blandy Posted July 12, 2019 Moderator Share Posted July 12, 2019 51 minutes ago, peterms said: You might have quoted the next sentence, which explained that she had deleted emails from her account because of concerns that a staff member who had access to her account was a political opponent. Yes, that's the reason/excuse given. That a "political opponent" had access to her e mail account. So what she reckons is instead of blocking the access of this individual - perhaps by changing her password, or getting the IT bod to change server permissions she instead went back and deleted incriminating e mails and then used a non Labour party e mail account for Labour party business. An "unconventional" approach to IT security and data protection, that. Or a hastily concocted tall story. Who can tell? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 12, 2019 Moderator Share Posted July 12, 2019 1 hour ago, peterms said: The people who I've seen being criticised are those who seek to exploit and manipulate the situation What, like the people on the TV programme? - the young female Corbynite enthusiast, and the young bloke who talked about how it made him seriously contemplate killing himself? Dismissing those people as some kind of enemy within, whilst refusing to engage with the actual content of what they said is just lamentable in the extreme. Shooting all these messengers just makes the problem more deeply embedded and bigger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 1 minute ago, blandy said: refusing to engage with the actual content It is engaging with the actual content of issues that is being made very hard by the deliberate hyping and exaggeration of people who are using the issue as a tool to attack Corbyn and others. As many have pointed out, the motive of so many is not concern about actual antisemitism, but dislike of Corbyn's stance on Israel and Palestine, and for many others, dislike of the recent move of Labour away from Blairite policies. The people who exploit genuine concerns in this way do no favours for the people who have these concerns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted July 12, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted July 12, 2019 17 minutes ago, blandy said: Yes, that's the reason/excuse given. That a "political opponent" had access to her e mail account. So what she reckons is instead of blocking the access of this individual - perhaps by changing her password, or getting the IT bod to change server permissions she instead went back and deleted incriminating e mails and then used a non Labour party e mail account for Labour party business. An "unconventional" approach to IT security and data protection, that. Or a hastily concocted tall story. Who can tell? I've not read much on the story so don't know all the ins and outs but I can't see how they are using an email system that doesn't have an archive of all emails. I spend ages telling my staff that just because they've deleted an email from their inbox, it doesn't mean it can't be retrieved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted July 12, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted July 12, 2019 May be worth noting that Sam Matthews, the chap that claims he wanted to resign and then jump off a balcony, also seems to bear more than a little culpability for the situation through being shit at his job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 12, 2019 Moderator Share Posted July 12, 2019 1 minute ago, peterms said: It is engaging with the actual content of issues that is being made very hard by the deliberate hyping and exaggeration of people who are using the issue as a tool to attack Corbyn and others. As many have pointed out, the motive of so many is not concern about actual antisemitism, but dislike of Corbyn's stance on Israel and Palestine, and for many others, dislike of the recent move of Labour away from Blairite policies. The people who exploit genuine concerns in this way do no favours for the people who have these concerns. Yes, I pretty much agree with that. The only quibble is where you say "the motive of so many is not concern about actual antisemitism" I think that implies (as I read it) that kind of "most of" this is not to do with AS. My perception is that most of it is to do with AS, but that behind that in the list of motivations and all the rest is a mix of personal antagonisms, in-fighting over the levers of power, inadequate procedures, siege mentalities, and a general atmosphere of bitterness, distrust, anger, hopelessness, anxiety and many other feelings and failings. A while back, people were saying "the whole thing is concocted, there isn't a problem, it's entirely fictional, it's the tories and the right wing press". Which is sad, but sort of harmless naivity from outsiders of the party. But when it was from the party itself, or those around Corbyn, it was indicative of the trouble to come. And the result is what we see now. It's a much repeated human trait. First deny there's a problem, then admit there's a problem but play it down and blame it on others... etc. Until the Labour party genuinely tries to sort this out, it's going to continue to eat away at them and their support, their leader's standing and their electability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 12, 2019 Moderator Share Posted July 12, 2019 10 minutes ago, Chindie said: May be worth noting that Sam Matthews, the chap that claims he wanted to resign and then jump off a balcony, also seems to bear more than a little culpability for the situation through being shit at his job. I'm not sure how you'd know this. I'm