BS: UK thread, Politics and political

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 05:42 AM

Jim,

If you still find that contentious, let's delete the statement altogether

DC

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 05:35 AM

"I can only select between the choices on offer. "
Yeah - you can get Heinz soup or Campbell's soup - fine, if you want soup]
Voting for Parties hasn't worked - it's about time people were given the opportunity of voting for policies - for genuine change..... anything but the same old, same old merry-go-round

"The Party includes those on the left and those who are more moderate..."
Same old rightist crop Doug
What it "immoderate" about left wing policies ?
As I have always understood them, they have always been about fairness and equality of opportunity, (work, education health, housing... etc), anti racism and a voice in the workplace
Take you pick - which of these is "immoderate"?
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 05:24 AM

"The Party is split between those on the left and those who are more moderate..."

There's so much wrong with this statement that I don't know where to begin.


OK Steve, let's change that to "The Party includes those on the left and those who are more moderate..."

If you still find that contentious, let's delete the statement altogether. My argument still stands.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: DMcG
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 04:58 AM

Why shouuld eiher be a choice Mac

I can only select between the choices on offer. There may be twenty things I would like a party to do, but if a certain party will do one, and the other none, I will vote to get the one.

What I want is to get as many of the "twenty positions" into power as possible. In the ideal world, yes, I'd love all twenty to be elected.   But if I can only get 10, 5 or even 1 into power, I would rather that than insist on all 20 if it means I don't get any.

That we differ on this is not a problem, and I am not going to argue about it. We must each take the consequences of our stance.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 04:41 AM

Why shouuld eiher be a choice Mac, expectantly when they are two sides of the same coin ?
The aim of both was'is to preserve the status quo
Surely there is no better time to demand a new broom - both for the Labour Party and for the country
Even the few principled politiciians there are have admitted that Parliament is little more than an exclusive Gentlemans' Club
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 04:38 AM

“It is not most people that cause trouble though. It is those that are intransigent in their views and unwilling to accept that other people's opinions matter too who create the rifts. As we see all too often on here.“

And there is everything right in this statement, on every level.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 04:34 AM

"The Party is split between those on the left and those who are more moderate..."

There's so much wrong with this statement that I don't know where to begin.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: DMcG
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 04:21 AM

I have a lot of criticisms of New Labour even if we leave out the obvious Iraq War matters. But given a choice of New Labour or the Conservatives I would go new Labour, because of things like the introduction of the minimum wage and Sure Start.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 04:07 AM

Can I just add
When this crisis is finally over, Britain, along with the rest of the world, will have been left to clean up the mess
Those in charge are going to demand we (the ordinary voters) are going to have to tighten our belts, bite the bullet, take on the burden.... whatever phrase they choose for making sacrifices and accepting what is thrown at us)
Brexit ("the People's Decision") will be their trump card, even though it is not going to happen for years
Their aim will be to return things back to the way they were   
Starmer has already offered Labour's full co-operation
Is that really what Britain needs ?
JIm

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 03:59 AM

"Unless Labour can get elected, it is almost powerless, "
Repeating this without addressing the fact that unless Labour is elected to bring about a change is becoming a bit of a meaningless mantra folks
People need to stop being asked to vote for a party and be asked to vote for genuine policies
Labour has no right to demand party loyalty any more - it has betrayed that loyalty over and over and over again - Wilson, Kinnock, Callahan, Blair, Brown - all Tories in everything but name
Why should people be asked to continue to do that ?
LABOUR HAS BEEN IN POWER - EACH TIME THEY HAVE SOLD OUT
This time, this feller has dropped out of honest politics before he started, which has scuppered your 'mountain climbing promises'

A simple question Mac - Baccie won't answer -you try
What sign has Starer given that he is any different than anything that has gone before, and where does his "sacking for telling the truth" strategy fit into this ?
Your time starts ........ now!
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: DMcG
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 03:19 AM

I am with Backwoodsman, Doug and DtG on this row. I kept thinking of that little rhyme:

Here lies the body of old John Gray
Who died maintaining his right of way.
He was right - dead right - as he walked along
But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong.

