EHRC report into antisemitism

[local]

Labour will suffer for this for years until they clear out the top layer of the party including Starmer.
He happily stood with and supported Corbyn and now he throws him under a bus for political expediency.
How lucky we are that the majority didn't vote for this sorry rabble.
Starmers nauseating apology shows how easily he lies.
He happily stood by Labours whitewash attempt wth the above mentioned equally nauseating Chakrabarti .

[Toodles McGinty]

Whether or not the previous leader of the Labour Party is a racist is beside the point?

What an incredible statement.

You took that totally out of context. Like the missing 'n'.

In terms of stamping out antisemitism, yes. He should have done that regardless of his views. Antisemitism, Islamophobia, any racism or bigotry. It should not be tolerated regardless of personal views. I don't know his personal views, I'm not a mind reader.

I've always condemned him for not stamping out antisemitism in the first place, so let's not make this personal.

[Desert Region]

You took that totally out of context. Like the missing 'n'.

In terms of stamping out antisemitism, yes. He should have done that regardless of his views. Antisemitism, Islamophobia, any racism or bigotry. It should not be tolerated regardless of personal views. I don't know his personal views, I'm not a mind reader.

I've always condemned him for not stamping out antisemitism in the first place, so let's not make this personal.

If Corbyn is a racist then that will be a deeply integral and personal matter for him.

Here's your context:

Whether he is antisemitic or not is beside the point, I've always said he should have stamped it out before it became a problem. As you say, he's listened to the Corbynistas of Momentum rather than the victims. Someone posted on another thread all the times he's stood up for the Jewish community, but as leader and allowing this poison to continue makes him ultimately responsible.

Incredibly, you state that his being or not being a racist will have had no connection or influence as to his willingness or ability to have stamped out Labour anti-Semitism!

Apparently, his attitudes, racist or not, have not been the problem, and are beside the point. The problem has been that he "listened to the Corbynistas of Momentum rather than the victims." So, this narrative shifts away from Corbyn and onto the bad influence elsewhere. His own attitudes, racist or not, apparently have had no influence regards his listening skills or focus.

Then you mention about "all the times he's stood up for the Jewish community" pushing the he's-a-good-man-really narrative.

Do the Jewish community consider Corbyn as a friend, then?


Jewish News

Report shows why British Jews’ fear of Corbyn was not unfounded

https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/repo...not-unfounded/


Antisemitism group to make complaints against individual MPs amid EHRC report

CAA has written to the party focusing on MPs including Diane Abbott, Apsana Begum, Richard Burgon, Barry Gardiner, Afzal Khan and Zarah Sultan

In the wake of the damning Equalities and Human Rights Commission’s investigation into Labour Party antisemitism, the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) has announced it is making a series of complaints against Labour MPs — beginning with former leader Jeremy Corbyn. And it says that the news of Corbyn’s suspension from the Party and the withdrawal of the Labour whip is “a hugely significant turning point and an indicator of real change and accountability at last”.

At last, says the CAA, “our complaints against Mr Corbyn and other sitting Labour MPs who seemed untouchable, are now being acted upon.”

https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/antisemitism-group-to-make-complaints-against-individual-mps-amid-ehrc-report/

[Toodles McGinty]

If Corbyn is a racist then that will be a deeply integral and personal matter for him.

Here's your context:



Incredibly, you state that his being or not being a racist will have had no connection or influence as to his willingness or ability to have stamped out Labour anti-Semitism!

Apparently, his attitudes, racist or not, have not been the problem, and are beside the point. The problem has been that he "listened to the Corbynistas of Momentum rather than the victims." So, this narrative shifts away from Corbyn and onto the bad influence elsewhere. His own attitudes, racist or not, apparently have had no influence regards his listening skills or focus....

I started this thread stating emphatically that I'm glad he's been suspended.

I've never done anything but condemn any kind of racism anywhere. I've always condemned antisemitism in the Labour party or anywhere else. And I've always condemned Corbyn for not stopping it the moment it started.

The context of post #14 was a response to bensherman's post:

He relied on sections of the party to support his leadership where anti-semitism is common and turned a blind eye.

In that context, whether he's antisemitic or not is beside that point, he shouldn't have listened to the Corbynistas and it shouldn't have been tolerated by the leader of the party. No excuses. No defence of him.

