BS: Labour party discussion

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 21 Oct 16 - 02:20 PM

You should be, and indeed are, sorry, Professor.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Oct 16 - 02:32 PM

Jim,
"I have quoted the entire NEC, Sadiq Khan,Chakrabarti and numerous other prominent Labour members saying it was a serious problem."
No they haven't - you are lying.

No. You are. and here are the quotes to prove it.

Labour List, " anti-Semitism within the Labour Party. The entire NEC recognises the seriousness of this issue" and "The NEC are appalled by recent cases of anti-Semitic abuse. "

Not much scope for misquote there Jim!

Daily Mirror,
"Mr Khan has vowed to spearhead a drive to stop the party being anti-semitic,"

Quite unequivocal Jim!

Chakrabarti told a Ch4 News presenter that her report acknowledged that Labour had a serious problem with anti semitism

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Oct 16 - 02:38 PM

Steve,
Now tell me, Keith: are you saying that Naz Shah, whilst not having worked on the report but still a member of the committee, was party to that unanimous verdict

No. She did not work on the report, but she did remain a member of the committee and they unanimously endorsed the report.

Of course you can't name them. But you can throw smears around just the same

I can not name them, but the Party leadership can and I see no reason to assume they are all lying about it.
Your case does not stand unless the whole Party leadership are lying, and that is ridiculous.

Why should anyone believe you over them Steve?

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Raggytash
Date: 21 Oct 16 - 03:13 PM

Astonishing, the professor is even denying the contents of one of his own posts.

Not too surprised really.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Oct 16 - 03:44 PM

"The entire NEC recognises the seriousness of this issue" a"
Recognises the seriousness of the charges having been made.
None of these charges have been confirmed by enquiry
Not much scope for misquote there Jim!2 Dosn't stop you from misinterpreting it
Were these charges confirmed by a properly carried out enquiry?
You can carry out this for as long as you like but until you describe this antisemitism it remains unproven
IF YOU HAVE A SHRED OF HONESTY AND DECENCY IN YOU, ANSWER THIS - IF YOU ACCUSED SOMEONE OF A CRIME IN ANY COURT IN BRITAIN BUT REFUSED TO DESCRIBE THAT CRIME - HOW WOULD ANY JURY REACT
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Oct 16 - 04:54 PM

So, Keith, Naz Shah, one of your Labour Three on the committee, took no part. Did she vote? Put her name to the report? Yes or no, Keith? If she took no part in producing the report and didn't vote, then it wasn't a unanimous vote of the WHOLE committee then, was it, Keith? It was a unanimous vote of six Tories plus one SNP plus TWO Labour (both anti-Corbynistas, lest we forget). But, Keith, you said THREE Labour, didn't you? Can you clear this up? Were you having another Wheatcroft moment (yet again), or do you actually know that Naz had a vote? Cards on the table here - I don't know the answer to that. But I can probably find out. If I can be arsed. I'm really trying to be fair here. If you can prove that she voted for the report, so that THREE Labour members voted for it, I promise I'll never mention the thing again.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Oct 16 - 06:21 PM

Cor, I must be mad. I've just looked up who was there at the select committee meeting that "unanimously" approved the report. Here ya go:

Formal Minutes

Thursday 13 October 2016

Members present:

James Berry

Mr David Burrowes

Nusrat Ghani

Mr Ranil Jayawardena

Tim Loughton

Mr Chuka Umunna

Mr David Winnick

Tim Loughton was called to the chair.

Draft Report (Antisemitism in the UK), proposed by the Chair, brought up and read.

Ordered, That the draft Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph.

Paragraphs 1 to 131 read and agreed to.

Annex agreed to.

Resolved, That the Report be the Tenth Report of the Committee to the House.

Ordered, That the Chair make the Report to the House.

Ordered, That embargoed copies of the Report be made available, in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order No. 134.

*****

Why, Keith, only seven out of the ten members you claimed! Only two of them Labour, not the three you claimed! And, strike me down, no mention of Naz Shah! Dear me, she wasn't there after all! Better review your posts, Keith. Yes indeedie, you've had another Wheatcroft moment!

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 03:16 AM

Jim who was accused of anything in "any court"? - Answer: Nobody.

