• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Jeremy Corbyn

Templeton Peck said:
Who mentioned forced repatriation? I don't recall Livingstone saying all Jews should be sent somewhere else to live.
Click to expand...

I would call the movement of a country and its people, in particular Jewish people, to somewhere else forced repatriation, wouldn't you? After all that is what Shah agreed with.
 
I think all those people who use social media to call for Muslims to go back home islamaphobic. I think those who link Hitler with The Jewish people trying to find safe haven after centuries of persecution anti-semetic. I think those who use negative stereotypes about Jewish people as "secretly in power and influence as anti-semetic and I think those that stereotype Islam as a religion of hate as islamaphobes.

I think people who criticise Iraeli government policy against Palastinans are right. I think people who criticise those who commit acts of terror in the name of Islam are right.

It really isn't that hard to seperate genuine criticism from prejudice yet so many seem to find that difficult.
 
Last edited:
Johnny75 said:
I would call the movement of a country and its people, in particular Jewish people, to somewhere else forced repatriation, wouldn't you? After all that is what Shah agreed with.
Click to expand...

1. Jews live all over the world. As far as I am aware, Shah was not saying they should all be rounded up and placed somewhere against their will. That would be anti-semitic.
2. The meme in question was a comment on the closeness of the political relationship between Israel and the USA. A valid point held by millions whether you agree with it nor not. She was not literally suggesting the population of Israel be moved from one place to another. The meme was certainly anti-Israel (and US) but anti-semitic? No.
 
So do you need to include all Jews to be anti-Semitic? I'm fairly sure Hitler wanted repatriation for German Jews was he not being anti-Semitic?

I go back to my original point if you cannot see how those comments and Livingstones comments are not anti-Semitic you have an issue you should seek reeducation on.

I can now see why there is a problem in the Labour Party if members such as yourself hold these views.
 
Johnny75 said:
So do you need to include all Jews to be anti-Semitic?

I go back to my original point if you cannot see how those comments and Livingstones comments are not anti-Semitic you have an issue you should seek reeducation on.

I can now see why there is a problem in the Labour Party if members such as yourself hold these views.
Click to expand...


This is what I think anti-semitism is: 'Hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group.'

If you can show me where Shah and Livingstone have shown this I'll happily call them out for it. FWIW I have no love for Livingstone and don't know enough about Shah to have any kind of opinion. My concern is that people are trying to make people racist when they may not be and I have to wonder if this is out of an honorable stance on racism or a chance to rubbish 'lefties' and by extension, Corbyn.
 
Here's quite a balanced article TP in which Shah and Lingstone's comments are analysed:

http://www.vox.com/2016/4/29/11526516/anti-semitism-labour-jeremy-corbyn-ken-livingstone

It shows Shah agreeing with a post stating Hitler was right. And then Livingstone also references Hitler and as TSB points out the history of Hitler needs to be taken into account at that point as Livingstone would've known. It is not unreasonable to conclude both parties have displayed anti-Semitic attitudes and their comments prove this.

The Gaurdian's timeline is also pretty good here

And a 3rd Councillor now suspended over anti-Semitic remarks details here

To question people's stance over this is pretty poor form.
 
Two more racist Labour councillors suspended today, which brings the total of anti-Semitic incidents to 14 since Corbyn took over. But of course it is all the fault of the Blairites.
 
A lot of the stuff happened before Corbyn took over. So you could say those within the party that want Corbyn out are "finding" things to help them.

Finding of course means saved and used when the time is right.

Just to clarify I do not agree with the views of those being suspended.
 
FrankMunro-371 said:
Two more racist Labour councillors suspended today, which brings the total of anti-Semitic incidents to 14 since Corbyn took over. But of course it is all the fault of the Blairites.
Click to expand...

This kind of nonsense doesn't help. Its not all about party politics but about those voted in having some fairly appalling views and why they have them.
 
Johnny75 said:
Here's quite a balanced article TP in which Shah and Lingstone's comments are analysed:

http://www.vox.com/2016/4/29/11526516/anti-semitism-labour-jeremy-corbyn-ken-livingstone

It shows Shah agreeing with a post stating Hitler was right. And then Livingstone also references Hitler and as TSB points out the history of Hitler needs to be taken into account at that point as Livingstone would've known. It is not unreasonable to conclude both parties have displayed anti-Semitic attitudes and their comments prove this.

The Gaurdian's timeline is also pretty good here

And a 3rd Councillor now suspended over anti-Semitic remarks details here

To question people's stance over this is pretty poor form.
Click to expand...

The one thing I would dispute is that there is a "growing problem" - you could take a snapshot of any time in the last 20 or 30 years and find similar views being expressed (mainly those that Shah expressed) which have been largely ignored because the difference between anti-zionism and anti-semitism has proven to be a difficult topic to define. The only difference is that we have a Labour Party leader who has long been openly sympathetic to the cause of the Palestinian people, something that has not been the case with previous Labour Leaders.

I don't believe that there is a large group of people within or associated with the Labour Party that are anti-semetic but there is a a large group of people who are more sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinian people than they are of Israel and this is where is gets difficult - at what point does criticism of Israel move away from fair comment into something more troubling. I don't think the current media furore is doing much to help that debate but anyone who attaches Hitler to Judaism deserves every bit of criticism they get.

The picture that got Naz Shah into trouble was produced by a Jewish blogger

Also, this blogger, provides a largely detailed description of Ken Livingstone which (sort of) supports him. However, whether he was being anti-semetic, anti-zionist or just a gobshite makes no difference to me. His intervention was unhelpful, factually flawed and repulsive.
 
Johnny75 said:
This kind of nonsense doesn't help. Its not all about party politics but about those voted in having some fairly appalling views and why they have them.
Click to expand...

It is not nonsense, both Livingstone and Abbott have blamed the current problem on Blairites. Their words not mine.
 
FrankMunro-371 said:
It is not nonsense, both Livingstone and Abbott have blamed the current problem on Blairites. Their words not mine.
Click to expand...

You're using it as a clumsy attack on the Labour Party and that is both tawdry and crass. It deflects from the issues at hand and is a pathetic attempt at points scoring and shows TP's uneasiness at people scoring points or raising racist/ anti-Semitic points.

It degrades the conversation and to hide behind others words shows you up for the empty vessel people accuse you of being.
 
The labour party is in melt down. If only Corbyn had stuck to his principles with the EU. At least then he would have credibility. He is in danger of losing that with the argument re Livingstone and Zionism \ anti Semitic behavior.
 
Cyber-_-man said:
The labour party is in melt down. If only Corbyn had stuck to his principles with the EU. At least then he would have credibility. He is in danger of losing that with the argument re Livingstone and Zionism \ anti Semitic behavior.
Click to expand...

The Labour Party elected a leader who said he considered terrorists such as Hamas as friends. And now we have the racism problems within the party. Decent Labour supporters, of which there are many, must be aghast at what Corbyns election as leader has brought to their party.
 
Decent Tory supporters, of which there are many, must be aghast at Cameron's sucking up to the Saud regime?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Del Woppio
Top strikers - the early years.
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
Deutsch Wolf
Deutsch Wolf
D
They Wore The Shirt launch
Replies
0
Views
2K
dwarfio
D
Back
Top