not saying he's not by the way, I just don't see how that can be anything but uniformed opinion 1 hour ago, peterms said: It's simply a fact that complaints have not been ignored, Is it? Point me in the direction please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted July 12, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted July 12, 2019 15 minutes ago, bickster said: I'm not sure how you'd know this. I'm not saying he's not by the way, I just don't see how that can be anything but uniformed opinion Quote The Labour Party’s compliance unit took months to act on some of its most high-profile anti-Semitism cases, according to a cache of hundreds of leaked emails that reveal the party’s failure to swiftly address allegations of racism. Emails between two former senior members of the Labour compliance unit, Sam Matthews and John Stolliday, and other party officials show the unit took more than a year to suspend a member who defended British fascists involved in the 1936 Battle of Cable Street, and eight months to suspend a council candidate who posted an article that said the Holocaust was a “hoax”. The first was only suspended after a senior member of the party’s governing body, the National Executive Committee, intervened and nearly 300 Labour members signed a petition. Action was only taken against the "Holocaust hoax" candidate when his posts were shared on social media by anti-racism campaigners. The compliance unit also took nearly a year to launch a formal investigation into further comments made by Ken Livingstone on Hitler and Zionism, who was already serving a two-year suspension over previous remarks. The emails were passed to BuzzFeed News by a former Labour Party official and a member of the Labour International group, who both said they wanted to expose failings in the compliance unit’s response to anti-Semitism complaints before Jennie Formby became general secretary in April 2018. The former Labour official who shared the emails said: “These emails show Labour’s compliance unit prior to Jennie Formby taking over failed to suspend members who had made appalling anti-Semitic remarks for over a year, despite clear evidence and repeated attempts by colleagues and complainants to seek action.” Emails seen by BuzzFeed News show Labour’s compliance unit was first made aware of other offensive posts by Bull in July 2017, including one post in which he linked Israel to ISIS, a common anti-Semitic conspiracy theory. At the time he was issued with a "notice of investigation" by compliance unit official Sam Matthews, but not suspended. Labour’s Local Campaign Forum decided that Bull should be allowed to stand as a candidate. In November 2017 the compliance unit was presented with more of Bull’s Facebook activity, including the infamous "Holocaust hoax" post. Despite the mounting evidence, Matthews recommended he be given a second notice of investigation, but still not a suspension. Guidelines agreed by Labour’s NEC stated that notices of investigation should be used as the first step in a disciplinary case, rather than suspensions. The leaked correspondence shows Bull faced no action until March 2018, when a Labour official emailed the compliance unit warning that the anti-racism group Hope Not Hate was tweeting about the "Holocaust hoax" post. The official asked: “In light of how bad his social media comments are, and in light of other complaints about comments by him received by the region, should he not be suspended pending investigation?” Matthews then emailed Jeremy Corbyn aide Laura Murray to say that following the Hope Not Hate tweet drawing attention to Bull’s posts, his view was now that Bull should be suspended. Murray ordered that the suspension be sanctioned immediately, eight months after the compliance unit was originally made aware of his posts. ... In October 2016, the member wrote in the Labour International Facebook group that Oswald Mosley’s fascists had organised “a peaceful march of a legitimate political party” which was “prevented by a violent mob”. Labour’s compliance unit received a complaint about the post from Labour International, a group for Labour members who live outside the UK, in November 2016. But emails passed to BuzzFeed News by a member of Labour International show that no action was taken until October 2017, when Ann Black, a senior member of Labour’s NEC, contacted Matthews. The emails show Matthews decided to issue the member with a notice of investigation rather than a suspension. Labour International then started a petition among its members calling for the party to suspend the member, securing 289 signatures. The member was finally suspended in March 2018, 16 months after the original complaint. Matthews declined to comment due to confidentiality obligations, but a source close to the compliance unit at the time accepted that the unit took too long to take action, saying it was overwhelmed by an unprecedented volume of complaints. The source claimed that compliance unit staff feared ending up on a collision course with NEC members and Corbyn’s office over disciplinary cases, and called on the Equality and Human Rights Commission to use the powers available to it to investigate. The former Labour official who passed BuzzFeed News the emails said: “It is completely unacceptable that it took so long for the compliance unit to suspend members who had defended the blackshirts and suggested the Holocaust was a hoax. It should have been immediately clear that these cases merited suspensions.” ... A third case reveals for the first time how Labour’s compliance unit failed to launch a formal investigation into former London mayor