The normal course of events is as follows:

1. An "offence" is alleged and reported
2. The matter is investigated
3. Substance in the allegation is either found or it is not found
4. The matter is taken further and the guilty punished

As far as the make up of committees goes I find it rather strange that Steve Shaw says that a Committee investigating the behaviour of Labour Party members that is 100% made up of Labour Party members is less biased than a Parliamentary Committee investigating the same thing that is made up on Members of a number of different political parties.

The thing that Steve Shaw denies however is that both Committees found that there was a problem with "anti-Semitism" within the Labour Party that required to be addressed. Two "Inquiries" commissioned by the Labour Party also found the same but went on to add that that "anti-Semitism" was not endemic or institutionalised - that does not mean in anyway to say that it isn't there as Shaw and Carroll attempt to claim.

The unbiased Labour NEC ordered that everything be kept secret, the names of those accused, what they were accused of and the results of any investigations made into those instances.

On the Shami Chakrabarti Inquiry which was supposed to have been an independent Inquiry. How on earth could it have been independent if the first thing the person conducting the Inquiry does is to join the Labour Party? The next thing to happen in this lady's career is that after literally weeks as a member of the Labour Party she finds herself elevated to the House of Lords and subsequently is given a Shadow Cabinet Job.

What we do know is as follows:
1. Over 50 members of the Labour Party were suspended - names of about half a dozen leaked, some of whom still remain suspended.
2. At least four Constituency Labour Party Committees are still currently suspended over allegations made against them.
3. Baroness Royall's Inquiry detailed 11 recommendations that required urgent and immediate action by Labour's NEC
4. The newly created Baroness Chakrabarti's Inquiry detailed 7 recommendations, among them was the recommendation that no-one should be banned for life from the Labour Party irrespective of what they had said. That the date of submission of her report would create a watershed after which no instance predating the submission of the report would be investigated by Labour's NEC.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 04:15 AM

"Jim who was accused of anything in "any court"? - Answer: Nobody."
It was merely an analogy to see how you stand on natural justice
You fail totally - you always have - it really is not your thing
For something to be proven, you make an accusation - you provide full evidence and the rest of us decides whether it is convincing.
You haven't and it isn't.
To date, what we know about these accusations is that they are totally without precedence in the Labour Party, they started to appear within weeks of Labour restating its support for B.D.S at a time when the Labour was embroiled in a leadership battle
The only "antisemitism" to have surfaced is the NEW ANTISEMITISM - described by the committee as "new racism" which also has not been specified, but is almost certainly the "criticism of Israel that has been demanded by the Israeli Justice Minister.
Most of the accusers have been found to have direct links to the Israeli propaganda machine - others were participants in the "oust Corbyn" campaign - many all are both.
Until someone produces enough actual examples of real antisemitism to make a case, all the accusations in the world - hill of beans and all that.   
They are unproven and extremely unlikely accusations - nothing more.
Now - tell me again - what are these cases of antisemitism, who committed them and how many where they - whoops, sorry - you haven't told us yet, have you NOR WILL YOU, BECAUSE THEY ARE FIGMENTS OF THE ISRAELI MACHINE'S PROPAGANDA TO PREVENT B.D.S. - THEY ALWAYS HAVE BEEN.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 04:17 AM


Astonishing, the professor is even denying the contents of one of his own posts.

I am not denying the content of the report quoted in my post.
If you look at the post you will see that it was about something else.
Why not reproduce it Rag?

Jim,
"The entire NEC recognises the seriousness of this issue" a"
Recognises the seriousness of the charges having been made.

No. The "issue" was and is Labour anti-Semitism.
You are misquoting, not me. Read the original.

Were these charges confirmed by a properly carried out enquiry?

Yes, By the Home Affairs Select Committee Report, and Chakrabarti stated that her report acknowledges that Labour has a serious problem with anti-Semitism.

Shah did not work on the report, but as a member of the committee she endorsed its findings.
However, that means nothing because she is a consummate liar who will say anything for political advantage, according to you!

