Demitri_C

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

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, blandy said:

It’s now something Corbyn’s labour does, too, now the left wing controls enough of the party to do exactly the same.

Do you have any examples in mind of using the party machinery to do this?  I can't immediately think of any.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, blandy said:

Not just the right wing. Corbynites have also followed the parachuting in method. Unions, too have strong influence in some seats.  It’s another small example of the many things which when all piled up helped cause a broken British democracy and Brexit.

I actually agree with you on this, but then it's not a disgrace for people who don't like Berger, didn't want her in the first place, and don't think she represents them or the Labour party to want somebody else. As you say, that's local democracy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, peterms said:

Do you have any examples in mind of using the party machinery to do this?  I can't immediately think of any.

Dan Carden, he was chosen by the local party but he was the "Union Man" and "Corbyn Approved" candidate. The fact that he's from Liverpool is irrelevant, so were the other candidates including a current Labour MEP, The local Labour Leader (OK Chippy Tits was never going to win, he's disliked by many.) and another leading local councillor but once you get the right stamps of approval, you're in

That's the way nepotism works in Labour. think of it as democratic nepotism

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, bickster said:

Dan Carden, he was chosen by the local party but he was the "Union Man" and "Corbyn Approved" candidate. The fact that he's from Liverpool is irrelevant, so were the other candidates including a current Labour MEP, The local Labour Leader (OK Chippy Tits was never going to win, he's disliked by many.) and another leading local councillor but once you get the right stamps of approval, you're in

That's the way nepotism works in Labour. think of it as democratic nepotism

So from what I can gather, it's a case of parachuting in because not chosen by local members, but not abuse of process to do so (ie no suggestion that the timing of the former MP's resignation was engineered by head office to cause normal selection procedures to be suspended because of the imminence of the election, he just chose to run for Mayor and stood down once elected)?  Or has anyone suggested that the former MP could and should have stood down sooner, to allow a full selection to be held?  Though I suppose at the time, an election wasn't expected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, peterms said:

Do you have any examples in mind of using the party machinery to do this?  I can't immediately think of any.

Yeah, Bicks gave one, there was another in Cumbria - maybe Whitehaven, or whatever the constituency round there's called. There's a fair few. I mean it's the party's "right" to do it, kind of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

it's not a disgrace for people who don't like Berger, didn't want her in the first place, and don't think she represents them or the Labour party to want somebody else. As you say, that's local democracy. 

No, it's not...unless they don't like her for being a Jew, which does seem to be the case for at least some of them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, blandy said:

Bicks gave one

I'm trying to distinguish between using the fact of having a majority, either in the local party or on the NEC, which I think everyone accepts as legitimate, and doing things like engineering a retirement in order to prevent normal selection processes being followed, which I would suggest is an abuse of process.  I don't think Bick's example shows abuse of process.  An error of judgement, perhaps - faced with the option of selecting a candidate called Chippy Tits and failing to do so just seems wrongheaded to me.

 

15 minutes ago, blandy said:

there was another in Cumbria - maybe Whitehaven, or whatever the constituency round there's called

This one, perhaps?

Quote

A three-way battle will take place tonight to select Labour’s Parliamentary by-election candidate.

Hospital campaigner Rachel Holliday, Copeland councillor Gillian Troughton and Allerdale councillor Barbara Cannon will fight for party members’ votes in Egremont Market Hall to get the nod in the race to succeed outgoing MP Jamie Reed.

Labour’s selection process has already been mired in controversy amid reports that the influential GMB union will refuse to back Mrs Holliday, should she win tonight’s vote, after its preferred candidates failed to make the final shortlist.

A source told The Whitehaven News that the GMB, which has backed Labour’s Copeland seat since the 1930s, is “furious” at the decision of the party’s national selection panel to overlook Cumbria county councillor Tim Knowles and former Dunfermline and West Fife MP Thomas Docherty for its shortlist.

It is understood that eight were originally shortlisted and it was whittled down to the final three last Friday.