Not sure why you're cherry picking certain words or phrases, but as I said in post #8, hate crimes are hate crimes, regardless of who perpetrates them.

[Desert Region]

I started this thread stating emphatically that I'm glad he's been suspended.

I've never done anything but condemn any kind of racism anywhere. I've always condemned antisemitism in the Labour party or anywhere else. And I've always condemned Corbyn for not stopping it the moment it started.

The context of post #14 was a response to bensherman's post:

He relied on sections of the party to support his leadership where anti-semitism is common and turned a blind eye.

In that context, whether he's antisemitic or not is beside that point, he shouldn't have listened to the Corbynistas and it shouldn't have been tolerated by the leader of the party. No excuses. No defence of him.

Not sure why you're cherry picking certain words or phrases, but as I said in post #8, hate crimes are hate crimes, regardless of who perpetrates them.

In post #19 you said I was quoting you "totally out of context." regards the statement "Whether he is antisemitic or not is besides the point..."

In post #20 I demonstrated that I wasn't, by discussing the statement in the context of the paragraph you posted it in.

Again, even in this response you keep on insisting on this seperation between Corbynistas and Corbyn himself, as in:

In that context, whether he's antisemitic or not is beside that point, he shouldn't have listened to the Corbynistas and it shouldn't have been tolerated by the leader of the party. No excuses. No defence of him.

Again, there's this notion that the Corbynistas were the 'bad influence' who were manipulating the good but weak man Corbyn with their bad advice.

Is it not possible that Corbyn himself could be thought of as a bit of a Corbynista?! Is it not possible that those closest to Corbyn were doing his bidding? The most straight-forward explanation is that the followers were following the leader.

If Corbyn is racist then that would be the fundamental reason why Labour Party anti-Semitism wasn't stamped out on his watch.

[Toodles McGinty]

In post #19 you said I was quoting you "totally out of context." regards the statement "Whether he is antisemitic or not is besides the point..."

In post #20 I demonstrated that I wasn't, by discussing the statement in the context of the paragraph you posted it in.

Again, even in this response you keep on insisting on this seperation between Corbynistas and Corbyn himself, as in:



Again, there's this notion that the Corbynistas were the 'bad influence' who were manipulating the good but weak man Corbyn with their bad advice.

Is it not possible that Corbyn himself could be thought of as a bit of a Corbynista?! Is it not possible that those closest to Corbyn were doing his bidding? The most straight-forward explanation is that the followers were following the leader.

If Corbyn is racist then that would be the fundamental reason why Labour Party anti-Semitism wasn't stamped out on his watch.

You're just trying to provoke some kind of argument. You're splitting hairs. Just like:

I doubt that when it comes to anti-Semitism, history will judge "Corby" as being simply "tone-deaf" or will see him as ever being someone who "struck out" at anti-Semitism.

What was 'Corby' about? As though I always call him that? As though it was a term of affection? You took a spelling mistake and my reference to the post he wrote today as if I was defending him. When I specifically started the thread to condemn him.

And the rest? Not a word to the poster who said Corbyn was 'foolish', but a big rant at me, complete with links and illustrations, about the person I denounced in the first place. And whose antisemitism I've denounced for years.

Not sure why you're doing this, or what your problem is with me personally, but you really need to look elsewhere when it comes to racists or antisemites.

[sandGroundZero]

One or more regular posters to this Q Local Southport forum have a degree of 'emotional investment ' in the Labour Party. Toodles McGinty got in first with this thread devoted to the EHRC Report.

Happily, I have no particular regard for Labour. [I did though vote for the local parliamentary candidate in recent elections, if only because her opponents were (even more) unappealing.]

Having perused sections of the Report, it strikes me that the current Labour leader, Keir Starmer, is engaged in damage limitation with his uncompromising rhetoric. But, what is the damage, really?

The Report notes that Ken Livingston and Pam Bromley (the latter name, heretofore unknown to me) as "agents" of the party offended the Jewish community and others. The Labour party's unwieldy administrative procedures were too slow in ejecting or otherwise disciplining this pair.