But, Keith, you said THREE Labour, didn't you?
Yes. There were and are 3 Labour MPs on the committee.
There were 6 Tories, but now only 5.
There is also 1 SNP member.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 04:39 AM

Tim Loughton MP, Acting Chair of the Committee, said:

"It is symbolic of the importance of this deeply felt issue that, despite the contentious, political nature of much of the debate, this report — which does not pull its punches — was agreed unanimously and without division by the Committee's Members, across the parties.
https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/home-affairs-committee/news-parliament-2015/antisemitism-report-published-16-17/

Membership - Home Affairs Committee
Yvette Cooper MP was elected as Chair of the Home Affairs Committee on Wednesday 19 October 2016.

The remaining members of the Committee were formally appointed on 8 July 2015, except Naz Shah and Chuka Umunna who were appointed on 26 October 2015.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Raggytash
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 05:04 AM

Yes you have quoted a report professor but you haven't told us why anti-Semitism should be considered different from any other racism.

Most people, yourself excluded of course, find any racism unacceptable. Are you suggesting that some racism is acceptable but anti-Semitism is not.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 05:50 AM

"No. The "issue" was and is Labour anti-Semitism."
Prove it Keith
You can do it easily by producing the examples of that Anitsemitism instead of yyour antisemitic claim that all the Jews in the Labour Party have kept silent about it
WHAT IS THIS ****** ANTISEMITISM YOU ARE CAINING IS RIFE IN TH LABOUR PARTY _ WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE OF IT?
The only genuine antisemitism to have emerged in this affair is your 'Jewish Plot'
Why should anybody take notice of somebody wh#o would make such an accusation - or the mates who back him up?
Until you produce it, it is as real as The Loch Ness Monster - go count the numbe of people who have sen that.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 06:02 AM

"Shah did not work on the report, but as a member of the committee she endorsed its findings."

So let's see. She didn't go to the meetings that worked on the report, but she popped her head round the door just as they were voting and shouted "Yeah, whatevvah you're on about, I'll endorse it!"   

When Keith were a little lad, he told his mates that he wanted to be a comedian. Well, as we can see, he made it, but they're not laughing now.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 07:22 AM

And I just ruined that bloody joke by leaving a bit out. I blame Naz Shah, the whole of the NEC, Ruth Smeeth, Chakrabarti, the bloody EUMC, AIPAC, Blair..

Oh sorry, Teribus. I forgot. Everything's Maggie's fault!!

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 08:56 AM

"Yvette Cooper MP was elected as Chair of the Home Affairs Committee on Wednesday 19 October 2016."
Yvette Cooper is yet another supporter of the Israeli regime - how much proof do we need that this is an Israeli stunt Keith
"As opposed, Yvette Cooper presented pro-Israel and pro-peace stances at the same time, showing serious commitment to the latter. Unlike others, she dared to speak the truth on both issues, i.e. the Israeli-Palestinian conundrum and Anti-Semitism. Most importantly, she praised the work of CST (Community Security Trust, NDR), a charity which provides security for Jewish areas across Britain. Her standpoint was more or less the closest to that of Ed Miliband."
"The right stance is Yvette Cooper's"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 03:47 PM

Rag,
Yes you have quoted a report professor but you haven't told us why anti-Semitism should be considered different from any other racism.

I keep telling you that I do not think it should be considered differently, unlike you Rag.

Are you suggesting that some racism is acceptable but anti-Semitism is not.

Of course not, and neither did the report.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 03:54 PM

"No. The "issue" was and is Labour anti-Semitism."
Prove it Keith

Certainly. Here are the quotes again.

"The NEC are appalled by recent cases of anti-Semitic abuse. Anti-Semitism has no place in the Labour Party and is contrary to everything we stand for. "

"... anti-Semitism within the Labour Party. The entire NEC recognises the seriousness of this issue and is committed to addressing all the issues raised by these inquiries."
http://labourlist.org/2016/05/alice-perrys-nec-report-corbyn-fighting-prejudice-and-listening-to-voters-online/

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 04:00 PM

Steve,
So let's see. She didn't go to the meetings that worked on the report, but she popped her head round the door just as they were voting and shouted "Yeah, whatevvah you're on about, I'll endorse it!"   