It has been claimed in the national press that Mrs Holliday is party leader Jeremy Corbyn’s preferred choice to contest the by-election.

The source told The Whitehaven News that the selection panel of Labour’s ruling National Executive Committee (NEC) – made up of Kate Osamor, the Shadow Secretary for International Development, Jennie Formby, the Unite union’s political director and Christine Shawcroft, the new director of left-wing movement Momentum – “clearly did not want the GMB’s candidate to win the selection”.

Which again sounds like exercising a majority on a decision-making body, not twisting the process.  I can see that supporters of people not selected don't like the outcome, but I can't see accusations of impropriety. 

I suppose if the GMB candidate had won, people would have said they had bought the seat.

I see Chuka Umunna's local party has voted to allow all members to vote in selections.  His supporters had tried to prevent this, having decisions made by a smaller body which they have tended to control.  Both options are permissible under the rules, and people will tend to favour the one which they think maximises their chances of success.  Again, this seems to me not to be an abuse of process, whereas something like inducing a retiring MP to delay the announcement so that normal selection procedures have to be suspended does seem like abuse of process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, peterms said:

...sounds like exercising a majority on a decision-making body, not twisting the process.  I can see that supporters of people not selected don't like the outcome

That may well be the one. Thing is, all these "shenanigans" sound as you write, to the doers of the shenanigans. That's the whole point, whether by more centrist, or more leftist. They use "leeway and interpretation" of the "rules" which are not really as black and white as they should be, they use "pressure" and promise of reward and all kinds to get "their" preferred candidate into prime position. All the parties and all factions of the parties do it. I don't see it as the case at all, that Catweazle and his tramps are different in this regard. His mate Chris Williamson, I think his name is - a nobber from Derby, anyway, went round the constituencies of a fair few MPs sceptical of Corbyn's merits and did a sort of threat roadshow to try and intimidate them from voicing any differences of opinions on their leader, for fear of stirring against reselection. "we wouldn't want your election chances to have a little accident, now, would we?" Not exactly outside the rules, but not exactly comradely either. Typical of the hard left, though.

We've probably strayed too far from Brexit here, mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, peterms said:

faced with the option of selecting a candidate called Chippy Tits and failing to do so just seems wrongheaded to me.

 

Chippy Tits (His twitter account is the second entry when you google Chippy Tits :crylaugh:)

 

a24622a96d7f2e016a80b89739b43e65_400x400

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, blandy said:

All the parties and all factions of the parties do it

The kind of thing I'm talking about is this.

(Don't know why it's all in hyperlinks)

Quote

The Blairites were doing this as a deliberate tactic, and also looking for excuses to suspend local parties so that candidates could be imposed.  This is an abuse of process.

No, not all factions do this.

As for deselection, Williamson has himself been threatened with it, and Remainers are targetting MPs who voted against Cooper's amendment.  The idea that it's some sort of "hard left" preserve is just not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, bickster said:

His twitter account is the second entry when you google Chippy Tits

It is, too.  I had to try it.  And now I've learned what Chippy Tits means, so my day has not been wasted.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, peterms said:

No, and I'm not aware of anyone having said that.

What has been said repeatedly is that there is a deliberate campaign to paint Corbyn supporters as antisemitic, for wider political purposes such as defence of Israel from criticism, or to discredit Corbyn and his supporters more generally.  Some people think that is not the case, and that it's all real.  The article illustrates some of the fabrications which have happened in pursuit of this aim.

I'd have thought that anyone who is genuinely concerned about antisemitism would be keen to differentiate actual cases from lies and exaggeration, and to deal with the actual cases.

Yes, it would be great if Labour actually dealt with the high profile cases instead of letting people go on with their racist b.s. We can agree there Peter.