Unless Labour can get elected, it is almost powerless, though I would say Starmer is making a good fist of the limited power that comes with opposition. He is not alone: the SNP are also having some success in challenging Johnson in PMQ. But in the end, it is always the government that holds the power. And, for Labour, as the review and cliche has it, there is a mountain to climb.   Having the largest membership of any party in Europe is of little value if no-one except party members vote for you. By all accounts, this was how Cummings got the Brexit vote he wanted: do not concentrate on those who will always vote for or always against you: all your attention needs to be on the undecided. It is a hard truth that Labour could in a sense afford to lose virtually all its members: it is far less than the number of votes they lost by. 'According to the 2011 census, 263,346 people answered "Jewish" to the voluntary question on religion, compared with 259,927 in the previous count of 2001. However, this final figure is considered an undercount' (Wikipedia). So it is around 50% of the party membership. Finding a way to make peace - or at least an accommodation - is important. And, as I said, I know traditional Labour voters who didn't because of the anti-Semitism row, so this argument has a 'voting power equivalent' of the same scale as the entire membership.

Climbing the mountain starts now, not just before the next election.

Now it is also true, as Jim was arguing, that there is no point getting Labour elected if it has jettisoned all its principles to do so. But I don't believe that would happen. In any case, when I come to cast my vote, I decide whether they have so weakened their principles that I vote elsewhere, or that they retain enough that they still get my vote. In the meantime, I think they are right to concentrate on what it will take to climb the mountain.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 03:04 AM

"I’ve made my point, several times, about disunity and disloyalty within the Labour Party. "
"My party right or wrong" is not a message I would wish to draw support for Labour on - the Labour Party had adopted wrong far to "right" (literally) policies for far too long - that peaked under Blair when he sold |Britain to George Dubya's oil wars adventures and began filling body bags with young British men and women
Is it a betrayal to suggest that should never have been suported and that all those left wingers who took to the streets were 'traitors to the cause'
The Party was wrong then, and the people who took Labour there - Blair's Babes and Babesses, are now scrambling to get into power - New Labour hasn't gone away - sacking ministers for telling the truth is holding the door open for them

Corbyn was inexperienced and he made mistakes, but you could see him growing into office as fast as the daisies in our garden - hi main strength from day one was that he had the strength of Labour principles behind him
If Labour is going to mean anything it has to put a huge gap between itself and its opponents - New Labour was indistinguishable from the Tories - if you voted them into office you would get the same policies in a different wrapping Corbyn offered a clean break, which was why so many flocked back in their thousands
Now Baccie's flavour-of-the-month is offering them a take it or leave it path back to the good old New Labour days

I notice nobody here has said that Labour has an antisemitism problem - Starmer has suggested that it has by sacking a principled minister for telling it as it is
That will drive out all those who came back and it will attract no new blood to replace them

Winning elections isn't enough; people have to be won back for an ideal - not promises of quick-fixes
The last election was a freak - it wasn't won on support for policies - it was won on 'Brexit fatigue' people wanted it to be over, one way or the other - that's not going to happen, of course
Corbyn's crowd offered a change - that is still a possibility and will remain so until his supporters throw in the towel and piss off

I cast my very first vote for a Prime Minister - Harold Wilson was our M.P.
I went on a massive lobby of Parliament one, organised by Y.S. and other groups (on rising youth unemployment, (particularly virulent on Merseyside)
As Wilson's most available constituent, I was invited into his office as a representative of the Merseyside group; it turned out to be my first experience of a slick, 'career politician' who spoke quickly and said nothing - polito-speak
When I was interview later by a leftie reporter I was totally unable to give one positive, straightforward statement Wilson had made - just empty 'shit-and-shine'
Politics have that down to a fine art nowadays - that's what has to change
Sacking people for telling the truth ain't gonna do that
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 02:46 AM

Unbeatable should read unbreathable. The air is already unbeatable:-)

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 27 Jun 20 - 02:29 AM

Thanks Dave and Doug - couldn’t put it better myself.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 06:04 PM

"The vast majority of Labour voters aren’t ‘Lefties’, they are ordinary people with decent, sensible, middle-of-the road views."
On what grounds do you make this claim

The Labour Party has around 580,000 registered members but received in excess of 10 million votes in the 2019 general election. The Party is split between those on the left and those who are more moderate but I would suggest that Party members, whatever their position, are more likely to be left leaning than those not in the party. If Labour is to win power, it will need to attract the floating voters who, last time, voted for Boris. As they have voted for the Tories at least once, they could not, by any stretch of the imagination, be described as 'Lefties'. I think that there are sufficient grounds to make the claim that the vast majority of Labour voters aren't 'Lefties'.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 05:51 PM

I don't think that most Labour voters are are "ordinary people with decent, sensible, middle-of-the road views".