I assumed that she read it Steve. Why ever would you assume that she did not?
Tim Loughton MP, Acting Chair of the Committee, said:
"It is symbolic of the importance of this deeply felt issue that, despite the contentious, political nature of much of the debate, this report — which does not pull its punches — was agreed unanimously and without division by the Committee's Members, across the parties.
https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/home-affairs-committee/news-parliament-2015/antisemitism-report-published-16-17/

Shah was and is a committee member.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 04:07 PM

Jim, completing your quote,
" Her standpoint was more or less the closest to that of Ed Miliband.
The above underpins how much distrust between Labour (and particularly its left) and the Jewish Community exists at the moment. Ed Miliband took the right approach to the problem: with regards to Israel, he rightly showed criticism of the Israeli government and marked the distinction between the country and the government who runs it.

So she is not "yet another supporter of the Israeli regime" and you have provided no evidence that any other Labour member is.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Oct 16 - 05:04 PM

So, Keith, let's drop the bullshit. Did Naz Shah endorse that report or not? Actively, in person, etc.? Put her moniker to it? Yes or no, Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 04:22 AM

"So she is not "yet another supporter of the Israeli regime" "
She and her husband, Ed Balls are members of 'Friends of Israel', have attended their events and have spoken for them - that is the support I was referring to.
She has a direct interest in Israel and cannot in any way be described as neutral on the topic - she should not have been part of any decision making on this matter.
YoU talk about the Chakrabatti enquiry being flawed - given the makeup of this one, the result was a forgone conclusion before it started.
And we still don't know what this "NEW RACISM" Labour is accused of is.
]Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 05:06 AM

Steve,
So, Keith, let's drop the bullshit. Did Naz Shah endorse that report or not? Actively, in person, etc.? Put her moniker to it? Yes or no, Keith?

All I know is that she is a member of the committee and the acting chair said it "was agreed unanimously and without division by the Committee's Members, across the parties. "

What does that say to you Steve?

Jim,
she and her husband, Ed Balls are members of 'Friends of Israel',

So what? People do not leave and join according to the government in power there. It is not a political organisation in that sense.

The article you linked to stated that she was like Ed Miliband who "took the right approach to the problem: with regards to Israel, he rightly showed criticism of the Israeli government and marked the distinction between the country and the government who runs it."

Remember Jim?

she should not have been part of any decision making on this matter.

She was not. She certainly had nothing to do with the report.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 05:44 AM

Your quote stated clearly and categorically that:

"Jewish Labour MPs have been subject to appalling levels of abuse, including antisemitic death threats from individuals purporting to be supporters of Mr Corbyn. Clearly, the Labour Leader is not directly responsible for abuse committed in his name, but we believe that his lack of consistent leadership on this issue, AND HIS RELUCTANCE TO SEPARATE ANTI-SEMITISM FROM OTHER FORMS OF RACISM, has created what some have referred to as a 'safe space' for those with vile attitudes towards Jewish people"

There is clearly a desire in the report to have anti-Semitism treated in a different way to other racism, to separate anti-Semitism from other racism.

That is quite obvious from YOUR quote above.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 06:02 AM

That says to me that you did not read my verbatim quote from the minutes of the meeting which listed the signatories. Naz was not among them. So what do you think happpened, Keith? That they tidied up the loose ends then gave Naz a quick bell, Naz who had nothing to do with the proceedings, to ask if she agreed to the report? What on earth is the matter with you, Keith? 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 06:16 AM

"So what? People do not leave and join according to the government in power there. It is not a political organisation in that sense."
This affair has been instigated by Israel - anybody sympathetic to that regime should be treated with suspicion and regarded as biased - the whole panel was made up of anti-Corbybinites anyway.
Th whole thing was rigged and we still don't don know what this "NEW RACISM" that Labour has been accused of so we have to assume that it is the Israeli "JUSTICE" (sic) Minister's "criticism of Israel".
The Israeli regime are not only allowed to attack a respectable and compassionate British Party, but now they are allowed to influence Parliamentary inquiries.
There goes the neighborhood - in a big way!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 06:29 AM

By the way
You also name Chuka Umanna
These, from a statement from 'Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods' entitled, "Its Kosher to Boycott Israel;i Goods"
This whole enquirt was formed of Anti- Corbynite, Pro Israeli mmbers
Jim Carroll

CHUKA UMUNNA SILENT AS LABOUR JEWS CONDEMN HIS ANTISEMITISM SMEAR CAMPAIGN
Posted on 12 July 2016 by jews4big | Leave a comment
Last weekend more than 40 Jewish members of Labour Party organisations around the UK wrote to MP Chuka Umunna condemning his cynical deployment of antisemitism allegations as part of the witch hunt against Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and other supporters of justice for Palestine.
Umunna has not deigned to respond. But the statement put out by Free Speech on Israel, which organised the letter, still merits attention.