I.e. not letting Ken Livingstone stay a part of the Labour party for 2 years until he quit himself over clear racist idiocy. Sadly Labour can't claim they are dealing with the "actual" cases when such clear cut issues are being swept under the rug because these people are clear close allies of Corbyn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, peterms said:

The idea that it's some sort of "hard left" preserve is just not the case

Totally agree. As I've said, all parties and factions do it. Corbyn's been in charge for how long? If he manages to stay in charge there will be more examples in the coming years. It's human nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, peterms said:

Well, this was a total shock, I can tell you.  People making up lies to portray the Labour Party as antisemitic?  And with involvement from Israel?  Surely not!

More bollocks

 

Whilst I've always said there's an element of that, there's also an element of genuine anti-semitism towards certain MPs like Luciana Berger. I've seen it with my own eyes and from people I actually know exist, in fact, I'd call them old acquaintances. I can also point people in the direction of people who just genuinely don't like Luciana Berger for quite genuine reasons, some of which I agree with, who don't have to resort to anti-semitism to get their point across but there are an awful lot who do both in and on the fringes of the Labour Party. The anti-semitism has been there a lot longer than the media have been paying attention, a lot longer than Corbyn has been anywhere near power and to pretend it isn't there is completely misses the point. There may be trolls making up lies but trust me, they jumped on something that actually existed in the first place

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bickster said:

There may be trolls making up lies

There are trolls, and lies, and abuse all over.  What seems odd and different to me is creating lots of fake accounts purporting to be from supporters of Corbyn, to post antisemitic stuff.  It's unarguably a deliberate attempt to stoke the antisemitism thing, but it also seems unusual.

I know that people like Abbott and Soubry get loads of abuse and threats.  I haven't heard of cases of people making up false identities and posting such abuse while purporting to be people supporting, for example, Wes Streeting or Rees-Mogg in order to discredit them.  False identities and abuse, yes.  A number of accounts pretending to be part of the support for a specific political figure in doing so, well, I've not heard of it happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, peterms said:

There are trolls, and lies, and abuse all over.  What seems odd and different to me is creating lots of fake accounts purporting to be from supporters of Corbyn, to post antisemitic stuff.  It's unarguably a deliberate attempt to stoke the antisemitism thing, but it also seems unusual.

I know that people like Abbott and Soubry get loads of abuse and threats.  I haven't heard of cases of people making up false identities and posting such abuse while purporting to be people supporting, for example, Wes Streeting or Rees-Mogg in order to discredit them.  False identities and abuse, yes.  A number of accounts pretending to be part of the support for a specific political figure in doing so, well, I've not heard of it happening.

You know Twitter is a thing yeah? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, bickster said:

You know Twitter is a thing yeah? 

Do you know of such campaigns on Twitter, aimed at other politicians, involving creating false accounts purporting to be their supporters to discredit them by linking them with views which they reject and which would go against their core beliefs?  I can't recall hearing of them.  Which do you have in mind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, peterms said:

Do you know of such campaigns on Twitter, aimed at other politicians, involving creating false accounts purporting to be their supporters to discredit them by linking them with views which they reject and which would go against their core beliefs?  I can't recall hearing of them.  Which do you have in mind?

I think you're missing the point somewhat Peter. troll farms, choose targets of opportunity in the required area they are attacking. They'll use whatever tactic supports their aim best, jumping on a bandwagon to amplify the discontent already expressed. They'll do it whichever way they'll get the best results

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/02/2019 at 22:27, peterms said:

Well, this was a total shock, I can tell you.  People making up lies to portray the Labour Party as antisemitic?  And with involvement from Israel?  Surely not!

More bollocks

looking closely at that article, some things stand out.