Ken Livingstone over comments he made while on suspension, despite attempts by Corbyn’s office to step up disciplinary action. According to the emails, in January 2018 the Jewish Labour Movement raised concerns with Murray that Livingstone was due to be readmitted to the party in April that year, as his suspension for his comments linking Hitler to Zionism was due to come to an end. The emails show Labour’s compliance unit had received a number of further complaints about comments made by Livingstone in interviews after his hearing at the party’s National Constitutional Committee in April 2017, but failed to order a formal investigation in the nine months that followed. Compliance unit official John Stolliday confirmed in an email to Murray: “A second suspension was not applied, so he will come back into membership in April.” “The Party received a small number of complaints about his comments after the NCC hearing. We haven’t formally opened a new investigation yet, and that is a conversation we will have over here,” he wrote. Stolliday said that the situation meant that Livingstone was due to be “unsuspended shortly before the local elections”. He said he recognised this was “not ideal in terms of campaigning”. Murray then asked Stolliday if Livingstone’s existing suspension could be extended. She wrote that it would be “disastrous for him to be reinstated as a member just two weeks before the local elections” and requested that the compliance unit inform her of its decision. Yet Livingstone faced no action until March when he eventually had his suspension extended, nearly a whole year after the new complaints were received and two months after Murray’s request. ... The former Labour official who passed BuzzFeed News the emails said: “Even after Laura Murray’s intervention, it still took the compliance unit another two months to extend Ken Livingstone’s suspension, and that was nearly a year after they received the complaints. All the time the possibility of Livingstone being reinstated meant the party was being dragged through the mud in the press.” A Labour Party spokesperson said: "The Labour Party takes all complaints of antisemitism extremely seriously and we are committed to challenging and campaigning against it in all its forms.” A Labour Party source told BuzzFeed News that since becoming general secretary Jennie Formby has sped up the process for dealing with anti-Semitism complaints. Between April 2018, when Formby joined, and January 2019, 96 members were handed suspensions and 12 were expelled. Leaked Emails Reveal Labour’s Compliance Unit Took Months To Act Over Its Most Serious Anti-Semitism Cases Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 12, 2019 Moderator Share Posted July 12, 2019 1 hour ago, Chindie said: Leaked Emails Reveal Labour’s Compliance Unit Took Months To Act Over Its Most Serious Anti-Semitism Cases Yes I get that but it's still only from yet another leak of part of the story. There's no way of knowing what unwitten direction (or written and not leaked) anyone mentioned there was given by others in the organisation above them I'm of the opinion that the only way we'll get a clear picture is when the EHRC report is finished and published Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted July 12, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted July 12, 2019 1 minute ago, bickster said: Yes I get that but it's still only from yet another leak of part of the story. There's no way of knowing what unwitten direction (or written and not leaked) anyone mentioned there was given by others in the organisation above them I'm of the opinion that the only way we'll get a clear picture is when the EHRC report is finished and published There's no way of knowing IF direction from above was given. Apart from the fact those being criticised the make no mention of it. Funnily enough it appears for some that the only way of resolving this is Corbyn going. One wonders why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 12, 2019 Moderator Share Posted July 12, 2019 5 minutes ago, Chindie said: Funnily enough it appears for some that the only way of resolving this is Corbyn going He can stay there as long they like as far as I'm concerned. I won't be voting for them whilst he or anyone of his ilk is the leader of the party. Her's a dreadful leader, I wouldn't expect him to be able to organise a party for toddlers without asking McLusky and Milne if it was ok, then he's only do it if he could show solidarity with little Johnny who wasn't invited this time because he cried to much last year when his nappy was full 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted July 12, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted July 12, 2019 1 hour ago, bickster said: He can stay there as long they like as far as I'm concerned. I won't be voting for them whilst he or anyone of his ilk is the leader of the party. Her's a dreadful leader, I wouldn't expect him to be able to organise a party for toddlers without asking McLusky and Milne if it was ok, then he's only do it if he could show solidarity with little Johnny who wasn't invited this time because he cried to much last year when his nappy was full And on that we agree mostly. I'm not a supporter of Corbyn or the Labour party. But that is because I think he's a fairly shit leader, albeit in bad circumstances, and thus I'd not be too upset to see him go, because it's demonstrable in many ways that he's not much cop. Not because of a sinister scheme to undermine the standing of the entire party and him with some pretty grim insinuations that don't really stand up to much. Bin him by