LABOUR JEWS CONDEMN UMUNNA'S ANTISEMITISM SMEAR CAMPAIGN
Umunna accused of "weaponising false accusations of antisemitism"
Public grilling of Corbyn part of "internal vendetta"
Smear campaign detracts from combatting racism
July 9 – Jewish members of the Labour Party have condemned Chuka Umunna MP for using false allegations of antisemitism to attack Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters in the Momentum group.
In an open letter to the MP for Streatham, a former Shadow Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, more than 40 members of party organisations all over the country say:
"We were shocked to witness the cynical manner in which you weaponised false allegations of antisemitism to launch an attack on the leader of the Labour party and on Momentum at the session of the Home Affairs Committee on Monday July 4th."
They accuse him of pursuing "an internal Labour Party vendetta in a public forum", cynically drawing attention away from important recommendations, contained in a recently published report by former Liberty director Shami Chakrabarti, on making the party more effective in combatting all forms of racism including antisemitism.
The letter urges Umunna to "concentrate your considerable energy on working to unite the Party so that we can displace this destructive Tory Government as soon as possible."
Free Speech on Israel (FSOI) is a network of labour movement, Green and trade union activists in the UK, mainly Jewish, who came together in April 2016 to counter attempts by pro-Israel right wingers to brand the campaign for justice for Palestinians as antisemitic. It broadly supports the conclusions of the Charabarti inquiry into antisemism and other forms of racism, to which it made this submission.
FSOI draws its support from members of the following Jewish groups:
Jews for Justice for Palestinians (JfJfP)    http://jfjfp.com/
Independent Jewish Voices (IJV)    http://ijv.org.uk/
Jewish Socialist Group (JSG)    http://www.jewishsocialist.org.uk/
International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network (IJAN-UK)    http://www.ijan.org/
Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods (J-BIG)    https://jews4big.wordpress.com/
Jewdas/Young Jewish Left    http://jewdas.org/

Dear Chuka Umunna,
We write as Jews who are members of the Labour Party. Some of us are also members of Momentum. We were shocked to witness the cynical manner in which you weaponised false allegations of antisemitism to launch an attack on the leader of the Labour party and on Momentum at the session of the Home Affairs Committee on Monday July 4th.
Some of the comments made at the press conference launching the Chakrabarti inquiry on June 30 by Mr Wadsworth (not a representative of Momentum as you claimed) were rude and unwarranted, however there is no evidence they were motivated by antisemitism. Wadsworth was clearly angry that the Daily Telegraph journalist had shared one of his leaflets with Labour MP Ruth Smeeth. He makes no reference to Ms Smeeth's religion and asserts he had no knowledge she was Jewish and there is no evidence that this is not true. We have searched assiduously, including scrutinising the video footage of the incident, but have found no evidence of antisemitism, as opposed to incivility, in his words or actions.
The questions about Mr Wadsworth had been asked and answered several times by the time you asked your questions. Quite evidently your questions were not designed to elicit information but to pursue an internal Labour Party vendetta in a public forum. This relentless concentration on a confection designed to damage the Labour Party inhibits proper discussion on an important report into how the Labour Party can be more effective in combatting all forms of racism including antisemitism.
In your questioning you repeatedly employed guilt by association. For instance, you made reference to David Watson's case. This is still under investigation and, as your legal background should have informed you, the allegations against him currently remain untested and unproven. These are allegations that, had you performed due diligence before asking your questions, you would have known are based on flimsy, if not fabricated, evidence.
We have been quite unable to detect any hint of animosity towards Jews in any of Watson's social media posts. His critique of Zionism is one that many Jews share, in particular that the political Zionism dominant in Israel today is a racist ideology, both discriminating against Palestinians and stereotyping Jews as incapable of living alongside non-Jews in diverse societies. To then suggest that anyone who shares a platform with Watson is implicitly condoning antisemitism, and further that Jeremy Corbyn is answerable for all events organised by Momentum, is absurd.
You cite the example of the Oxford University Labour Club, and claim that "time and time again in these incidents of activity" in which offence is caused "to and against Jewish people Momentum seems to pop up quite frequently". Yet Baroness Royall found no evidence of institutional antisemitism in OULC, and reported on at least one case of serious false allegations of antisemitism which had been reported to the police.
We ask you to cease your relentless undermining of the Labour Party. It would be more appropriate for you to concentrate your considerable energy on working to unite the Party so that we can displace this destructive Tory Government as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely,