I think that most people, however they vote, are "ordinary people with decent, sensible, middle-of-the road views."

It is not most people that cause trouble though. It is those that are intransigent in their views and unwilling to accept that other people's opinions matter too who create the rifts. As we see all too often on here.

As I keep saying. Compromise and cooperation is what is needed. When the oceans and the earth are worn out or when the air becomes unbeatable it will not matter who you vote for.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 04:12 PM

Well.. this just demonstrates in a nutshell how it will be extremely difficult
to regain the mass of working class Labour voters,
who abandoned the party in favour of the easily digestible rhetoric
of populist right wing ukip and tories...

The word "socialist" has now been successfully demonised forever beyond any positive use...

When these new working class conservative's relise they were hoodwinked by boris's tories,
they will probably be even more likely to turn to the easy solutions and scapegoats of the far right,
than the progressive policies of Labour...???

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 03:48 PM

Here we go again.

I’ve made my point, several times, about disunity and disloyalty within the Labour Party. That’s my view. Now you rant on, be my guest, drag out your red-herrings, confuse issues, talk to people as though they’re idiots, playing Mr. Know-It-All, refusing to allow others an opinion - that’s your standard MO and I’ve got more wick in my lamp than to get dragged in to another of your interminable battles.

You certainly know how to piss people off. You’re talking to yourself from now on.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 02:54 PM

"Well, Jim, I live in the UK, I have a wide circle of friends, many of whom are Labour voter"
So ?
You didn't say anything about a lot of friends - you actually said
"The vast majority of Labour voters aren’t ‘Lefties’, they are ordinary people with decent, sensible, middle-of-the road views."
Do you actually know this or did you make it up ?
You made the statement - you give us the evidence
"The vast majority of Labour voters aren’t ‘Lefties’, they are ordinary people with decent, sensible, middle-of-the road views."
Whick implies that "lefries aren't ordinary and don't have sensible views - otherwise, why make such a cliam
What is sensible about sitting on the fence whie your party supports a line fed by a criminal state - or all the other things I listed
Pretty 'insensible' to the suffering of those who elected them, in my opinion
"So would I."
So why was Blair noth thrown aout on his arse at the earliest opportunity-?
" the dissenters and underminers are risking destroying Labour’s chances of victory at the next GE? "
Which totaly ignores my point
What should anybody want to support a party who sacks his minister for telling the truth - do you claim that Britons wants to be governed by such a leader - or are you caiming Israel to be innocent of what she calamed they were doing - were they not traning American police forces to The vicious ?
The Minnesota Force is one of those has now admitted having backed away from the tactics because of the number of deaths

Why should Labour members gt behind a leadership who supports such behaviour - because they are the leaders - right or wrong - surely not?

The only rd herrings here are above - you have yet to respond to a single point - you have hidden behind "but they are the leaders" from the word go - whatever happened to principles and honesty ?

In essence, by sacking this principled lady, this nasty piece of work has accepted that The Labour Party is riddled with Jew-haters - he has played to the bumwipe press, The Friends of Israel and the Ethnic Clesnsing regime that has dragged the Labour Party's name into the slime
Not a bad days work for someone who hasn't been in office long
"Rumbled" - don't you wish !!
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 01:59 PM

”The vast majority of Labour voters aren’t ‘Lefties’, they are ordinary people with decent, sensible, middle-of-the road views."
On what grounds do you make this claim - I don't remember a referendum being held on the issue. It depends on you are in this divided nation (divided by Thatcher)“

Well, Jim, I live in the UK, I have a wide circle of friends, many of whom are Labour voters. Some - a small number - are what I would describe as radical Lefties, most fall into the category I described, they have middle-of-the-road views very much akin to mine. It seems a pretty reasonable to assume that would more or less hold true in a wider setting. If you think I’m wrong, give us the evidence.

”What right have you to describe left-wingers as indecent”

I didn’t. You’ve just introduced that concept - very low and dishonest of you, Jim.

”I would describe those who stood behild Blair when he committed Britain to decades of war in the Middle East as thoroughly indecent”

So would I.

”The same goes for those who stood silent as the situation was arrived at where working people could no longer afford to send their children to higher education, or as the gap between haves and have-nots steadily widened, or homelessness grew....... and all the rotten things that have ahppened to Britain over the last few decades   
The old Labour party was part and parcel of making Britain the unequal, dog-eat-dog, oil greedy nation it has become - just by saying nothing as it happened“

Nothing I’d disagree with you about there Jim.