10 twitter accounts have been identified by the article writer as troll accounts. The writer suspects they are all run by the same person, or source. The writer doesn't know who or what is behind them "it’s impossible to know for sure who is behind [the 10 twitter accounts]" However the writer earlier wrote that (following from your linked article) 

Quote
  • I interpret this as the latest in a series of death threats by a supporter of Nick Griffin who has stolen five faces of Muslims from the internet to set up four fake accounts that call for mass murder of Jews, gays, Zionists, Blairites and anyone who is not a Muslim as defined by him. He is not a Muslim. This is a criminal con artist supporter of Nick Griffin who is using these fake accounts to blame Jeremy Corbyn for his calls for mass murder to help so called journalists at the BBC, SKY, Channel4 News, ITV and Channel5. He keeps threatening me with death for exposing him and he belongs behind bars. I can’t understand why Twitter doesn’t care about this. Please justify yourself....I sent this to @Twitter when I told them I interpret some of @LabSaleh’s latest tweets as death threats to me and one other user of Twitter who has exposed this individual as a troll who has stolen five faces and invented four names to set up four accounts that repeatedlycall for murdering Jews, gays, Zionists and Blairites in the name of all Muslims and of Jeremy Corbyn.

The next thing that's clear is that the website, and the writer are from the left of Labour. He is writing from a left wing and anti Israel perspective - it's not a neutral article, it's a political article w(hich is fine, of course) - evidenced by this type of sentence

Quote

"The campaign has found support among the declining Labour right, including many of the party’s lawmakers, some of them involved with pro-Israel groups

So there's a few things at play, here. a suspected BNP person posing as both Muslim and non-muslim Labour members makes some vile posts about Jews, Blairites, gays, Zionists...etc. The posts are not limited to anti-semitism, though that's bad enough.

A normal person in the street, seeing the tweets of these troll accounts (and being under the impression they were real people, would likely consider that the accounts were of bigoted, homophobic, anti-semitic, unbalanced, anti Blairite extremists. They would consider the posters as vile and shameful and perhaps by association consider the Labour party and muslims as shamed - as the writer of the article says

Quote

Those who created the fake accounts also exploited Islamophobic prejudice that anti-Semitism is endemic among Muslims, including activists within Labour.

You ask "And with involvement from Israel? " The article writer didn't really think so. Which isn't to say that Israeli gov't activities don't frequently stray into the appalling and underhand. They do. Israel is clearly worried about the impact of the whole Boycott & Divest & Sanctions movement and the potential for it to have a massive economic and thus political impact on them. Personally I think this is the motivation behind much of the clandestine stuff they do - if they can discredit BDS supporters, or put off BDS supporters, then they weaken the movement which will hit Israel's economy and thus threaten their positions, ultimately.

Anyway, what;s that got to do with Labour?  A robust process for rooting out these 10 trolls and any other real or fake accounts posting anti-semitic, anti-gay, anti Blair, anti muslim bile would get the accounts shut down and disowned or exposed as fakes. It also wouldn't offer political opponenents to make hay.

Further, citing 10 troll accounts and then asking or hinting at " involvement from Israel"   is exactly the sort of wrong headed (if it were to come from Labour) response which makes the situation look worse to the public. "Anti-semitism - it was Israel" The right headed response would more along the lines of "anti-semitism - a small number of fake accounts posting hate speech have been uncovered. Our processes investigate all instances of hate and uncover both malicious trolls and occasionally genuine instances of hate speech, including anti-semitism and we take the strongest action possible when we find it, including working with the police if necessary"

Meanwhile, as Luciana Berger said

Quote

Three people have received prison sentences for the anti-semitism they have directed at me. The cases I have had to go to court over have disproportionately been due to the actions of people from the far right.

Last week I received a torrent of abuse from people purporting to be of the left. One person, who I am told is a member of the Labour Party, emailed me to say that I should kill myself.

This has all happened following my request to Jeremy Corbyn’s office to explain why he posted a comment opposing the removal of an anti-semitic mural, showing Jewish bankers getting rich off the backs of the poor, and my attendance at a rally showing solidarity with the Jewish community...

I'd really hope she'd be getting support both from Labour's leadership and the wider Labour party, given what she has to deal with. It's an ugly, ugly situation. She shouldn't be told "pledge your loyalty and it'll go away" by McDonnell. Her colleagues, and definitely the leadership should be voicing absolutely clear "stop, not in our name" condemnation of the abuse.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites