The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[snowychap]

16 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

Didn't say you did Snowy. Far from it. I didn't click on the tweet, or read what else he said either. I'm not making a case of his opinion is any less important than another. If I misinterpreted what he (and you for that matter) said, then I apologies whole heartedly.

On the second point, you quoted me, I responded to that. Unless I'm missing something, I'm not sure what I posted that disappointed you? Again, maybe I'm totally missing the point? If that's the case, please let me know, and I'll gladly retract anything I said that offended you, if I feel you have a valid point.

You failed to read beyond the single tweet that I quoted even though I specifically said that it was a thread worth reading?

And then you took what was said in that single tweet (which didn't appear to me to be some part of an anti-Corbyn smear - as I said he looks like he's giving Corbyn credit about trying to rectify something) as enough to respond by putting David Schneider in the 'smear Jeremy', 'MSM lack of interest' box in contrast to the other groups that you listed.

Your original reply appears to be a formulated, reflex, defensive response which has instinctively assumed my post, my opinion or the (reference to) tweets by David Schneider to have been an unwarranted attack on Corbyn.

[blandy]

2 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

We’ve been here before though. Those on the left of the party, who have been smeared, and seen the twice democratically elected leader of the party repeatedly smeared keep coming up against this time and time again. This time something has arisen that is difficult to find a defence for, because the basis of the accusation isn’t something that can be easily proved or disproved.

I don't think that argument, and it's one that's made a lot, is valid. I think it's deflection. 

You're right, I'm sure. Most members of Labour aren't antisemitic, mayny won't have expereinced and instances of it. BUT some are. So just get on with closing that down as best as you possibly can. Improve the complaint processes and be firm on taking action. Why is Ken Livingston still a member?

The way to "win" is to take away the flaws. Unfortunately Corbyn's judgement time and time again is really poor. He's got a history of ignoring the anti-semitic aspects of some proper knobheads as well as being caught out a few times himself. I don't think he is quite anti-semitic, but he is clearly someone who appears to have a bit of a blind spot in terms of associating with people who are.

[dAVe80]

9 minutes ago, snowychap said:

You failed to read beyond the single tweet that I quoted even though I specifically said that it was a thread worth reading?

And then you took what was said in that single tweet (which didn't appear to me to be some part of an anti-Corbyn smear - as I said he looks like he's giving Corbyn credit about trying to rectify something) as enough to respond by putting David Schneider in the 'smear Jeremy', 'MSM lack of interest' box in contrast to the other groups that you listed.

Your original reply appears to be a formulated, reflex, defensive response which has instinctively assumed my post, my opinion or the (reference to) tweets by David Schneider to have been an unwarranted attack on Corbyn.

OK, it appears I did misinterpret what you said. I retract my response and apologies. If it seems formulaic it's because it's a view point I've had to put forward a lot in the past 24 hours or so.  

[dAVe80]

7 minutes ago, blandy said:

I don't think that argument, and it's one that's made a lot, is valid. I think it's deflection. 

You're right, I'm sure. Most members of Labour aren't antisemitic, mayny won't have expereinced and instances of it. BUT some are. So just get on with closing that down as best as you possibly can. Improve the complaint processes and be firm on taking action. Why is Ken Livingston still a member?

The way to "win" is to take away the flaws. Unfortunately Corbyn's judgement time and time again is really poor. He's got a history of ignoring the anti-semitic aspects of some proper knobheads as well as being caught out a few times himself. I don't think he is quite anti-semitic, but he is clearly someone who appears to have a bit of a blind spot in terms of associating with people who are.

The Ken Livingstone thing puzzles me too. As much as it may seem it, I'm not a Corbyn fanboy, and do believe he has flaws. I can see merit in your argument, and concede that this issue should have been put to bed a long time ago. I do still hold the view point that he's being disproportionally criticized on this issue.  

[blandy]

2 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

he's being disproportionally criticized on this issue.

That's probably true, I agree - though it's difficult to answer the question "how much criticism is the right amount for a poor response/blind eye/failure to see/failure to react to [anti-semitism]"

In general, (and perhaps partly because I don't rate Corbyn at all and therefore would say this, wouldn't I?) it seems to me that there's kind of an ingrained viewpoint and world view amongst a lot of Corbyn supporters that any criticism comes from people who are plotting to overthrow/ are biased / are media stooges /are etc.. which reduces down to all criticsm of Corbyn is invalid as a knee jerk reaction (not on VT, but in the wider world). - "Someone's criticised JC, attack them immediately", which then means valid criticism or comment gets ignored or worse, excuded and the problem grows and worms its way deeper.

What starts with a sympathy for Palestinians, turns to anger against the Israeli government or army, to feeling you can see why Hamas might be so furious, to understanding that they might feel they have nothing to lose in retaliating, to condoning indiscriminate Rocket attacks on Israel, to welcoming Hamas leaders as friends and seeing people who criticise Hamas as Jewish stooges...and that kind of loop leads to anti-semitic words and bahviours and even actions.  It starts off perhaps with "good" sympathy but leads to a darker mindset, and then it gets embedded and someone who started out as an idealist turns out, over time to be a wrong 'un.

[Xann]

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

That's probably true, I agree

No shit, Sherlock.

How many people are actually getting dry humped by the Tories?

How many of Jewish extraction are actually getting dry humped by Labour?

 

Labour aren't in power of course, but I'm sure they'll be introducing fascist style antisemitic laws should they get in

Of course that's the line that will taken by the press if sanctions were to be introduced against Israel.

 

Get a f***ing grip people.

 

 

[snowychap]

39 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

OK, it appears I did misinterpret what you said. I retract my response and apologies. If it seems formulaic it's because it's a view point I've had to put forward a lot in the past 24 hours or so.  

That's rather what I suspected and it's why I was disappointed as I've read enough of your posts on any number of subjects on here to know that, even if I don't agree with you, they're normally considered and respond to what someone has actually said (okay, we're all guilty of not doing that at some point!).

Anyway, apologies accepted.

Edit: And I'll offer some of my own as I think I was probably a bit too confrontational in my replies.

Edited March 27, 2018 by snowychap
Rejigged the sentence order.

[blandy]

1 minute ago, Xann said:

No shit, Sherlock.

How many people are actually getting dry humped by the Tories? How many of Jewish extraction are actually getting dry humped by Labour?

Labour aren't in power of course, but I'm sure they'll be introducing fascist style antisemitic laws should they get in  Of course that's the line that will taken by the press if sanctions were to be introduced against Israel.

Get a f***ing grip people.

It's not a choice between two bad things - either Jewish people choose to be dry humped by Labour or alternatively more? people get dry humped by the tories.

Both those things are bad. Both should be fought against. It's frankly good that a large section of the media and the internets is criticisng Labour on their flaws. Hopefully all the attention will get them to sort their act out. It seems like there's beginning to be a realisation within that acxtually, yes, they do need to do more and be better.

And then everyone can go back to Brexit, austerity, and other general idocy as normal. 

[Xann]

1 minute ago, blandy said:

It's not a choice between two bad things...

No it's not - You're right!

One is a harsh reality suffered by millions.

[tonyh29]

23 minutes ago, blandy said:

In general, (and perhaps partly because I don't rate Corbyn at all and therefore would say this, wouldn't I?) it seems to me that there's kind of an ingrained viewpoint and world view amongst a lot of Corbyn supporters that any criticism comes from people who are plotting to overthrow/ are biased / are media stooges /are etc.. which reduces down to all criticsm of Corbyn is invalid as a knee jerk reaction (not on VT, but in the wider world). - "Someone's criticised JC, attack them immediately", which then means valid criticism or comment gets ignored or worse, excuded and the problem grows and worms its way deeper.

Other then Heskey is a donkey , they are probably the truest words ever written on VT ,

[Chindie]

I thinking Corbyn's support might be forgiven for being, let's say, defensive, when it seems there has been an overtly hostile front presented from many angles since his leadership began. Even in the month you've had everything from he's a treacherous spy to he's a Moscow shill to now the nudge nudge wink wink he hates the Jews. Which is daft. I can understand support jumping on everything when it seems they are under siege.

To please everyone, I'm not a Corbyn supporter (or Labour really) and think he's mostly guilty of being a feeble politician.

[dAVe80]

58 minutes ago, snowychap said:

That's rather what I suspected and it's why I was disappointed as I've read enough of your posts on any number of subjects on here to know that, even if I don't agree with you, they're normally considered and respond to what someone has actually said (okay, we're all guilty of not doing that at some point!).

Anyway, apologies accepted.

Edit: And I'll offer some of my own as I think I was probably a bit too confrontational in my replies.

Good man. Appreciated.

[OutByEaster?]

6 hours ago, blandy said:

What starts with a sympathy for Palestinians, turns to anger against the Israeli government or army, to feeling you can see why Hamas might be so furious, to understanding that they might feel they have nothing to lose in retaliating, to condoning indiscriminate Rocket attacks on Israel, to welcoming Hamas leaders as friends and seeing people who criticise Hamas as Jewish stooges.

I agree with the point you're making about the fine line between disliking the regime in Israel and taking that extra step into making the cultural association with all Jewish people - I actually think that your example here is a good one too - because for me, right up until the last two words, there's nothing anti-semitic in it - and indeed if you replaced the word Jewish at the end with Israeli, I'd say that's not an anti-semitic viewpoint. Now I'm not sure if you'd agree or not, and I'd understand whichever way it is - but that's probably a decent example of how peculiar this line can be. 

 

 

[snowychap]

3 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I agree with the point you're making about the fine line between disliking the regime in Israel and taking that extra step into making the cultural association with all Jewish people - I actually think that your example here is a good one too - because for me, right up until the last two words, there's nothing anti-semitic in it - and indeed if you replaced the word Jewish at the end with Israeli, I'd say that's not an anti-semitic viewpoint. Now I'm not sure if you'd agree or not, and I'd understand whichever way it is - but that's probably a decent example of how peculiar this line can be.