attacking him real flaws and pushing real alternatives, not by creeping around whipping up a hysteria designed to never get washed off, especially when that hysteria appears to directly contradict the record of the man and the party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 4 hours ago, bickster said: Is it? Point me in the direction please Here. Quote “Our records show that after these officials left and after Jennie Formby became general secretary, the rate at which antisemitism cases have been dealt with, increased fourfold.” It has previously been reported that the staff complement in the complaints unit was doubled last September, I think it was. Formby reported on stats back in February, including on some of the long delays there had been under her predecessor in processing cases, though some of the records that had been kept were incomplete (I don't know whether the claim that files had been destroyed by former staff also includes some records). It sounds like the unit was previously a right mess, and that progress is now being made in clearing the backlog. Yet despite this, the accusation is repeatedly made that she, and by implication the leadership, is ignoring complaints. It's astonishing that such bare-faced lies are swallowed and repeated. I can understand it from the gutter press, but not from supposedly objective onlookers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 12, 2019 Moderator Share Posted July 12, 2019 22 minutes ago, peterms said: Here. It has previously been reported that the staff complement in the complaints unit was doubled last September, I think it was. Formby reported on stats back in February, including on some of the long delays there had been under her predecessor in processing cases, though some of the records that had been kept were incomplete (I don't know whether the claim that files had been destroyed by former staff also includes some records). It sounds like the unit was previously a right mess, and that progress is now being made in clearing the backlog. Yet despite this, the accusation is repeatedly made that she, and by implication the leadership, is ignoring complaints. It's astonishing that such bare-faced lies are swallowed and repeated. I can understand it from the gutter press, but not from supposedly objective onlookers. So it's a fact because Labour says it is, righto As an aside and because I had to read the whole bloody thing to get to your quoted line, the article contains the following horseshit from Barry the Gardener Quote Speaking on Sky’s Sophy Ridge on Sunday, Barry Gardiner, the shadow international trade secretary, said Labour would not use gagging orders “to hide anything that is illegal or improper” and the party remained committed to legislating to stop firms using NDAs to cover up racism, sexual abuse or illegality. So Labour won't use NDAs for something they can't be used for but will campaign against their use for something they can't be used for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, bickster said: So it's a fact because Labour says it is, righto Well, if you are inclined to disbelieve anything and everything they say, I guess you might look at things which are either clearly facts, or which have previously been reported and are not challenged, and see if they bear out the claim made or not: - staffing has been doubled - previous staff took a lot of sickness absence - complaints first made years ago were not processed but the same is not happening currently, as has been reported You would expect having more staff on the case to result in the number of cases being dealt with increasing (unless new cases were mainly of massive complexity compared to previous ones, perhaps), so the claim is in line with observable facts and is therefore obviously plausible. If you look at things like that and still wish to disbelieve the claim that they are dealing with complaints more quickly and tackling the backlog, without any basis for thinking so, then at that point it would feel like we have moved beyond rational discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Chindie said: Bin him by attacking him real flaws and pushing real alternatives, not by creeping around whipping up a hysteria designed to never get washed off, especially when that hysteria appears to directly contradict the record of the man and the party. You can tell the money is shitting bricks. To get away with the Brexit con they need Corbyn neutralised, and can't you tell? Edited July 12, 2019 by Xann Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 12, 2019 Moderator Share Posted July 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, Xann said: To get away with the Brexit con they need Corbyn neutralised, Sorry mate, you can't be serious 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 Just now, bickster said: Sorry mate, you can't be serious Deadly serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 12, 2019 Moderator Share Posted July 12, 2019 Just now, Xann said: Deadly serious. They might be coming from different angles but they both want the same thing for completely different reasons.Corbyn doesn't stand in their way over Brexit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted July 12, 2019 Share Posted July 12, 2019 Just now, bickster said: They might be coming from different angles but they both want the same thing for completely different reasons.Corbyn doesn't stand in their way over Brexit If Brexit is forced through? The Corbyn fork pisses on the Neo-Con chips. I don't like to think what would happen down the BJ/JRM/NF route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts