magnkarl

28 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

 

Usual thing, imagine a similar tee shirt but saying intifada shitlord, would that be excusable due to context?

 

The context is quite clearly different though. Intifada means armed rebellion, terror and resistance, while Zionism means (or meant to the original people fighting for it) that Jews had a right to a homeland. I presume there are many more zionists than people think, just not the rebranded version of it. One implies armed struggle, while the other seeks a homeland for a people who've been mistreated since they were forced out of Egypt. One is also a term used for a group, while the other is a rallying cry used by terrorists.

I wouldn't wear either.

22 minutes ago, DaoDeMings said:

'It's the nature of Labour' - Do the Tories and other parties not do the same thing?

'It's not like it's hard to stay away from promoting other parties' - If this was a problem for Labour, why are they accepting so many deferring Tories?

'Some of the left candidates are making it a bit too easy' - What about Luke Akehurst, Rosie Duffield, Neil Coyle. Plenty of candidates on the right where there are arguably 'easy' grounds to deselect them.

This shouldn't even be a left or right issue. It's antidemocratic and wrong whatever faction of the party is doing it. Making excuses for it because 'the left candidates are making it easy' is nonsense.

I'm not defending it, though I think people disagree in each different case what they consider a purge. There are people removed for clear breaches of rules, and then there are oddities where you'll have to question why. It's like when Corbyn would flood a constituency with momentum-activists and 'vote' or scare people out. That wasn't democratic either.

41 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

It’s knowing what posts will be the wrong posts 10 years in the future, that’s where the skill is.

Look at that poor Luke Akehurst, he’s had to spend the last couple of days deleting over 2,000 of his own tweets and likes.

5 years ago people would stand outside Luciana Berger's house and shout ZIOOOO until she quit the party. That isn't a great t-shirt, by any means, but it was likely a dig at the Corbynites hiding antisemitism behind the term by shouting it at anyone who disagreed with them. Zionism, before the term was warped by Likud, only intended to mean that Jews had a right to a homeland in the hills around Jerusalem(Zion) not the current warped right wing murder-policy meaning that people currently attribute to it.

30 minutes ago, bickster said:

Yes but I have a feeling they were Ukrainian made Neptune missiles on this occasion

In other news, Germany just followed Biden in declaring their weapons can be used on Russian soil. That one is a bit of a shocker!

Without the Taurus, that isn't really doing much though. What has Germany delivered which has that sort of range? Ukraine would need to drive their PzH2000 very close to the border for this to be a reality. Maybe German made smart excalibur 155 rounds can get to about 55kms, that isn't very far into Russia.

It's Scholz Scholzing around, as the Germans say.

4 hours ago, bickster said:

And it seems with Biden's announcement yesterday that Ukraine has launched a counter offensive in the Kharkiv region and taken back a good chunk of the town of Vovchansk with Russians surrounded in a meat packing plant. They also seem to have restored some bridges to improve logistics

Ironic fate, isn't it, you're in a meat assault squad caught in a meat packing plant with no way out.

1 hour ago, juanpabloangel18 said:

I read an article in the New Statesman which basically suggested this is all part of the GE campaign, i.e. KS fighting with and purging left wing people from the party is good optics for middle England voters. Am not sure what the optics of people like Luke Akehurst are meant to be.

Maybe it's a good strategy in the short term. We'll see. But I don't think any of this will be soon forgotten once he's in power, and perhaps he'll then have a different problem on his hands. 

Some of the left candidates are making it a bit too easy tbh. I don't even know why people are on X(crement) anymore, other than posturing and liking the wrong posts.. Obviously there's purging going on too (just like under Corbyn, and pretty much any Labour iteration before his). It's the nature of Labour.

It's not like it's hard to stay away from promoting other parties, liking content from pariah states, hyping terrorist groups and the like. If someone can't consider the implications of liking or spreading such content I really don't want them being a minister or MP.

2 hours ago, bickster said:

you're thinking is all wrong, Engels would disagree only the wealthy can afford 10 microns, ciggie papers aren't for the workers in the capitalist system. CIggie papers are designed to divide us!

Someone's blowing smoke up your behind! This is clearly Socialist Worker's Party propaganda, we in the Worker's Socialist Coalition oppose anything of the sort. It's 2 microns.

7 hours ago, bickster said:

This is just not true. There was a bloke in Hampshire convicted of fraud at 72 who got 2 and a half years earlier this year.

I only wanted to sell the lady some Nigerian diamonds, jeez!

With these hearings about higher educational places going on in the US it's pretty clear that some pretty grim governments are putting loads of dosh on the table to be able to influence them, I do wonder how much of that goes on in our own universities, especially with money from Russia\Qatar\Iran\China etc.

I especially like that the president of Northwestern wasn't aware that his school of journalism had a cooperation deal with Al Jazeera until he was humiliated about it on live TV, surely there's this stuff going on in UK too?

Seems Russia's Kharkiv offensive mk2 is about to collapse fully. UAF is counter attacking and Russian milbloggers are panicking and suggesting that Russia is planning a retreat. Out of the deployed 30.000 Russian troops, some mil-bloggers claim that there's only 12-14k left.

It's sad that it took the US so long to get their aid package over the line, because current operations show how US supplies (as well as European of course) is essentially more than enough to push Russia back. Put this together with many nations now allowing Ukraine to hit military targets in Russia with Western weapons and we're starting to look like Ukraine might make some actual progress towards forcing Putin to negotiate an end to this war that isn't in his favor.

UAF seems to suggest that the next attack will come in Sumy, but I don't see how there will be enough manpower for that either.

3 hours ago, blandy said:

They will need trained aircrew. Currently they won’t have any.

The aircraft systems will need to be made fully interoperable with Ukraine’s network. Currently, there’s no indication that it is. Maybe Ukraine has been given datalinks and so on which are compliant with Mil-Stds used by NATO (and Sweden), but this hasn’t been put into the public domain. To an extent the same hurdles apply to F-16s when they arrive, though we know pilots have been undergoing training. For the AEW&C aircraft there are also siggies to train. Then there’s ground crew training…

It’s not going to affect the deadliness of SAM batteries.

Ah, my understanding is that they’ll help identify aircraft and incoming missiles for the SAMs to shoot down, no? Or am I mistaken? A flying radar is better for early warning than a stationery ground based one?

Sweden also seems to be saying that they can guide patriot missiles, so surely there's some advantage to them for SAMs? The aircraft have a much longer visibility range than the stationary radars, so there is probably something to that? Pardon my questions.

Sweden showing some massive cahones and donating two Saab AEW&C surveillance planes. It'll do the world of good for Ukrainian NATO assets and link into the already powrful radars of Patriot\SAMP-T\NASAMS ++.

When these arrive Ukraine will have capability they've never had.

450km of scanned array in a light aircraft, tasty. SAM batteries in Ukraine will be even more deadly.

Got fruit trees, berries or similar and mow the lawn?

Add the cut grass around the circumference of the trees. It'll kill the weeds and act as a moisture retentive layer for when the likely drought comes later in the summer. Make sure that the stem isn't covered, so leave about 1 cm around it. It does wonders for many of my perennials.

Just now, chrisp65 said:

Speaking on behalf of others, that’s not what he’s suggesting.

The suggestion is (I think) that you will get shouted at by van drivers and chased down the street because you are black. You are not so easily identified if you are a traveller or Jewish.

Sat across the table in a job interview to be a bus driver in Bristol, it takes a bit more work to establish someone is catholic, or French, or traveller, or Jewish, than if they are black. Basically, a version of ‘you all look the same to me’.

I think I just opened another can of worms.

 

You'll hear it the moment the Irish traveler opens his mouth, you'll see it if the Jew is wearing a kippah or a David's star necklace, or on his or her likely Jewish name. You'll see it on the brown complexion and dark hair of the Roma. It's a dumb argument that only exists in league-table racism koko-land. 

1 hour ago, mjmooney said:

I'm going to make myself unpopular here, but I largely agree with what she said: 

I find that uncontroversial. She wasn't talking about centuries of pogroms, or the Nazi holocaust, or the Irish potato famine, she was referring to day-to-day life in modern Britain. You can argue till you're blue in the face (irony intended) that being Jewish, or a traveller, or a celtic redhead constitutes a 'race', but the fact remains that being a member of one of those groups will not make you such an obvious visible target for abuse and violence on the level that has been faced by afro-caribbean and south Asian people in Britain since the 1950s. 

Was she wise to say it? No, of course not. She has always been politically naive, and can be guaranteed to put her foot in her mouth. Coming at the hight of the antisemitism witch hunt in the Labour Party (which was largely fabricated to purge the Corbyn faction), she - not for the first time - walked into the obvious trap. But to twist her words to suggest that she is some sort of inverse racist is the sort of calumny I'd expect from a Tory spin doctor. 

Do you agree with her that what Roma, Travelers and Jews aren't facing racism, but a child like mockery akin to being mocked for your hair colour?

Can't say I agree. And I don't see how anyone can either. The travelers are being horribly attacked by Irish nationalists in the MEP elections as we speak, I don't really get how one can simply describe that as simple 'prejudice' when it's completely related to who they are as a race. It's racism. You wouldn't be trying to explain that away if it was aimed at someone with a darker skin tone. It's the crux of the issue for DA. She puts her foot in it constantly if the racism isn't aimed at someone with a darker skin colour.

Meanwhile, all reports suggest a massive surge in racism specifically against the three minorities she listed as being less prejudiced to racism, and all three of them are comparatively tiny compared to her own race in the UK. It's not just dumb, it's naive, and frankly racist, and going by her dumb ranking list per capita, her race isn't close to the other 3. She wrote about historic events with slave ships, but then jumps back to present day racism when it comes to the other three to score a cheap political point. Try walking around London with a kippah and see how that 'non-visible racism' that she describes works.

So Trump has claimed he can get Evan Gerskhovich freed as soon as he wins the election and that Vladimir will only do it for him. The Kremlin says they haven't heard from Trump in a long time.

The Don going to Don.

15 minutes ago, juanpabloangel18 said:

The statements are stupid and poorly worded so I've no interest in defending them, and you've applied your own understanding of her intentions. My more generous interpretation of what she said in the draft letter is that when you're dark skinned in a white majority country you face a different kind of prejudice. Is that really controversial? 

Her swiftly issued apology said: 

Her record as an MP is that she has consistently voted to advance the causes of under privileged people regardless of race. 

I of course agree that black people can be racist I just don't agree that she is - she's clumsy 

How many times is she 'clumsy' before you'll consider it a form or tendency?  She specifically picked out three of the worst oppressed historical minorities in Europe to diminish their experience, so she could highlight her own. It's not my understanding, it's what the text says. How do you in any way word that differently for it not to be diminishing the racism experienced by Roma, Sinti, Jews and Travelers? 

Let's say some posh tory said 5 racist things, would you defend him as clumsy?

I think Diane Abbott is a selective anti-racist campaigner who, when she had some drinks, couldn't really stop herself from airing her politically incorrect views. It's a bit like when Mr. Alotment 'happened' upon that wreath laying ceremony for the Black September terrorists while popping over to Tunisia for a conference. It's a tendency.

16 minutes ago, juanpabloangel18 said:

Yes. It is.

Her voting record is anti racist. I can quickly google dozens of speeches she's made warning against islamophobia and antisemitism throughout her career.

Can you find me evidence of her "racism" that isn't a link to the Daily Telegraph or Jewish Chronicle?

(That she is "dumb" is an entirely different argument, and if you like, we can get into the double standards applied to different types of people in public life.)

Is her 'first draft' letter not enough?