One incident on its own is forgiveable, more than that starts to become a pattern.

I'm someone who has had more than one argument on here about both the actions of the Israeli state with regard to Gaza and some of the accusations of anti-semitism that have been put forward against all sorts of people (including Corbyn). Genuinely, I think people are much too partisan on all of these issues and, worryingly, this places them on the same platform (at whichever end of the scale) as some pretty grim characters and views.

[snowychap]

[magnkarl]

Again, Labour needs to sort its act out on allowing frank buffoons to talk about Holocaust in conjunction with Israeli politics. Israel in 2018 has very little to do with what happened in the war and Labour politicians should know better than to make any sort of link. The fact that Israeli officials sometimes act defensively is well known - so why on earth do (read: some) Labour MP's and politicians (Naz Shah, Livingstone, Corbyn, Bull) keep stepping in this mess over and over?

I can only conclude that labour are way too lax on punishing antisemitic idiocy like that of Livingstone. When they did not deal with his apparent vile views they've left themselves open to continued idiocy like that of Bull. Corbyn supporters going "oh but the Tories are racist too!" need to wake up - it's not okay to be racist just because someone else is. Some soul searching is needed - either you're against racism of all people or you're just a bit simpleminded, really. Would Corbyn support a Jewish artist who painted a mural making fun of the plight  of Palestine in the way that this mural made fun of holocaust?

I feel like a broken record discussing this issue with Corbyn supporters. The great anti racist party who can't quite seem to deal with its own racists. Then again I guess it would be hard when Corbyn's glasses cannot differentiate between the modern conflict in Palestine and holocaust denial\mockery.

To Corbyn however it's nothing new. From going to ceremonies honouring Munich bombers, to praising Hamas, to letting Jewish MP's get hounded for years by his own attack dogs. It's all socialist - m'lud.

Edited March 29, 2018 by magnkarl

[snowychap]

1 hour ago, magnkarl said:

this mural made fun of holocaust

The mural that is the centre of the row (facebook posts by Corbyn, &c.) didn't 'make fun of holocaust', did it?

It obviously pursued the stupid, anti-semitic trope that Jews somehow control the world by depicting a group of obviously Jewish looking old men (which the artist later admitted were to represent the 'Rothschilds' et al) sat around a monopoly board on the backs of some (naked?) others. That is the basis of the (quite correct, in my opinion) accusation of anti-semitism against the artist and the mural itself.

Edited March 29, 2018 by snowychap

[magnkarl]

1 hour ago, snowychap said:

The mural that is the centre of the row (facebook posts by Corbyn, &c.) didn't 'make fun of holocaust', did it?

It obviously pursued the stupid, anti-semitic trope that Jews somehow control the world by depicting a group of obviously Jewish looking old men (which the artist later admitted were to represent the 'Rothschilds' et al) sat around a monopoly board on the backs of some (naked?) others. That is the basis of the (quite correct, in my opinion) accusation of anti-semitism against the artist and the mural itself.

Compare Nazi propaganda from the 1930's and the mural - and it's not a stretch to say that it's making fun of holocaust. The style of painting Jews is taking from the same posters that claimed that Jews would drain Christians of blood in Germany before shit hit the fan. The artist knew what he was doing - if he did this with motives aiming at any other ethnic group no one would even blink an eye at it being taken down. 

What made direct fun of Holocaust was the fact that you have a disciplinary chief in Labour, who is also a director in momentum, trying to defend Allan Bull's post on facebook where he claims that Red Cross has said that the holocaust is a "hoax" with an edited picture of the gates of Auschwitz saying "muh Holocaust". A place where most of the Jews alive in the UK today had family butchered.

I agree with you on the second bit though. I read the twitter thread you posted the other day and the amount of low ball racism going on there is beyond me. Is this really how far the labour party will go to defend their weak leader's transgressions just a few years ago?

[snowychap]

12 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Compare Nazi propaganda from the 1930's and the mural - and it's not a stretch to say that it's making fun of holocaust. The style of painting Jews is taking from the same posters that claimed that Jews would drain Christians of blood in Germany before shit hit the fan. The artist knew what he was doing - if he did this with motives aiming at any other ethnic group no one would even blink an eye at it being taken down. 

What made direct fun of Holocaust was the fact that you have a disciplinary chief in Labour, who is also a director in momentum, trying to defend Allan Bull's post on facebook where he claims that Red Cross has said that the holocaust is a "hoax" with an edited picture of the gates of Auschwitz saying "muh Holocaust". A place where most of the Jews alive in the UK today had family butchered.

It is a stretch and it's a stretch that, not unintentionally, muddies the waters considerably.

It's a stretch that permits you to do what you have done above in move seamlessly from an accusation about one thing to an accusation about something else.

It's an unnecessary and unhelpful conflation of issues.

[chrisp65]

Shawcross out, Izzard in

 

 

Izzard confirms the hat has not been 'shopped