BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 05:50 AM

Jim,
It has been found that there is no major problem of Antisemitism in the Labour Party - two enquires both came to the same conclusion.

No Jim. Chakrabarti found lots and made many recommendations to deal with it.

This is what Labour List said about the other report,
"Oxford University Labour Club (OULC) does not have an "institutional" issue of anti-Semitism, according to an internal Labour inquiry – although the report's author has said the student body has a "clear cultural problem" around the topic.

Following today's meeting of the Labour National Executive Committee, an executive summary of Baroness Royall's investigation into anti-Semitism within OULC was published, including her recommendations for the party to consider. However, there are criticisms already that the full report is not being published." (Wonder why!!!)

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 06:03 AM

BBC 7 hours ago,
"This week's statement by Iain McNicol, general secretary of the Labour Party, was blunt: "There is no place for abuse of any kind in the party," he declared. "There is simply too much of it taking place and it needs to stop." "
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36898391

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 07:02 AM

"No Jim. Chakrabarti found lots"
Then you will be able to indicate any reference to numbers.
There have been no expulsions, no disciplining of individuals members and no reference that there is an extensive problem in the Labour Party - on the contrary, the only example of antisemitism in all this was by one named member who was attacking Israel for its murderous policy against the Palestinians; as Israel's defence for it's war crimes is to to claim that it is anti-semitic to criticise Israel about anything, this is understandable.
This is getting #like your "Irish hatred of the British" claim - you vehemently insisted that it wqas tehre yet refused to explain how it manifested itself.
Where are your examples of lots of anti-semiites in the Labour party - how many are there, who are they and what form does their anti-semitism take?
You refuse to respond to the numbers of claims of Israel's interference in British politics - so that one's sorted.
You refuse to respond to the exampl;es of Tory bullying and racism, which makes this simply a crusade against the Labour Party and a somewhat desperate one at that
THIS IS WHAT THIS IS REALLY ABOUT
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 09:11 AM

"This is what Labour List said about the other report, "Oxford University Labour Club (OULC) does not have an "institutional" issue of anti-Semitism, according to an internal Labour inquiry – although the report's author has said the student body has a "clear cultural problem" around the topic"

The student body referred to is the student body of the University of Oxford, thousands of students, amongst them the Bullingdon Club. Now I wonder if any of them are racists like your friend Boris.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 11:33 AM

Rag,

The student body referred to is the student body of the University of Oxford, thousands of students,

No silly. The report was about the OULC, not the OU!

Jim,
You have the evidence of the NEC's unequivocal statements, and those of many senior Labour figures, as PROOF that there was a serious issue with antisemitism in Labour.
The FACT that an enquiry was set up is further PROOF.

Labour and Chakrabarti have chosen not to name or expel any of those guilty of that antisemitism. They have been criticised for that.

However much you deny it, those FACTS remain.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 11:38 AM

Guardian on Chakrabarti,
"The report is a short one, light on details of specific incidents and wary of passing judgment on long-running controversies. Rather, Chakrabarti's warmth and her frequent invocations of Labour values of universalism and human rights suggest an appeal to decency, calmness and common humanity.

In one respect though, the inquiry has produced detailed and clear recommendations. Much of the document deals with internal Labour party procedures and how they can deal with the antisemitism controversy more effectively. Some may well be aghast at her rejection of lifetime bans and her proposal for a moratorium on trawls through the past statements of Labour party members.

Whether her proposals for rule changes and codes of conducts will actually be adopted or have the desired impact is open to question.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 11:46 AM

Same Guardian writer on The Left and Jews.
It applies to own lefties rather well.

"On the left, black people are usually allowed to define what's racism; women can define sexism; Muslims are trusted to define Islamophobia. But when Jews call out something as antisemitic, leftist non-Jews feel curiously entitled to tell Jews they're wrong, that they are exaggerating or lying or using it as a decoy tactic – and to then treat them to a long lecture on what anti-Jewish racism really is.

The left would call it misogynist "mansplaining" if a man talked that way to a woman. They'd be mortified if they were caught doing that to LGBT people or Muslims. But to Jews, they feel no such restraint.

So this is my plea to the left. Treat us the same way you'd treat any other minority. No better and no worse. If opposition to racism means anything, it surely means that."

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 11:55 AM

Raggytash - 28 Jul 16 - 09:11 AM

"The student body referred to is the student body of the University of Oxford"

Ehmmmm No Raggy the "Student body" being referred to is the "Oxford University Labour Club" aka (OULC) - That is after all the organisation that was under investigation - Investigation of the entire "Student Body" of Oxford University was never, ever within the remit of Baroness Royall's investigation into anti-Semitism within OULC.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 12:16 PM

On the left, black people are usually allowed to define what's racism; women can define sexism; Muslims are trusted to define Islamophobia. But when Jews call out something as antisemitic, leftist non-Jews feel curiously entitled to tell Jews they're wrong, that they are exaggerating or lying or using it as a decoy tactic – and to then treat them to a long lecture on what anti-Jewish racism really is.

Whoever wrote that has to have have been reading Mudcat posts.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 12:27 PM

"Guardian on Chakrabarti,"
Then no information on how many or the nature of the "antisemitism" then?
"You have the evidence of the NEC's unequivocal statements, "
I most certainly have - they took the problem seriously, they examined it and fornfd no serious problem
If you disagree with this analysis you are free to correct ne, otherwise it stands.
It's a repeat case if the "hating Irish" - they "hated the British" but you refuse to say how they did.
You can repeat "serious" till they carry to the funny farm but, as with past arguments, it is just dishonest stonewalling.
You have obviously looked very hard for evidence thet there is a serious problem - you have found none, so there is none, so you fall back on the term "serious.
One more time If an accusation of Antisemirism is made against a major party, it doesn't matter if it is true or not - it will be treated AS A serious matter
If there has been a cover-up in ot exposing, disciplining or expelling those "large numbers" you are claiming, the Labour right and the Jewish member of the Party would be up in arms.
If there has been cover-up, the press would be having a field day
No serious Antisemitism has been found, none has been indicated either inside or outside the party.
Do not suggest that there has been some indicated in earlier reports - if it has, where is it?
You are one of the most clumsily crude, dishonest people I have ever come across.
Now - numbers - what forms did it take - who pas exposed, who was expelled - if no-one - why?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 01:07 PM

Jim,
they(NEC) took the problem seriously, they examined it and fornfd no serious problem

NO.
They were quite clear that there was a serious issue with antisemitism within Labour.
"The NEC are appalled by recent cases of anti-Semitic abuse."

Which bit of that do you not understand Jim?

"Baroness Jan Royall, who has conducted two recent investigations into specific allegations of anti-Semitism,"

"Chakrabarti, who will be chairing a wider ranging inquiry looking at anti-Semitism within the Labour Party. "

"anti-semitism within the Labour Party. The entire NEC recognises the seriousness of this issue."
http://labourlist.org/2016/05/alice-perrys-nec-report-corbyn-fighting-prejudice-and-listening-to-voters-online/

Get it Jim?
The seriousness of anti-Semitism within the Labour Party is recognised by the entire NEC!
When will you recognise it?
You do not need numbers or names!

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 01:52 PM

"The entire NEC recognises the seriousness of this issue.""
For Christs sake Keith - if a party is accused of antisemitism it is serious whether they are guilty or not - they investigated it itd found there was no signfnifficant proble
m - ir ceased to be serious
If you have any evidence that there was major problem, apart from your now deliberately misinterpreting a fact - present it.
"Geddit"
When yo stop stupidly lying and produce some numbers
Whjo has said there is a lrge number
Where have they said it
Why haven't they been reprimanded or expelled - or have they?
You are a very stupid, very dishonest man, you really are
Numbers - crimes- punishment ???
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 02:25 PM

You didn't know that Labour List wasn't Labour, did you, Keith? 😂 As a matter of fact, the party distanced itself from Labour List years ago. You would know about these things if you subscribed, as I do. Sussed again, Keith. As ever. And that's twice now that you've smeared Shami Chakrabarti by suggesting that she's fishing for a peerage. Completely unjustified, completely scurrilous, so typical of you. You have no reason to doubt her integrity whatsoever. In that regard she drops hot shit over the right-wing scumbags who you support. You really are the most disreputable smear-monger on this forum by a country mile. Disgraceful behaviour.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 02:30 PM

Numbers - crimes- punishment ???