It's uniquely racist to hold your race above others. She diminished the suffering of Roma, Travellers and Jews in one fell swoop by comparing their suffering to being bullied for your hair colour, and by then pointing out that her race is the ultimate victim of racism. By also stating that these three minorities are just 'white' she essentially said that they have no racial identity. I presume it's also okay to say that to people who are BAME but with slightly paler complexions than her? 

It's racist, and you could even go as far as saying that it's denying minorities their racial heritage.

Here are some other DA statements:

The Guardian Profile: Diane Abbott

Quote

In the past, the grammar-school and Cambridge-educated MP, has spoken in defence of women's rights, black sections and working class causes. A frequent denouncer of racial discrimination, she stood accused of it when she complained in 1996 that the 'blonde, blue-eyed Finnish girls' in her local hospital in east London were unsuitable as nurses because they had 'never met a black person before'.

BBC

Quote

She said she had not meant to generalise when she wrote, external: ''White people love playing 'divide & rule'".

Change the colour of the statements, see how you feel. For being an ant-racist, she sure does seem to have form on saying racist things.

6 minutes ago, juanpabloangel18 said:

Sorry but this is ill informed right wing  bollocks

Is it? From the looks of her opinions and speeches, it really isn't. I know it hurts when all the leftist headliners are found out to be as dumb as their counterparts on the right, but she has a record of saying and doing really dumb and racist things.

I mean, I guess you could claim that the Roma and Sinti are facing redhead bullying rather than racism, no credible research or statistics will corroborate your claim. Or you can claim that everyone of paler complexion is the same race, like she did, and you still won't find anyone credible to support your claim.

I stand corrected, you don't need to give DA 'time', she already shot herself in the foot before the news broke. Jesus this lady.

1 minute ago, ml1dch said:

Yes. She has carried out whatever remediative action that they required of her and has therefore been accepted back into the party.

If her offence was too great that she cannot stand for the party, she should and would be outside the party, as Corbyn is. 

I agree that she should be outside of the party.

It's not her first incident. She has a very narrow definition of racism which only constitutes that of her own race, and has more than once said things that a Labour MP shouldn't be considering the labour racism rules.

8 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

She has followed the rules of the party, hence she now holds the Labour whip again.

Labour racism rules

Quote

1. The Labour Party is an anti-racist party, committed to combating and campaigning against all forms of racism, including antisemitism and Islamophobia.

2. Labour will not tolerate racism in any form inside or outside the party. The Labour Party will ensure that the party is a welcoming home to members of all communities, with no place for any prejudice or discrimination based on race, ethnicity or religion.

3. The Labour Party welcomes all who share our aims and values, and encourages political debate and campaigns around the vital issues, policies and injustices of our time.

4. Any behaviour or use of language which targets or intimidates members of ethnic or religious communities, or incites racism, including antisemitism and Islamophobia, or undermines Labour’s ability to campaign against any form of racism, is unacceptable conduct within the Labour Party.

Has she?

Letter

Quote

It is true that many types of white people with points of difference, such as redheads, can experience this prejudice. But they are not all their lives subject to racism. In pre-civil rights America, Irish people, Jewish people and Travellers were not required to sit at the back of the bus. In apartheid South Africa, these groups were allowed to vote. And at the height of slavery, there were no white-seeming people manacled on the slave ships.

7 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

I think that our parliamentary system requires that people you don't like are allowed to stand for election. 

She can stand for election, just not as a Labour MP. No one is barring her. She has to follow the rules of the party. Maybe her and catweazel can make their own party?

1 minute ago, ml1dch said:

Doesn't mean she should be prevented from standing. 

Personally I think someone who holds the views that Roma, Travellers and Jews doesn't face discrimination and racism, and experience more like what redheads face in regards to bullying shouldn't be a MP. But that's just me.

Give DA some time and she'll manage to do what she does best, fumble her way through some idiotics about her race being the utmost sufferer and how no one else comes close, and then she'll hopefully have the backbone to stand down from her eternal free salary position. She doesn't have the protection she used to have anymore, so she best be not writing any 'first drafts' for articles or speeches in the future. She's about as coherent in her arguments as the average drunk.