But what, pray, does any of that have to do with my suggestion that, by undermining the Leadership, ELECTED BY THE PARTY MEMBERS, the dissenters and underminers are risking destroying Labour’s chances of victory at the next GE? The Party should be big enough and adult enough to accommodate a range of views, and to reach agreement on its attitudes and policies by a process of discussion, negotiation, consensus, and compromise. And those who disagree with the final decision at the end of that process should be adult enough to accept it, and get behind the Leadership in order to rid the nation of the scourge of this corrupt Tory government.

You’re pulling your usual stunt of dragging out every red-herring you can think of in order to muddy the waters, and try to stifle the voice of one whose views don’t mirror yours.

It won’t wash, Jim. You’ve been rumbled.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 01:15 PM

I have no idea how accurate that article is PFR - there's no reason to doubt it
Israel is now the major supplier of military drones

A CONVENIENTLY FORGOTTEN FACT
It says the deal fell through because of "costs" - it transpires it was abandoned because they didn't want "the blecks" to have them if the regime ever fell

From The Christian Science Monitor, 2013
Does Israel have chemical weapons?
Israel signed the global treaty banning the production or use of chemical weapons. But Israel never ratified it. Israel will not confirm or deny the existence of chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons.
Israeli workers are seen at the Shalon gas mask factory in Kiryat Gat, Israel. The U.S.-Russian plan to dismantle Syria's chemical weapons is drawing some unwanted attention on Israel's own alleged chemical stockpile.
September 16, 2013
By Josef Federman Associated Press
JERUSALEM
The US-Russian plan to dismantle Syria's chemical weapons is drawing attention to Israel's own suspected chemical stockpile and could raise pressure on the Jewish state to come clean about its capabilities.
Israel signed the landmark international treaty banning the production or use of chemical weapons two decades ago, but it is among a handful of nations that have never ratified the deal. While foreign experts widely believe that Israel likely possesses a stockpile of chemical and biological weapons, Israeli officials refuse to confirm or deny the existence of any such arsenal.
They say the key issue right now is Syria, not Israel.
In a radio interview Monday, former Defense Minister Amir Peretz declined to discuss the country's chemical weapons capabilities but said the international community's attitude toward Israel is "different" from Syria.
"It's clear to everyone that (Israel) is a democratic, responsible regime," he told Israel Radio. "I very much hope and am certain that the international community will not make this a central question and we will maintain the status quo."
‘It’s way past time to try something new’: The push to defund police

Israel has been similarly vague about foreign reports of a nuclear arsenal, a policy of ambiguity aimed at deterring its enemies. But following the weekend deal between the U.S. and Russia to eliminate Syria's chemical weapons by mid-2014, voices have emerged calling on the government to take similar steps.
"I do believe that the Israeli government should be open about this issue, should say what arsenal, if any, it does have and should strive for an international agreement to keep all these kinds of weapons outside of the Middle East," said opposition lawmaker Dov Khenin.
The liberal daily Haaretz wrote in an editorial Monday that the chemical disarmament of Syria gives Israel an opportunity to finally ratify the Chemical Weapons Convention.
"It would be a pity if in the future Israel finds itself in the position of Syria — forced to sign the convention under international pressure," the newspaper said.
Paul Hirschson, a spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry, said Israel could not ratify the treaty in such an uncertain environment. "These things are regional and we're not going to go out there on our own," he said.
There seems to be a consensus among foreign experts that Israel has likely developed an arsenal of chemical and biological weapons over the years.
"Israel's lack of transparency has led to a continued suspicion that a chemical weapons program is in place, although we are unable to confirm this or provide any further details," Emily Chorley, a chemical weapons analyst at IHS Jane's, said in an email.
In a report this month, Foreign Policy magazine published what it said was a secret 1983 CIA document outlining evidence that Israel possessed a chemical weapons stockpile of unknown size, likely developed in the 1970s out of fear its neighbors were acquiring such weapons.
"Several indicators lead us to believe that they have available to them at least persistent and nonpersistent nerve agents, a mustard agent, and several riot-control agents, matched with suitable delivery systems," the document says.
The article's author, military historian Matthew M. Aid, said the nonpersistent agent was almost certainly sarin, the same chemical that the Syrian army is suspected of using in an Aug. 21 attack that allegedly killed more than 1,400 civilians and triggered the international response. It was unclear what the persistent nerve agent might be.
Chemicals are labeled persistent and nonpersistent depending on how long they last.
The document said Israel had possessed special testing equipment since the early 1970s and "possible tests were detected in January 1976." It also said a "probable CW nerve agent production facility and a storage facility" were identified in 1982 in the southern Israeli town of Dimona, home to Israel's secretive nuclear program. It said other weapons production capability was believed to exist in Israel's chemical industry.
If Israel does have an active chemical weapons program, it likely involves the Israel Institute for Biological Research, a secretive facility in the Tel Aviv suburb of Nes Ziona that is under the jurisdiction of the prime minister's office. The facility's website describes itself as a "governmental, applied research institute specializing in the fields of biology, medicinal chemistry and environmental sciences." Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office declined comment.
Israel says it has never used chemical weapons on the battlefield, though in one famous incident, Israeli agents attempted to assassinate Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal by poisoning him in neighboring Jordan. The agents were captured, however, and Israel was forced to turn over the antidote.
Israel has also drawn war crimes accusations for its use of white phosphorous during an offensive in the Gaza Strip in early 2009. White phosphorous can be used legally as an illuminating agent, but is forbidden from use as a weapon. The substance can be dangerous if used in civilian areas because it can cause severe burns. Earlier this year, the Israeli military said it was halting its use of the material.
The use of chemical weapons is an emotional topic in Israel, where memories remain fresh of the Holocaust, when countless numbers of Jews were killed in Nazi gas chambers.
Since the outbreak of the civil war in neighboring Syria two and a half years ago, Israel has repeatedly warned of the dangers of Syria's chemical arsenal. Israeli leaders fear that Syrian nonconventional weapons could either be fired into Israel, or slip into the hands of Hezbollah and other hostile groups battling inside Syria.
Hirschson said attempts by Syria or any other country to link Israeli compliance with Syria's were disingenuous efforts to divert attention away from the real issue.
"I don't think Syria is in any position to tell anyone what to do," he said. "We have never threatened anybody with chemical weapons, never used them, and they have."

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 12:26 PM

Jim - this is the article that appeared on my news feed a few nights back...

The Rise of the Cyber-Mercenaries 2018


You'll probably know better than me how reliable & trustworthy this writer is..

"Israel is a world leader in private cybertechnology,
with at least 300 firms covering everything from banking security to critical infrastructure defense.
But while most of these firms aim to protect companies from cyberattacks,
a few of them have taken advantage of the thin line
between defensive and offensive cybercapabilities to provide clients with more sinister services...

...Israel.. produces a steady supply of highly skilled cyberoperators who learn the craft during their military service
in one of the country’s elite signals intelligence units
—Unit 8200 is the best known among them
—and then go on to work in the private sector. "

Funny how the UK right always get such fast intelligence
on Labour party membership tweeting history...???

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 11:57 AM

"The vast majority of Labour voters aren’t ‘Lefties’, they are ordinary people with decent, sensible, middle-of-the road views."
On what grounds do you make this claim - I don't remember a referendum being held on the issue
It depends on you are in this divided nation (divided by Thatcher)
What right have you to describe left-wingers as indecent
I would describe those who stood behild Blair when he committed Britain to decades of war in the Middle East as thoroughly indecent
The same goes for those who stood silent as the situation was arrived at where working people could no longer afford to send their children to higher education, or as the gap between haves and have-nots steadily widened, or homelessness grew....... and all the rotten things that have ahppened to Britain over the last few decades   
The old Labour party was part and parcel of making Britain the unequal, dog-eat-dog, oil greedy nation it has become - just by saying nothing as it happened
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 11:47 AM

"Is it split or is it two separate parties? "
There have been divisions between the warring groups, true, but to a degree, Brexit gave them a reason to bury them
Amnesty has reportedly denied that they reported that the knee-on--neck technique - that was a branch of Amnesty, they have not denied that Israel has trained American police forces - how could they - that has been a fact since at least 2013 when Amnesty first raised it   
This denial appeared in 'The Spectator', owned by the same press magnate who owns The Daily Telegraph
When Boris Johnson was editor he was accused of publishing a racist article aimed at Nigerians - a journal to be trusted on matters such as rcism

It is unclear exactly what Maxine Peake said about her statement, as far as I can find it has not been quoted in full - just the one line
That is beside the point - there is no question thet Israel has been training American police forces, just as there is no question that the technique that killed Floyd is used by Israel against the Palestinians
These are proven facts, whatever way you car to try to sidestep them

As far as political Parties being able to work with each other - following Brexit, political parties ban no longer get a consensus of their own elected members and are at odds with the rank and file membership
Starmer stands to become part of this ivory tower group who have been totally ignoring the wishes of those who elected them
That is the circus that Parliamentary Democracy has now openly become
Go ask the old-school Tories who were kicked out of office en-mass for not dancing to the music from the top
We have a hand-picked Cabinet dictatorship in Britain, as things stand at present
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 11:42 AM

On an intellectual/ideological level, I'm stuck between BWM and Jim&Steve.

But I'm no fence sitter, I'm a pragmatic realist..

We can't wait forever, for the further far right inclined tories to see the light and leave power voluntarily,
or kill each other off with stupid careless covid social recklessness...

Any UK party calling itself "Labour" might be some improvement for us...??????????

[pause for grim laughter of despair...]

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Rain Dog
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 11:40 AM

Apologies if I got that wrong pfr, my memory is not what it was.

But I think you got the gist of my post. As someone said to me, politics is a dirty business.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 11:30 AM

During Corbyn’s leadership, the dissenters who undermined the leader were called everything from a pig to a dog by his supporters. Now they are themselves the dissenters, undermining the current leader, they seem to believe that’s OK, that they are beyond reproach. Words like ‘double’ and ‘standards’ spring readily to mind (others too, but those will suffice for now).

The vast majority of Labour voters aren’t ‘Lefties’, they are ordinary people with decent, sensible, middle-of-the road views. They don’t want the political dogma of the radical Left, they just want a left-of-centre party of Fairness For All. I’ll say it one last time, if there’s no compromise and the dissenters continue to undermine the Labour leadership, there will be no Labour government in the foreseeable future, probably ever. And that will be a tragedy. If you don’t believe it, you’re delusional.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 11:29 AM

"Steve and pfr have posted in the past about the factions that appear in local party meetings

I could have, but I can't remember..
Are you sure it was me...???

I've never been a member of any party, but am an old best mate
of folks who are senior party officials in a west country town
I no longer live in...

I know I wouldn't last two minutes as a labour party member
before some local zealot got offended by me...

I'm best off persuading for the labour cause on my own terms, from the outside...

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Rain Dog
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 11:05 AM

Jim posted "For the record, the Parliamentary Labour Party is split down the middle over the sacking"

Is it split or is it two separate parties? Steve and pfr have posted in the past about the factions that appear in local party meetings. The vast majority of people in this country do not belong to any political party. They are mostly oblivious to the scheming and internecine warfare that goes on between people who are supposedly members of the same party.

I personally am in favour of having a form of PR in our elections. I have also said that I find it hard to imagine political parties being able to work constructively with each other. That is a long way off, seeing that even members of the same party find it so hard to work with each other.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 10:25 AM

We won't shake off this bogus antisemitism malarkey by booting out people who are not antisemites, that's for sure. The snappy dogs just come back for more every time you do that, as happened time after time on Corbyn's watch. And they'll be back for more this time too. Pro-Israel lobbyists always see parties more to the left as the people who are more likely to question the unconditional support for the Israeli regime, so they're the ones they target. The Tories are safe because their friends-of-Israel setup is very right-wing, and the Tories in any case are far more inclined towards Islamophobia than to antisemitism. And the more you give the snappy dogs, the more they want. Starmer has made a massive mistake.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Rain Dog
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 10:24 AM

In a statement to the New Statesman, the organisation said: “For years, we’ve documented appalling crimes under international law and human rights violations meted out to Palestinians by members of the Israeli security forces, though the precise nature of the training offered to US police forces by Israeli officials is not something we’ve documented.

“Allegations that US police were taught tactics of ‘neck kneeling’ by Israeli secret services is not something we’ve ever reported and the article in question has rightly been amended to acknowledge that.

“The US police themselves have a longstanding record of using excessive force against members of the public - including Black Lives Matter protesters, something we reported on earlier this week.”

Peake herself has now retracted her earlier comments, saying in a statement: “I was inaccurate in my assumption of American police training and its sources. I find racism and antisemitism abhorrent and I in no way wished, nor intended, to add fodder to any views of the contrary.”


Ailbhe Rea is political correspondent at the New Statesman.

