some would like, but putting new procedures in place and preparing and deciding cases takes time (even after doubling the membership of the NCC).
Something I suspect the Met Police are probably also experiencing in the three and a half months since the Commissioner was given the 'dossier' by LBC on September 4th.
We can get on to the links with dictatorships and overseas terrorists later.
You're obsessed.
I would say more passionate than obsessed.
Henry clearly has very strong views about Corbyn's behaviour insofar as terrorism and antisemitism is concerned. Views that I share, even if not as passionately.
Thank you. If being passionate about opposing antisemitism and terrorism is a crime then I plead guilty.
@iainment it's a thread about Corbyn. @leuth asked for evidence so I gave some.
What is sad is that your only response is the say "you're obsessed". Why not refute the evidence given? Maybe because you can't.
I try not to argue with people who have a fixed viewpoint. It's not worth it. You won't take any notice of any view but your own because you're obsessed about Corbyn. It'd be like trying to have a conversation with a creationist about Darwin's theory of evolution.
I know it's not the done thing to quote yourself but this thread just proves my point. I don't think anyone's opinion has changed despite the passion from both sides.
Is having a 'disputes panel' (which in my experience of these things is usually wishy washy crap) actually 'doing nothing'? I certainly agree that if the party was getting threats against individuals, particularly MP's, and didn't tell them about it, then it is totally wrong. TOTALLY WRONG. Are you suggesting that in the circumstances because they were Jewish they weren't told, but non Jewish MP's would be?
Yes
OK. That interests me. Can you point me in the direction of any evidence?
I take that as a no then .
Jewish MP's not told of threats to their lives from anti semitic messages. Nothing to do with the fact they're jewish clearly..!
Basically now your only real defence is that the labour party is institutionally incompetent. Which in itself, the buck stops at the leader.
Stop being so obtuse.
You suggest Jewish Labour MPs would not be told of threats but non Jewish MPs would. I asked if you could point me towards evidence of that differentiation. You initially said yes
I said yes, they were not told because they were Jewish. For obvious reasons.
Where’s your evidence that non Jews weren’t told either? What am supposed to provide? Examples of non jewish mps recieving anti semitic death threats?
I literally cannot believe you're defending anti semitism.
I am not defending anti semitism though am I? If all Labour MP's that the party HQ knew were subject to threats, and Labour HQ didn't warn them about it then as I said above it would be totally wrong. Your suggestion is that the party machine would be anti Semitic if it withheld information from only Jewish MP's., I am asking if the party machine was so rubbish it withheld such information from all threatened MP's regardless of background.
as much as i'd burn 95% of the Tory party you cant say the Labour party, or Corbyn is anti semetic, it's their reaction to anti semetic people within the organisation and the slowness of doing anything which brings in the charges. Very sadly at this time the UK is in desperate need of leadership either by HM Gov or HM Opposition and we have in May and Corbyn anything but leaders
@Henry Irving is that really worthy of a flag? You misread what I had written, paraphrased me to forward a position I do not hold and then flagged me for pointing it out. Can't wait for you to go back to the forum equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears running round shouting "bollocks!".
@Henry Irving is that really worthy of a flag? You misread what I had written, paraphrased me to forward a position I do not hold and then flagged me for pointing it out. Can't wait for you to go back to the forum equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears running round shouting "bollocks!".
it was for the lazy blood pressure abuse
I didn't misread anything. You tried to be clever with the "what else can we do?" question and then got personal when I gave you big list.
@Henry Irving is that really worthy of a flag? You misread what I had written, paraphrased me to forward a position I do not hold and then flagged me for pointing it out. Can't wait for you to go back to the forum equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears running round shouting "bollocks!".
it was for the lazy blood pressure abuse
I didn't misread anything. You tried to be clever with the "what else can we do?" question and then got personal when I gave you big list.
So to use your quote "I want to hear from people but not someone who disagrees with me".
That is your post, I never said that. Quite the opposite in fact. Again the fact you think I was trying to be clever and can't recognise a genuine question, let alone I agreed with most of your list, kind of says it all. Look @iainment is bang on the money, no-one else wants to read this and you are clearly sensitive. I apologise for any offence caused.
@Henry Irving is that really worthy of a flag? You misread what I had written, paraphrased me to forward a position I do not hold and then flagged me for pointing it out. Can't wait for you to go back to the forum equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears running round shouting "bollocks!".
it was for the lazy blood pressure abuse
I didn't misread anything. You tried to be clever with the "what else can we do?" question and then got personal when I gave you big list.
