Pro-Brexit Labour lawmakers who ignored instructions and voted with the government on Tuesday night say party managers exerted no pressure on them to switch sides. Their votes helped block an amendment put forward by pro-EU rebels in May’s Conservative Party that could have meant Britain staying in a customs union with the European Union after leaving the bloc.
BobbyBobberson wrote: » My own two cents on the Anti Semite stuff, I don't doubt that it exists at some level within Labour. Corbyn has been sketchy on some things while also there is evidence to the contrary where he can use as evidence that he is not AS. Overall I think hes been poor on it.What I cannot get past is that the reason these are all leaving is because of this. It just seems the AS stick is used because they do not like Corbyn and his inner circle. Personally I think if him and JMcD left and were replaced with Blairites then you would hear very little of the AS problem again.
prawnsambo wrote: » It quite depends on how you define 'years'. Because the first I became aware of it was during the referendum campaign and the Chakrabati enquiry. That's 'years' ago, but maybe not as many as you seem to be suggesting.
Hurrache wrote: » You asked for evidence this type of stuff happens, after the video was posted.
MrMusician18 wrote: » The guardian wants rid of Corbyn and wants a blairite in. The story is being pushed relentlessly by those that hate Corbyn and all he stands for on the right, and the centre left. The real issue is that the UK establishment fear a Corbyn government even more than Brexit. I don't particularly like Corbyn just to note, but all this anti semitism stuff appears after the centre left lost the party and will just vanish again the day a centrist gets back in the leadership. Which would be strange, considering it's seemingly an institutional problem for Labour.
Enzokk wrote: » You have to look at examples of how Corbyn has been leading the party with the accusations of antisemitism thrown at him and the party. As I said before he is either the unluckiest person in that he finds himself around these issues when he himself isn't antisemitic. There is this example,Corbyn in antisemitism row after backing artist behind 'offensive' mural So in this case he didn't look at the mural but he supported the right of free speech, unlucky. Then we have this, So he joined a Facebook group that shared antisemitic posts, but he didn't see it because if he had he would have challenged it. Such a shame that he always just seems to be a little late to challenge that antisemitism. Then we have this case,Jeremy Corbyn: MPs 'not under threat' at Labour party conference You know what was missing here in his quotes? He never said that what is happening is unacceptable and he is sorry that one of his MPs should need police protection at her own parties conference. You will also note that he is saying there is no threat to anybody in the conference, but yet just outside in Liverpool she needs protection? Are Liverpudlians known to be antisemitic and are Jewish people in danger in Liverpool? She is in the city that she represents and yet she needs protection? Why at the conference and not at any other time? Look at the Labour press office reply, And this is why there are the accusations that they are not taking it seriously. See how they gloss over the fact that she received abuse from Labour supporters because of her opposition to Corbyn and that is why she needed the protection at the Labour conference. Here are some more examples that doesn't make Labour look great.Union boss: Labour MPs complaining of antisemitism are smearing Corbyn Some of the article makes for grim reading for Labour, And then finally this story from a week or so ago,Labour investigates Liverpool members over 'bullying' of Luciana Berger I will take any claims that this issue is being overblown with a pinch of salt when you actually see the amount of articles from supposedly friendly media to the Labour party.
Bambi wrote: » Who said I had a issue with it? Funny tone to take in fairness, post this recording or recordings you keep referencing and we can have a listen.
Hurrache wrote: » When I'm at my desk I'll look for it, but someone also posted a speech in the house of commons by someone who personally experience it. What's your issue with that?
MrMusician18 wrote: » I'm asking why those who have said it's been a problem for years, ignored it up until now? That have said it's institutional after all. Was it because it suited them? Or because these are exaggerations to oust Corbyn? You can see the beauty of the tactic. If it's successful it will get rid of Corbyn and split his base leaving space for the centre to take control of the party again.
Bambi wrote: » Maybe people would respond if you posted a link to it?