New Statesman - Amnesty Denial

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 10:21 AM

"How do you propose to demonstrate that ‘anti-semitism’ is a completely unfounded Tory trope without demonstrating it won’t be tolerated?"
It is not up to me or anybody to prove the accusation is unfounded, on the contrary, it's up to the accusers to prove it does - that's how British justice works
Antisemitism is the oldesst form or racist bigotry in existence and it is present in every party, Labour included
There was not a smell of it being 'a problem until almost exactly one month after Corbyn announced his support for the Palestinian People - he drew short of supporting BDS
A group of Labour Friends of Israel were invited to a meeting with the Knesset and a week after they returned accusations of Labour antisemitism began to appear in the press
It was found that virtually all the accusations were groundless - Ruth Smeeth, one of the most vociferous, was found to be FUNDED BY ISRAEL and was an admirer of Netanyahu - none of this appeared in the popular press, who were happy to take whatever they could throw at Corbyn in their orchestrated campaign to get rid of him
Despite clause 10 of the new definition, Israel has managed to make criticism of Israel "antisemitic" - this has backfired on the Jewish people who are now being accused of Israel's crimes, thanks to Israel's using them as human shields
Some of the most outspoken critics of Israel are Jews - Holocaust survivors and their descendants, ex Directors of Mossad, even a General in the Israeli Army - all have equated the behaviour of the present Government with that of the Nazis - they have been awarded the title "self-loathing Jews"
Israel is now regarded a criminal State by the U.N. - for its land stealing and its ethnic cleansing policies
The only thing that has kept it out of the International Criminal Courts is over 30 U.N. vetoes by the United States

The Labour Party was founded partially with support of Jews fleeing the European pogroms - it might be a coincidence that these accusations began so soon after Corbyn's announced support for the Palestinians - I'd welcome anybody's opinion on that one
Labour has nothing to prove, it's accusers have everything
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 09:39 AM

How do you propose to demonstrate party-solidarity and unity without compromise - on both sides?

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 09:38 AM

Sorry, pressed ‘go’ too soon!

....get rid of the Tories without compromise within a terminally divided party? How do you propose to demonstrate that ‘anti-semitism’ is a completely unfounded Tory trope without demonstrating it won’t be tolerated?

How?

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 09:34 AM

So, how do you, Jim and Steve propose to ‘get rid of the Tories’?

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: peteglasgow
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 09:32 AM

i've left the labour party 3 times in the past and supported and voted for other progressive parties. anyway, i joined again when corbyn was going for the leader job. i thought it disgusting the way he was treated and i'm dismayed to see what the leader is doing to Rebecca L-B. however, i'm not even thinking of leaving - did i read that part of maxine peake's purpose was to urge left leaning members to stay with the party? - well, i'll do that and do my best to use what little influence i can to keep the party to task in fighting for the rights and lives of people in england and internationally. i'm afraid i think it's self-indulgent and defeatist to do anything else. i havn't been loyal to the labour party but i have all my life fought the tories and the danger they currently pose to us all is real and urgent. it's a terrible system - we have to remake it and this will never happen unless we get rid of the tories. 'a party without principles is not worth supporting' is purist but just what the tories and their friends want you to think. sadly, we have to get our hands dirty to get rid of their filth.

pete

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 09:25 AM

No Baccie - "our lot" didn't fuck it up
It was already "fucked up" by one on yours who turned out to be a war criminal who supported sending troops in sear of non existent weapons in order to appease Goerge Dubya - he narrowly escaped international prosecution
That was the Labour Party Corbyn was faced with changing
He "fucked it up" by attempting to return Labour to it's socialist principles
Britain is in the state that it is in because it has lived with a two-party same policy sysstem for far too long
Under both Labour and Conservative Governments, British workers have lost their rights to a say in working conditions, they have watched the NHS slither down to crisis level, they've seen industries go bust, homes have been transormed into investments, unemployment has steadily climbed and now the unemployed are forced to take any job that is offered to them no matter what they were trained for and usually at an enforced decline in standards of living
The gap between haves and have-nots has reached ASTRONOMICAL LIMITS pretty well the highest in the 'free world'
That has been brought about by a series of Governments whose policies have become indistinguishable
The fact that Blair oved to formalise that bey creating 'New Labour' caused many thousands of people who wanted genuine change to abandon the Labour Party - Corbyn's policies and promises brought them flocking back
In the short time that this knight of the realm has been in office he has managed to frive aa wedge between the giffeent groups in the Labour Party - all to appease an extreme right wing State which is bust ethnically cleansing Arabs out of their rightful homes
Shame on you for supporting any of this
Now will you answer my points instead of meaningllessly trying to lay the blame on people who still support what the Labour Party was set up i the first place for
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 09:22 AM

Worry not, pfr. Labour Friends of Israel have tightened their grip, along with the Board Of Deputies. Until someone grows the cojones to tell these arseholes to get off and walk, every little mention of Israel or the Palestinians will be flagged up for scrutiny. There's no end to this misery. Starmer has solved absolutely nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 09:05 AM

Well.. Sir keef better have a well devised longer term strategy
how he is going to decisively neutralise the israeli regime take-over
of our UK Labour party...?????