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 12:08 PM

British author Howard Jacobson on Anti-Semitism and the Labour party

To the question posed by the parliamentary committee last week, as to whether Shami Chakrabarti's soft inquiry into antisemitism in the Labour party was a whitewash for which Corbyn brazenly rewarded her with a peerage, or evidence of a deep-seated reluctance to take the subject seriously, there is unlikely to be a satisfactory answer.

Where people are convinced of their own rectitude – and Corbyn and Chakrabarti belong to the more un-self-questioning wing of British politics – there is no separating what they know from what they don't want to know.

The Chakrabarti inquiry didn't fail, it was stillborn. Corbyn has always defended himself against the charge of antisemitism by protesting his freedom from all racisms – an insistence that feels like an evasion and blurs a crucial distinction – and the moment Chakrabarti widened the terms of her inquiry likewise, there was no hope for it.

The Guardian

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 12:44 PM

There's no hope for Howard Jacobson either. Just as wrong-headed as you and Keith. Who will you think of next? By the way, don't go thinking that the fact he's in the Guardian in any way legitimises him. The Guardian fearlessly allows commentators from all parts of the spectrum.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 01:05 PM

But, thank God, it hasn't allowed Bubo.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 01:09 PM

Rag,
There is clearly a desire in the report to have anti-Semitism treated in a different way to other racism, to separate anti-Semitism from other racism.

If you read the previous sentences, you will see what they mean.
Either way, I had no part in formulating the report.

Steve, all I know is that Shah is a member of the committee and the acting chair said it "was agreed unanimously and without division by the Committee's Members, across the parties. "

Jim,
This affair has been instigated by Israel -

Complete bollocks Jim! All the accusations came from within Labour.

anybody sympathetic to that regime should be treated with suspicion and regarded as biased

No Labour MP is sympathetic to the current Right Wing regime.

The Israeli regime are not only allowed to attack a respectable and compassionate British Party, but now they are allowed to influence Parliamentary inquiries.

Your delusional conspiracy theories suggest you are completely deranged Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 01:25 PM

Never mind "all you know." Try looking into it. You won't like what you find, but the process will help to make an honest man of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 01:44 PM

"Complete bollocks Jim! All the accusations came from within Labour."
Good old "bollocks" again and no response to the the masses of evidence oyu have been given - or all the Jewish members inside and outside Britain who have said excactly the same thing
Well - we know your antisemitic vies on Jews who don't toe the line - they get blamed for atrocities instigated by the regime.
"No Labour MP is sympathetic to the current Right Wing regime."
You have to be joking - you have had dozens of example of those who are - including your friend Smoothie Smeethiepoos, Chuka Umunna, Ed Balls and Y'vette Cooper
Jim Carroll

LABOUR JEWS ASSERT: The Labour Party does not have a 'problem with Jews'
We are witnessing a wave of orchestrated hysteria over claims that the Labour Party is rife with antisemitism and has a 'problem with Jews.' This is not true. Yes there is indeed a problem. The problem is that some people – Jewish and otherwise, inside and outside the party – use allegations of anti-Semitism as a stick to beat the Corbyn leadership, regardless of the damage caused.
Jeremy Corbyn and others have done their best to respond, rightly asserting their impeccable anti-racist credentials, treating specific allegations of antisemitism seriously, investigating them and taking appropriate measures. This is no more and no less than should happen with allegations of racism or discrimination of any kind.
But this has not satisfied those sections of the pro-Israel lobby orchestrating the attacks. They have targeted Malia Bouattia, the first Muslim woman to be elected president of the National Union of Students, on the thinnest of pretexts and despite her consistently principled stance. Another victim has been Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) founder member and lifelong anti-racist Tony Greenstein, suspended from the Labour Party without even being informed of the charges against him. Now Naz Shah has been suspended on the basis of a few inappropriate social media posts, which she evidently regrets – swiftly followed by Ken Livingstone for having the temerity to defend her. (Regarding Shah's comments, read more here, and this background to Livingstone's comments on Zionism & Hitler)
Those who are making allegations of anti-Semitism are talking a different language. It is not anti-Semitism but anti-Zionism that is their concern. It is opposition to Israeli racism not anti-Jewish racism that concerns them.
This campaign of vilification is intended to undermine Labour's new leaders, because of their commendable record of supporting justice for Palestine. The wider aim is to crush support for the solidarity movement, which is working to achieve for Palestinians basic rights that are endorsed by international legal bodies.
As the Jewish Socialist Group has stated on its website: 'A very small number of such cases seem to be real instances of antisemitism. Others represent genuine criticism of Israeli policy and support for Palestinian rights, but expressed in clumsy and ambiguous language, which may unknowingly cross a line into antisemitism. Further cases are simply forthright expressions of support for Palestinian rights, which condemn Israeli government policy and aspects of Zionist ideology, and have nothing whatsoever to do with antisemitism.'                        