So to use your quote "I want to hear from people but not someone who disagrees with me".
That is your post, I never said that. Quite the opposite in fact. Look @iainment is bang on the money, no-one else wants to read this and you are clearly sensitive. I apologise for any offence caused.
"sensitive" About racism? Why not go the whole hog and say "you've got a chip on your shoulder"?
You and Iainment, two Corbyn supporters BTW, don't want to read it. Fine but since when did you speak for everyone else so you can claim "no one else wants to read this"?
Comments
Seems like you’ve just lost an argument and throwing your toys out of the pram.
"Inherent bias" Yes, I'm biased against racism. Happy to say it. Shame not everyone in the labour party is.
Yes, it was Willsman. Regardless that Momentun dropped their support he was one very senior person denying there was any problem so your statement that it was just me is proved false. Corbyn was in the room and didn't say "Actually Peter, that's out of order". You have to wonder why when he is the "most anti-racist MP of the last 40 years" and someone who says racism should be confronted everywhere.
Corbyn is the problem because his leadership enables and protects the racists. His support for Hamas etc emboldens racists to say the things they do, the inaction of him and the party is seen as permission to carry on. The JVL make excuses and carry on the fight that Corbyn was forced to give up by John McDonald ie undermining the IHRA definition and backing CLPs who refuse to adopt it.
Back to trump levels of denial here folks.
Let me guess, you're also some one who's "fought against racism all their lives" but can't pick up when they're being grossly insensitive to jews?
For the many, not the Jew.
I don't know whether or not Corbyn (the subject of this thread) is antisemitic or not, although the lack of meaningful action, on his watch, does bring it into question.
What isn't in denial is that the Labour Party does harbour antisemites, and I'm sure there are also antisemites in other parties, and that there has been a lack of action on Labour's part to rid itself of this shame.
Very sadly at this time the UK is in desperate need of leadership either by HM Gov or HM Oppersition and we have in May and Corbyn anything but leaders
A month previously on August 7th (only a couple of weeks after the Labour 'Disputes Panel' at which it had been presented) the Guardian reported 'Leaked Labour papers reveal scale of challenge to tackle antisemitism', which quoted a 'Labour source' saying:
“The new code of conduct means we will not have to go to the full NEC disputes committee, but a smaller antisemitism subgroup. It will mean we have the potential to kick people out super fast, instead of waiting months for a full disputes meeting and just getting through 11 of 70.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/07/leaked-labour-papers-reveal-scale-of-challenge-to-tackle-antisemitism
While another Guardian article on September 19th - 'Labour NEC backs plan to speed up handling of antisemitism claims' - reported that:
"Labour’s ruling national executive committee has approved a plan to double the size of the party’s key disciplinary body, in order to speed up the handling of antisemitism claims.
The backlog of disciplinary cases against party members was one of the concerns raised by Jewish leaders when they met Jeremy Corbyn this year.
At a marathon NEC meeting.....it was agreed that membership of the national constitutional committee (NCC), which decides cases, would be doubled, with 14 additional members elected" [from which 3 person panels to hear cases are drawn].
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/19/labour-nec-double-size-key-disciplinary-body-antisemitism-claims
This may not be as swift or 'summary' as some would like, but putting new procedures in place and preparing and deciding cases takes time (even after doubling the membership of the NCC).
Something I suspect the Met Police are probably also experiencing in the three and a half months since the Commissioner was given the 'dossier' by LBC on September 4th.
I don't think anyone's opinion has changed despite the passion from both sides.
If all Labour MP's that the party HQ knew were subject to threats, and Labour HQ didn't warn them about it then as I said above it would be totally wrong.
Your suggestion is that the party machine would be anti Semitic if it withheld information from only Jewish MP's., I am asking if the party machine was so rubbish it withheld such information from all threatened MP's regardless of background.
Very sadly at this time the UK is in desperate need of leadership either by HM Gov or HM Opposition and we have in May and Corbyn anything but leaders
I didn't misread anything. You tried to be clever with the "what else can we do?" question and then got personal when I gave you big list.
"sensitive" About racism? Why not go the whole hog and say "you've got a chip on your shoulder"?
You and Iainment, two Corbyn supporters BTW, don't want to read it. Fine but since when did you speak for everyone else so you can claim "no one else wants to read this"?