It is a crime of moral failure the punishment of which is shaming by public exposure as should be happening in the Labour party had they the courage to do so.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 04:02 PM

Lovely sentence. Translator's note, please? 😂😂😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 04:21 PM

Professor provide a link to the report you cited then we will be able to see for ourselves who the student body is.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 04:46 PM

All in the title of the Report Raggy:

Baroness Royall Inquiry Oxford University Labour Club

Opening two paragraphs of the Executive Summary:

Executive Summary

I was asked by the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party to examine the allegations of antisemitism that arose surrounding Oxford University Labour Club (OULC) after the resignation of a former co-Chair.

This was followed by a number of allegations of incidents of antisemitism against members of the Labour Party including against one Member of Parliament and a member of the National Executive Committee.

Any doubts Raggy.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 05:31 PM

Awful Teribus post. No points made. Link not clickable.

Really, Teribus, aka Johnny-come-lately in the thread, do take the time to read the bloody thing before wading in. Everything you've said so far has been done to death. You have no further angles to put on it, none at all. You are a Keith clone. Just try thinking for yourself for once instead of hitching your wagon to a thoroughly dead horse. Even you are not stupid enough to fail to understand that antisemitism has nothing to do with attacking a country that isn't even three-quarters Jewish. It's about attacking Jews because they are Jews. Do you accept that or not? If you do (and if you don't you're as big a clown as Keith), then try to agree without spin and without dishonesty that it is not possible to make blanket accusations against Labour. Names must be named. You won't do it, Keith won't do it, the enquiries won't do it. Why do you suppose names are NOT being named? Go on, have a guess. But don't forget the lawyers...

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 05:39 PM

It's about attacking Jews because they are Jews

See: The New Anti-Semitism

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 05:50 PM

Yes, bobad, well that's exactly the kind of rubbish that has been comprehensively debunked in this thread. Do keep up. To adhere to that makes you a rabid antisemite and a racist (which, of course, you are, as well as being a two-timing cheat, a coward, a liar and, as your previous post reveals, illiterate to boot). You should heed the old saying. Better that everyone merely thinks you're an idiot than open your mouth and prove it.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 06:03 PM

that's exactly the kind of rubbish that has been comprehensively debunked in this thread

On the [regressive] left, black people are usually allowed to define what's racism; women can define sexism; Muslims are trusted to define Islamophobia. But when Jews call out something as antisemitic, leftist non-Jews feel curiously entitled to tell Jews they're wrong, that they are exaggerating or lying or using it as a decoy tactic – and to then treat them to a long lecture on what anti-Jewish racism really is.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 06:07 PM

[regressive] in my previous post was mis-placed, it should have read:

that's exactly the kind of rubbish that has been comprehensively debunked in this thread

On the left, black people are usually allowed to define what's racism; women can define sexism; Muslims are trusted to define Islamophobia. But when Jews call out something as antisemitic, [regressive] leftist non-Jews feel curiously entitled to tell Jews they're wrong, that they are exaggerating or lying or using it as a decoy tactic – and to then treat them to a long lecture on what anti-Jewish racism really is.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 06:15 PM

Have another ten pints. It might just improve your posts.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 28 Jul 16 - 06:28 PM

Have you seen anyone about your obsessiveness, I hear they have medication for it now?

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 03:20 AM

No reference to the wider student body in that attachment, a wider student body in toto which I suggested was the University of Oxford including the Bullingdon Club.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 03:32 AM

Baroness Royall OULC Inquiry

Try this one Shaw, certainly came up OK in the test, then compare the opening two paragraphs to those quoted in my earlier mail.

What is the matter Shaw? Can't you or Raggy actually search for information? Just enter the title of the link above into the search engine of your choice and you could have found it for yourself.

By the bye Shaw I did not have to make any "points" all I had to do was demonstrate quite clearly that Baroness Royall's Inquiry was into the Oxford University Labour Club and not the student body of Oxford University in general - something Raggy was rather lamely trying to claim. So merely pointing out yet another example of Raggy being factually in error.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 03:40 AM

"Have you seen anyone about your obsessiveness, I hear they have medication for it now?"
The only obsessiveness here is from those who, after accusations of Antisemitism turning out to be a damp squib, continue to claim that The Labour Party is riddled with Anti-semites - notably, all supporters of Israeli terrorism.
They refuse to provide evidence of their claims in terms of actual examples, they refuse to acknowledge the fact that Antisemitism is basically a feature of right-wing politics and has proved to be so - six million times over within my lifespan.
None of them with acknowledge the links between these accusations and the move to boycott Israeli goods in protest to the mass murder that has taken place.
These people are men on a mission - obsessives, and their own spineless behaviour in branding everyone who disagrees with them is fully in line with Israeli claims that all criticism of Israeli policy is Antisemitic.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 04:16 AM

Executive Summary

I was asked by the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party to examine the allegations of antisemitism that arose surrounding Oxford University Labour Club (OULC) after the resignation of a former co-Chair.

This was followed by a number of allegations of incidents of antisemitism against members of the Labour Party, including against one Member of Parliament and a member of the National Executive Committee.

I was also made aware that there was at least one case of serious false allegations of antisemitism which was reported to the police.

The context of the wider allegations means that I had to consider the matters of Oxford University Labour Club in that broader landscape. My recommendations will have a positive impact, not only on OULC, but on Labour clubs and the Labour Party more generally.

I do not believe that that there is institutional antisemitism within OULC. Difficulties however, face OULC which must be addressed to ensure a safe space for all Labour students to debate and campaign around the great ideas of our movement.

It is not possible to simply make recommendations about the OULC without considering how our Party itself responds to these events. I am therefore, today making recommendations about how Labour tackles antisemitism to minimise the chance of any repetition of incidents such as those described at OULC. I am making eleven recommendations for immediate and sustained action. In addition, I am advising the second, wider inquiry led by Shami Chakrabarti of a further seven issues which she may wish to consider.

So the Inquiry found that anti-Semitism was not institutionalised within the Party - that does not mean that there was no serious problem - otherwise why should there be "eleven recommendations for immediate and sustained action" - Take note of that IMMEDIATE and SUSTAINED ACTION - And you clowns say that there was no serious problem??? . Why should Baroness Royall feel that as a result of her Inquiry she should advise Shami Chakrabarti of "a further SEVEN ISSUES which she may wish to consider.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 04:24 AM

I know that the paper was referring to the OULC which the report said does not have an institutional issue of anti-Semitism.

However the professor quoted a section that said "although the student body has a "clear cultural problem" around the topic"

Now when I and others went to University the student body referred to all the students at that University not merely a section of that student body.

Thus I would suggest that this statement therefore refers to Oxford University as a whole.

The professor is well known for his selective "cut an pastes" and anything he cites requires to be checked thoroughly.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 04:25 AM

Well I could watch you making a cup of tea then come up with eleven recommendations for immediate and sustained action that I think would improve your tea, but I wouldn't mind betting that your tea tastes pretty good already, bereft of serious problems. And that could be the last time today I say anything nice to you.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 04:41 AM

Steve,
You didn't know that Labour List wasn't Labour, did you, Keith? 😂 As a matter of fact, the party distanced itself from Labour List years ago. You would know about these things if you subscribed, as I do.

Yes I did know, but it is still basically the house journal.

😂 As a matter of fact, the party distanced itself from Labour List years ago.

Can you support your assertion for once Steve?

Rag,
Professor provide a link to the report you cited then we will be able to see for ourselves who the student body is.

Labour for some reason decided not to publish the report Rag, but the enquiry was into OULC not the entire OU!

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 04:41 AM

And actually bobad's "new antisemitism" link, which is to a wiki entry, makes quite an interesting read. It's tempting to do that evangelist/Keith thing and pick out the bits that suit, but that isn't me. It's a long read which, more or less neutrally, assesses both sides of the argument. In one place the point is made that the ardent supporters of the broader definition of antisemitism are (with an irony that goes above their heads - my observation) actually antisemitic themselves, as Jim states. As for me, I'll stick with my tenet that antisemitism can only be that if it is an attack on Jews because they are Jews. It's perfectly possible to look at any attack on Israel/the Jewish state/the Israeli regime, as well as attacks on Jews as an ethnic or religious group, including concepts such as the apartheid state and comparisons with Nazism, through that lens. You've gotta be honest about it, that's all. You can say something that's bloody stupid and antisemitic, you can say something that's just bloody stupid, or you can make fair criticism. Most of the remarks I've seen attributed to members of the Labour Party that were allegedly antisemitic fell into the middle category in my view.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 04:45 AM

So provide a link to your quote "although the report's author has said the student body has a "clear cultural problem" around the topic"

Simple enough, even for you.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 04:45 AM