As Labour and Trade Union activists, we condemn this witch hunt and assert the right to campaign in solidarity with all oppressed people, including Palestinians. We: – Reiterate our strong commitment to combating all forms of racism and to defending those who are subjected to it. We actively oppose Islamophobia, prejudice against migrants and racism against ethnic and religious minorities, including anti-Jewish racism.
– Reject the suggestion that questioning the Zionist ideology of the Israeli state and its supporters – both Jews and non-Jews – entails antisemitic prejudice. On the contrary, campaigning to end the injustices inflicted by Israel on the Palestinian people is in the very best traditions of the British Labour movement.
– Urge the Labour Party establishment to listen to the many Jews who are outraged by the lie that Jews are not safe in the Labour Party;
cease victimising those who work for justice for Palestine;
adhere to fair practice and transparency when investigating charges against members;
call to order Labour Party members who bring the party into disrepute by spreading calumnies about widespread antisemitism in the party."
Jews & friends who say antizionism is NOT antisemitism

NO ANTISEMITIC PROBLEM

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 01:52 PM

"Your delusional conspiracy theories suggest you are completely deranged Jim."
No Keith - your obsessively inhuman support for a regime that instigates hatred that leads to incidents like th celebrating of the death of a child who has been burned alive in an arson attack, and then going on to support that filmed celebration by suggesting that it didn't happen, sows a sickness of mind that is beyond belief.
Blaming "Jews" for the crimes of the establishment really doesn't help your case
Please deny this disgusting behaviour to give me a chance to link to it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 02:30 PM

Snd still we have no description of what particular brand of Antisemitism Labour is supposed to be guilty
Keith's Jewish politicians are keeping this one close to their chests, aren't they?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 04:15 PM

Your delusional conspiracy theories suggest you are completely deranged Jim.

I've been saying that for a long time - it is clearly evident by now.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Oct 16 - 04:28 PM

Jim,
No Keith - your obsessively inhuman support for a regime

I support no regime Jim. More desperate lies to smear me.

arson attack, and then going on to support that filmed celebration by suggesting that it didn't happen,

I suggested that the video showed nothing but an impossible to recognise photo, which is the absolute truth.

Blaming "Jews" for the crimes of the establishment really doesn't help your case
Please deny this disgusting behaviour to give me a chance to link to it.

Of course I deny your ludicrous lies and smears.
No need to link. Anyone reading this thread will also be reading the other, but i is probably just us by now.

Keith's Jewish politicians are keeping this one close to their chests, aren't they

I can hardly believe that you said that Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 12:26 PM

Some Labour Party discussion from a very prominent and long serving member, who even Jim can not link to the Israeli goverment!

"Labour has been infected by a "virus" of anti-Semitism, a former shadow cabinet minister has said.
Tristram Hunt said on Sunday evening that Jeremy Corbyn was "not doing enough" to tackle the problem."

"The Labour Party's relationship with the Jewish community is in real crisis and any hint of some kind of transactional deal with Shami and the leader's office will only sort of further distrust," he said. "We have a great history with the Jewish community in the UK and that is being put at risk"

"Shami had a real opportunity to deal with it and confront it and address it and that was a missed opportunity and we're still reaping the consequences of it."
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/labour-infected-with-anti-semitism-virus-says-former-shadow-cabinet-minister_uk_580dc39ee4b0fce107d12379

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 12:37 PM

Sounds like a a shturem in a gloz vaser to me, Professor.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Raggytash
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 12:51 PM

Would this be the same Tristram Hunt who resigned from labours front bench stating he had substantial political differences with Jeremy Corbyn?