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 08:51 AM

I want a Labour government. Your lot completely fucked it up, and we’ve ended up with the most corrupt Right-Wing Tory government in my lifetime, and you’ve learned nothing from the experience.

I’m appalled that you’re incapable of compromise in order to get this disgusting bunch of corrupt, greedy Tories out. Meanwhile the lpoor and vulnerable continue to be sacrificed on the altar of your intransigence.

Shame on you.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 08:27 AM

I'm appalled that you should support the behavour of this man the way you are
You certainly have chosen your side in the Labour Party - Tony Blair would be proud of you
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 08:23 AM

"I thought Maxine Peake had retracted her claim about the Israeli training of the US police."
If she has I'll be very disappointed - it had been a known fact for about a month now
HERE
NECK_KNEELING, UP CLOSE
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 08:15 AM

”I’d rather have no Labour Party rather than one without principles”

That’s exactly what the Tories want to hear. Well done for giving them succour Jim.

Politics isn’t binary, and getting a party to the point of electability necessarily involves compromises. Wake up and smell the coffee, or get ready for permanent Tory government.

Your choice.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 07:58 AM

For the record, the Parliamentary Labour Party is split down the middle over the sacking
This "insanity" must be as infectious as Coraonavirus
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Rain Dog
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 07:58 AM

I thought Maxine Peake had retracted her claim about the Israeli training of the US police.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 07:49 AM

I thought labour had a future with Corbyn - I respected his stance on Israel and his refusal to scapegoat members because of a deliberate plot hatched up by New Labour supporters and Friends of Irrael
To capitulate woould have put Labour back at square one
I'd rather have no Labour Party rather than one without principles
Your way has been tried and has failed miserably
It is you who is repeating a mantra about being in power - try responding to what I have said
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 07:38 AM

As the frequently mis-attributed quote goes, ‘The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results’.

It seems to me that Starmer has acted quickly and with authority in order to de-fuse the charge of institutional anti-semitism made, with great success, against the LP pre-the 2019 GE by its own party-members, the Board of Deputies, and the Conservatives. He’s sharp enough to know that the ‘anti-semitism’ trope was a deliberate tactic, along with ‘Get Brexit Done’ etc., aimed at ensuring a Tory win at the election. It worked, at least in part, because the party leadership failed to deal with it properly.

If you’re happy for Labour to carry on in the Corbyn way, and thus guarantee they will be in permanent opposition, fine - have it yur way. But remember, Labour can’t change anything if the don’t get elected, and a Tory majority of 81 says something has to change in a big way. If you can’t hold your noses for a while and support the current leadership, you’re no better than the Corbyn-detractors during his time as leader, and you’d better get ready for Tory rule for a very, very long time to come.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 07:16 AM

Absolute rubbish. You appear to be saying that I can't criticise the Board Of Deputies in the same way that I can criticise anyone else. Well I can and I will, and if that's what you think then you've been hoodwinked and cowered by the same strong lobby that has successfully managed to get any criticism of the actions of the Israeli regime labelled as antisemitic. I might suggest to you that you think very carefully before you go around labelling any of us here as antisemitic. Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 07:08 AM

Attacking the actions of the Israeli state is never, ever, antisemitic. Unless, of course, you make the criticism then add, or imply, that "it's typical of Jews..."

                ---------:---------

I can just imagine the blood rushing to the heads of the Board Of Deputies. Who can we get next, they'll be thinking...


By the definition given in the first statement, the second statement appears, to me, to be antisemitic.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jun 20 - 06:52 AM

Smentics Baccie - she has been 'neutrailised' which is worse
We've had Labour Governments - the only one to have made a difference was elected in 1945
The rest have all been Tory Governments in all but name
Blair's was the second worst of bad Tory Governments (close on the heels of Thatcher)
A Labour Government without Labour principles is worth less than shit - the turd in charge now is actually supporting one of the things that had Corbyn removed - false accusations of antisemitism
Jim