Look it up, Keith. They fell out over a spat in 2009 when Gordon Brown was screwing up. The idiot Damien Barber was also involved. It is not "the house journal." It publishes or links to many items that make extremely uncomfortable reading for Labour.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 05:03 AM

""eleven recommendations for immediate and sustained action"
Noe nof those recommendations refer to serious anti semitism, they are no more than a check on the use of language in an atmosphere which has been created by a situation where the lines between what it and is not antisemitic has been blurred by a deliberate campaign to make All criticism of Israel an attack on Jews - read Bobad's vitriol, if you want a perfect example of this.
Nobody has been named, nobody has been disciplined - even the right-wing press have not bothered to pursue this matter further.
If the there had been the slightest hint of a serious problem, right wing rags would have jumped in with both feet screaming "Labour Jew haters" - we leave that to the three right wingers here.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 06:45 AM

Raggy, the ONLY Student body subject Baroness Royall's Inquiry was the Oxford University Labour Party.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 06:54 AM

Hey Carroll, are you a supporter of Sinn Fein? Just wondering because I came across this item: Israel's Reply To Provisional Sinn Fein sbtitled "Irish Nationalist Antisemitism Raises Its Ugly Head, Yet Again!" and recognized you and your spew in their neo Nazi like ideology.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 06:59 AM

The LabourList spat, 2009, from wiki. Was in a rush earlier on. My car wasn't working. It is now.

On 11 April 2009, it was reported by the Daily Telegraph that Gordon Brown's special adviser, Damian McBride had sent a series of emails to former LabourList editor, Derek Draper, discussing plans to set up a blog which would be used to post false rumours about the private lives of senior members of the Conservative Party.

McBride resigned later the same day, and 10 Downing Street issued an apology for the "juvenile and inappropriate" emails. Gordon Brown later sent personal letters to those who had been mentioned in the emails, expressing his regret over the incident.

In the wake of the incident, Labour sought to distance itself from LabourList owing to its connection with Draper. Draper also came under pressure to resign his post as editor of LabourList. Peter Oborne criticised Draper's failure to resign and his continued association with the site as "morally revolting".

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 07:08 AM

"Hey Carroll, are you a supporter of Sinn Fein?"

Don't tell him, Pike! 😂😂😂

The hysterical stuff in your link is so ridiculous as to be comical. I must say, your judgement isn't up to much. You gave us a link yesterday that was at least worthy of a read but today you give us a rant worthy of Basil Fawlty at his finest. Try to think about your reputation is my advice. Not that it's worth trying to rescue.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 07:11 AM

"Hey Carroll, are you a supporter of Sinn Fein?
Hey Bobad - are you a supporter of the British national Party?
Your policy towards the Jewish people are not unsimilar
Only fascists and the Israeli regime (supported by you), blame the Jewish People for massacres and human rights atrocities.
As I told your brutish mate, if you can't enter into these discussions with a degree of respect, sling your hook.
It is not particularly impressive and extremely cowardly to thurl insults anonymously from behind a keyboard - I trust your family is very proud of having a hero like you in their midst.
These arguments really do drag them up from the lower depths, don't they.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 07:17 AM

It certainly isn't worth taking that ridiculous link any further. Wouldn't mind betting that even Keith's squirming. 😂

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 07:20 AM

Jim Carroll - 29 Jul 16 - 05:03 AM

"Noe nof those recommendations refer to serious anti Semitism"

None of them had to did they Jom?

What was Baroness Royall's remit from Labour's NEC? She mentions it in her opening sentence of her Report:

"I was asked by the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party to examine the allegations of antisemitism that arose surrounding Oxford University Labour Club (OULC) after the resignation of a former co-Chair."

Where in that does it say that she was asked to look into allegations of "serious" anti-Semitism Jom? "Serious" anti-Semitism, "Semi-Serious" anti-Semitism, "Mild" anti-Semitism, how many differentiating categories apply in your rather warped mind Jom? Anti-Semitism is anti-Semitism and THAT was what Baroness Royall was asked to look into.

So what else do you think, after having been given that remit, she would refer to in her Report? Having been specifically requested to examine allegations of anti-Semitism you would think that she would not have to pre-fix everything with the word anti-Semitism - would you?

Anti-Semitism is however specifically mentioned in five out of the seven issues she recommends Shami Chakrabarti to look into.

Of the eleven recommendations she urges immediate and sustained action on specifically mentions anti-Semitism are seen in six of them, others relate to racism (Which includes anti-Semitism), criminal activity and equality.

Labour's NEC have decided that the Report will not be made available to the public, they have decided that the Full Report will not be published - care to suggest why, if there is nothing to hide? Just because no names have been named under these circumstances does not mean there was no problem - the whole things absolutely reeks of cover-up.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 07:41 AM

No surprise that Shaw and Carroll mock the Israeli ambassador's letter to Sinn Fein. I'm sure they also approve of Sinn Fein's "send them back to Auschwitz" sentiment.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 07:44 AM

"Jom?"
If people insist on bringing children onto this forum, would they please try to control them?
I told you - if you want to be treated like an adult, behave like one.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 07:57 AM

Rag,
So provide a link to your quote "although the report's author has said the student body has a "clear cultural problem" around the topic"

Just google the text.
http://labourlist.org/2016/05/royall-clears-oxford-university-labour-club-of-institutional-anti-semitism/

It is not "the house journal.It publishes or links to many items that make extremely uncomfortable reading for Labour.
Yes it is. House journals do.
Where else can you go to read reports of NEC meetings?
The 2009 "spat" was brief and instantly forgotten, as is made quite clear by the rest of the page that Steve cherrypicked his sentence from!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LabourList
"On 29 January 2010, Labour cabinet minister Ed Balls MP said in interview that "LabourList is flourishing and agenda setting, and that's very powerful. It's brought a huge change over the last year. Two years ago, we weren't on the field when it came to new media. Now, I think we're ahead of the Tories in new communications. Our people are younger, they're in the real world, they're young parents or they're students, so we ought to be ahead of them in new communications. LabourList and Left Foot Forward are really, really good. A year on from Labour people really grasping this stuff, the reality is now reflected in what's going on." "

"The site features breaking news, analysis, opinion, policy and ideas from a broad cross-section of the Labour movement from activists to cabinet ministers, in addition to regular editorials and posts by the sitting editor and a core group of columnists, which include Paul Richards and Anthony Painter. Government ministers who have blogged on the site include Peter Mandelson, Ed Balls, David Miliband, Ed Miliband and Douglas Alexander."

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 08:21 AM

"Jom?"
If people insist on bringing children onto this forum, would they please try to control them?
I told you - if you want to be treated like an adult, behave like one.
Jim Carroll

Lol.....this is called deflection......it's what some people do when they are caught with egg on their face.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 09:16 AM

Stop acting like a baby, bobad. Unless you're about fourteen you should be realising by now that the world is never black and white. I don't approve of anybody's "send them back to Auschwitz" sentiment and no-one here has the slightest cause to level that at either me or Jim. But that doesn't mean I have to take the hysterical ranting of a near-lunatic as my source. And if you can't see that Teribus is doing nothing more than pointlessly fannying around with words, then if anyone around here has egg on their face, it's you. In fact, egg on both your faces. Cor, bet you miss being the anonymous sniper, don't you.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 09:23 AM

"it's what some people do when they are caught with egg on their face"
Yeah sure - you and teribus strut around like a pair of jackbooted thugs hurling your insults - neither of you have the bottle to defend your statements and you howl like whipped dogs when people don't take you seriously.
Behave like adults and maybe, just maybe, you'll be treated like one
Try this old one for a start - do you believe, along with the Israeli justice minister, that any criticism of Israel is Antisemitic
If you don't, then on what grounds do you claim that people who have never attacked Jews or their religion can be described as Antisemites
Your starter for ten - take your time
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 09:25 AM

LabourList is not the house journal because it is not in the house. The party has no say as to the content of its blogs. Why don't you just admit that you thought it was a Labour Party publication until I told you it wasn't? The relationship with Labour is no more than tangential. I'm amazed that you're so keen to quote Ed Balls.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jul 16 - 10:05 AM

steve,
LabourList is not the house journal because it is not in the house.

It is independent but it is in practice the house journal.
It provides that role and there is no other.
All blogs and posts come from within the movement.

Why don't you just admit that you thought it was a Labour Party publication until I told you it wasn't?

Because it would not be true.
Two months ago I had not even heard of it, and I would not quote an unknown site without clicking the "about" button.
Your first response actually suggests that you did not know it was independent Steve.


The relationship with Labour is no more than tangential.

Completely false.
Read the page you quoted. It makes a liar of you.
Read from the site itself.
That does too.