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 12:51 PM

Hardly Greg,
This has been a huge issue for Labour for many months now.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 01:12 PM

"who even Jim can not link to the Israeli goverment!"
Beg pardon?
"Splits within the Labour party over the Palestinian question were laid bare last night as one of Ed Miliband's most senior frontbenchers invoked Winston Churchill in a passionate tribute to Israel.
Tristram Hunt, the shadow education secretary, praised the former prime minister's 1921 declaration that he had "full sympathy for Zionism". Speaking on a visit to Jerusalem while serving as colonial secretary, Churchill said that a Jewish national home in Palestine would be "a blessing to the whole world, a blessing to the Jewish race scattered all over the world and a blessing to Great Britain"."

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 01:16 PM

Whoops
Mustn't forget the link
LOVING ODE to ISRAEL
You really need to do your homework Keith
Thanks for yet another link to extreme Zionism - where shall I send the cheque?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 01:21 PM

This has been a huge issue for Labour for many months now.

Not so, Professor: this is a huge red herring that has been perpetuated for many months by the tabloid press and idiots like yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 01:32 PM

extreme Zionism

Putz!

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 01:51 PM

this is a huge red herring that has been perpetuated for many months by the tabloid press and idiots like yourself.

No, it has been reported by all the media including all the broadsheets and the broadcasters.
It has been "perpetuated" by the entire NEC, Sadiq Khan, 2 Labour enquiries one of which has caused even more contention, by Tristram Hunt who controversially thought it right that Israel was created as a Jewish homeland, a sentiment made reality by the United Nations, KEZIA Dugdale, the Scottish Labour leader, Jim Murphy the former Scottish Labour leader, and many others.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 02:17 PM

Spot on Greg. Keith, Greg was including under "idiots like you" those divisive Labour people who are deliberately undermining Corbyn and who have forgotten that they handed Cameron two elections on a plate.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 02:22 PM

"Israel was created as a Jewish homeland"

That's what Jew haters can't accept.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 02:23 PM

"Jim Murphy"
Former chairman of the Labour Friends of Israel - passionately opposed to the boycott
Next
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Oct 16 - 02:53 PM

Nobody apart from "ordinary" Jew-hater Keith and his two fiends have ever questioned The Jewish Homeland - your cowardly trolling accusations are about as valid as accusations of antisemitism aimed at the Labour Party - and every bit as unsubstantiated.
"Jim Murphy the former Scottish Labour leader"
And former chairman of Labour Friends of Israel
"From 1997 to 2001 Murphy was vice-chair of the Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) and then chair from 2001 to 2002. Murphy has described himself as a 'regular visitor' to Israel. One of his visits, in 2012, was paid for by the Maureen and David Garrard Foundation, which donated £1,570 to Murphy for the trip according to the Electoral Commission. [1] Formerly a donor to the Conservative party in the 1980s and 90s, Sir David Garrard is now a major donor to the Labour Party and has hosted LFI events. In 2005 Garrard was recommended for a peerage, however the Lord's Appointments Committee recommended against his appointment and that of three other Labour Party donors. The Metropolitan Police undertook an investigation as part of which, in May 2006, Garrard was interviewed under caution by the police. The Crown Prosecution Service ultimately determined that they lacked evidence to show that peerages had been awarded in exchange for donations.

LFI is one of the most influential groups in the Labour Party and is seen as a stepping-stone to the higher ranks of the Parliamentary Labour Party. During Operation Protective Edge, Murphy's website carried a statement on the fighting in Gaza. Although Murphy did criticize the comments of the Israeli interior minister (who stated that Israel would 'send Gaza back to the Middle Ages') he located the cause of the conflict, not in the illegal Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, but in the actions of Palestinian militants:"
JIM MURPHY'S 'GRIM RECORD'
"Putz!"
Don't know enough about Mr Hunt to know if your dscription of him is true, but his name is a delicious piece of Rhyming Slang
Jim Carroll