MrMusician18 wrote: » Or they could be exaggerating? You can't claim this abuse is institutional, but have kept quiet for years. Unless they were complicit in the cover up? There's a lot more arguing for it in order to get rid of Corbyn. The center left media find him distasteful, and the right media think he's dangerous. That's why it's an issue.
Jeremy Corbyn was embroiled in a fresh antisemitism row on Friday after conceding he was wrong to support a graffiti artist whose “offensive” work was scrubbed off a wall in London’s East End. In a Facebook post in 2012, Corbyn offered his backing to Los Angeles-based street artist Mear One, whose mural, featuring several known antisemitic tropes, was due to be removed after complaints. Mear One said on his Facebook page: “Tomorrow they want to buff my mural Freedom of Expression. London Calling, Public art.” Corbyn replied: “Why? You are in good company. Rockerfeller [sic] destroyed Diego Viera’s [sic] mural because it includes a picture of Lenin.” “In 2012, Jeremy was responding to concerns about the removal of public art on the grounds of freedom of speech,” said a statement released by the Labour party on Friday. “However, the mural was offensive, used antisemitic imagery, which has no place in our society, and it is right that it was removed.”
He recently admitted being a member of a closed Facebook group called Palestine Live, in which a number of antisemitic posts appeared – though he did not join in the conversations and left the group in 2015. When the existence of the group was revealed earlier this month, Corbyn told reporters: “Had I seen it, of course, I would have challenged it straight away, but I actually don’t spend all my time reading social media.
Jeremy Corbyn has insisted that his MPs are not under any threat within Labour's conference in Liverpool. His comment came after Jewish MP Luciana Berger was pictured flanked by police protection as she attended an event on the fringe of the annual gathering. Ms Berger was provided with protection after police carried out a risk assessment. The decision was made after threats and abuse were directed at the MP in the wake of her criticisms of the Labour leadership's handling of the anti-Semitism row. In an interview with Channel 4 News, Mr Corbyn was shown pictures of the Liverpool Wavertree MP and asked whether he felt concerned that she felt under threat attending her own party's conference. He replied: "There is no threat being made in this conference to anybody." We are a party that is open and inclusive and oppose anti-Semitism as a totally united party. I've opposed anti-Semitism and racism all my life and will continue to do so"
A Labour spokesman later pointed out that the Jewish Labour Movement rally where Ms Berger received her police escort took place in a venue outside the conference area. The spokesman said: "We support whatever security is necessary for any of our MPs. "We have had one fatal incident involving one of our MPs. There have been extremely serious threats made against our MPs - including Jeremy, in the case of the trial of the killer from Finsbury Park - from far-right white supremacists."
On Wednesday about 40 Labour MPs and peers marched in support of their Jewish colleague Ruth Smeeth before she gave evidence at an expulsion hearing against an activist accused of berating her at the launch of Labour’s antisemitism inquiry. MPs including the shadow environment secretary, Sue Hayman, the former shadow Northern Ireland secretary Owen Smith and the Jewish Labour movement chair, Luciana Berger, formed a protective ring around Smeeth as she entered the hearing in London. The Labour activist Marc Wadsworth will have his case heard by the NCC, which has the power to expel members. The hearing comes 22 months after the first complaint was made against Wadsworth, who challenged Smeeth at a the launch of Shami Chakrabati’s inquiry into antisemitism, accusing her of working “hand in hand” with the media. Labour Against the Witch-Hunt, a campaign group set up to protest against expulsions, turned out to support Wadsworth at the hearing in Westminster. Several people shouted: “Free Palestine,” as the MPs walked past. Berger said the MPs who had joined Smeeth were “looking for action” against antisemitism. “Warm words are nice, but in and of themselves they are not enough, and that’s why we’re here with our colleague Ruth Smeeth. She has an incredible amount of support,” she said.MPs said they had decided to support Smeeth because she had initially been told by the party she would be responsible for her own security walking to the hearing.
Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, has said the party is investigating the conduct of some members of the Liverpool Wavertree branch over what he said was “bullying” of the local MP, Luciana Berger. A motion of no-confidence in Berger over claims she had been disloyal to Jeremy Corbyn which had been due to be debated by the local party was withdrawn on Friday amid a row over antisemitism.Local members had told the Guardian that one of Berger’s critics had posted on Facebook that the MP should be “exposed for the disruptive Zionist she is”, and that evidence of antisemitism had undermined what some viewed as legitimate criticism. But in a statement released on Sunday, the executive of the Liverpool Wavertree constituency Labour party rejected accusations of political bullying, and said claims of antisemitism were a “false and slanderous accusation”.
Hurrache wrote: » Everyone ignoring the recording at Labour meetings that I mentioned more than once?
MrMusician18 wrote: » You can see the beauty of the tactic. If it's successful it will get rid of Corbyn and split his base leaving space for the centre to take control of the party again.
prawnsambo wrote: » So you're saying that it has been a problem for years? And that's some sort of excuse for continuing to ignore it?
Bambi wrote: » Onus is on the accuser to provide evidence of the accusation, but you know that.
oscarBravo wrote: » Maybe instead of rummaging around for arguments in favour of our preferred conclusions, we should examine the facts. If some members of the party are claiming there is institutional anti-semitism, then either (a) there is, or (b) they're lying about it in order to further an agenda. If you wholeheartedly believe (b) to be true, there's an onus to disprove (a) - and I'm seeing a lot more of people arguing for (b) than producing evidence against (a).
MrMusician18 wrote: » Or they could be exaggerating? You can't claim this abuse is institutional, but have kept quiet for years. Unless they were complicit in the cover up?
Leroy42 wrote: » I always find this argument amazing.LibDems are busted because, as a junior partner in a coalition government they clearly got taken advantage of. But Blair, and Labour, brought the UK into a war the majority of the UK did not want. The Tories are now in charge of probably the most dysfunctional government in UK history. Even staunch Brexiteers claim that they are making a pig ears of the whole thing, with the line that Brexit would be easy only for TM etc. Yet they continue to keep the main support. It really makes no sense so I put the aversion to the LibDems as little more that party loyalty dressed up as some stand up against lies.
The party’s collective failure to take a lead and provide sufficiently strong, coherent opposition to Tory government policy on the UK’s relationship with Europe, with all the adverse implications this poses for the working people of this constituency, is a betrayal of the Labour interest and Labour’s internationalist principles.UK Independent
Baron de Charlus wrote: » Mod Note Have created a new thread since a lot of the discussion on this news isn't Brexit related
MrMusician18 wrote: » Shouldn't we be equally suspicious of Jews and non Jews who have been members of the labour party for years and decades claiming that there is now institutional anti semitism within the labour party, but have kept quiet for years?. Handily enough at the very same time someone they despise is the leader of the Labour party. Convenient eh?! And to add to our suspicions, these same people have tried everything to get rid of Corbyn before and since. I'm not saying that there are no anti semetic members of labour but it's as plain as day this "anti semitism scandal" is a tactic to oust Corbyn. If Starmer was made leader tomorrow, the institutional anti semitism would be forgotten about.
MrMusician18 wrote: » Shouldn't we be equally suspicious of Jews and non Jews who have been members of the labour party for years and decades claiming that there is now institutional anti semitism within the labour party, but have kept quiet for years?.
Bambi wrote: » Yeah, if people keep saying something then it's probably true. Personal opinion: It's just blaggarding, it's the only thing they have left that sticks to Corbyn. Corbyns been in charge for three years, if Labour is institutionally anti-Semitic then it was going on long before his watch and these MP's didn't raise it. Labour does have a problem it that a lot of it's Muslim voters and members who hold values that are at odds with any Liberal Party. But these MPs did not see that as a problem any more than Corbyn did.