Keir Starmer and Jeremy Corbyn

The Equality and Human Rights Commission was a Labour government's creation and the Equality Acts of 2006 & 2010 were the Labour government's Acts. The ancient Greeks had a word (goddess ?) for this — nemesis. I suspect that if the EHRC were induced to investigate any "association" as makeshift and as complex as large, British political parties and it then pronounced lax procedures vis-à-vis two individual 'agents' that organization would count itself fairly reprimanded. Uncompromising Keir Starmer will fail to preserve the Labour Party. I predict.

[Desert Region]

You're just trying to provoke some kind of argument. You're splitting hairs. Just like:

What was 'Corby' about? As though I always call him that? As though it was a term of affection? You took a spelling mistake and my reference to the post he wrote today as if I was defending him. When I specifically started the thread to condemn him.

And the rest? Not a word to the poster who said Corbyn was 'foolish', but a big rant at me, complete with links and illustrations, about the person I denounced in the first place. And whose antisemitism I've denounced for years.

Not sure why you're doing this, or what your problem is with me personally, but you really need to look elsewhere when it comes to racists or antisemites.

An argument on QLocal! Never!

"Corby" came across as another of your political nicknames, such as "Fat Al."

Why does someone having a discussion with someone on QLocal have to be personally motivated somehow? I've disagreed with Local and their defence of President Trump for years but I don't think Local has ever decided that I was being personal.

Examples of posters getting (unfoundedly) personal would be Local suggesting you're an alcoholic and you calling Local a "nonce."

[Toodles McGinty]

An argument on QLocal! Never!

"Corby" came across as another of your political nicknames, such as "Fat Al."

Why does someone having a discussion with someone on QLocal have to be personally motivated somehow? I've disagreed with Local and their defence of President Trump for years but I don't think Local has ever decided that I was being personal.

Examples of posters getting (unfoundedly) personal would be Local suggesting you're an alcoholic and you calling Local a "nonce."

It was a simple typo, I assure you. You won't find me calling him anything but Corbyn, apart from joshing Hamble about him, calling him 'Jezzer'.

I called Local that after months and months of having to read slurs about alcoholism, about which I don't recall anyone mentioning him being 'unfoundedly personal' until I reported him. It seems Said decided it was a suitable insult, and hopefully that's why he won't be around for a while.

I don't mind the cut and thrust of a political debate, but this isn't political. It's about a hate crime, no matter how much others might try and divert it. I don't mind being put in my place if I'm wrong, but I do object to the idea that I'm defending racism or a racist.

[Desert Region]

It was a simple typo, I assure you. You won't find me calling him anything but Corbyn, apart from joshing Hamble about him, calling him 'Jezzer'.

Sure. It was a typo. I believe you.

I called Local that after months and months of having to read slurs about alcoholism, about which I don't recall anyone mentioning him being 'unfoundedly personal' until I reported him. It seems Said decided it was a suitable insult, and hopefully that's why he won't be around for a while.

You and Local had been going hammer and tongs at it for ages. I wouldn't be able to pinpoint the exact moment it got too personal. I do remember pointedly stating that there was no basis whatsoever from your posts for you to be called a drunk or something other.

I don't mind the cut and thrust of a political debate, but this isn't political. It's about a hate crime, no matter how much others might try and divert it. I don't mind being put in my place if I'm wrong, but I do object to the idea that I'm defending racism or a racist.

When posters on QLocal defend things that shouldn't be being defended it tends to be from a politically biased view.

It's not proven that Corbyn is definitely a racist so unless you're declaring that he is then you're not definitely defending a racist.

I'd point out that it would probably be inadvisable to call Corbyn a racist, as he's disgruntled, litigious, and with backing that includes a GoFundMe Legal Fund currently past £356k (which isn't that much - but still...)

Haha! I hadn't realised that Said is banned again. Always deserved. Though I find it extra funny re what Said says but doesn't get banned for.

[Toodles McGinty]

It's not proven that Corbyn is definitely a racist so unless you're declaring that he is then you're not definitely defending a racist.

As I said, I can't read his mind, so I can't say for certain.
He's wrong. Wrong about his inaction as leader. Wrong with his statement today.

I'd point out that it would probably be inadvisable to call Corbyn a racist, as he's disgruntled, litigious, and with backing that includes a GoFundMe Legal Fund currently past £356k (which isn't that much - but still...)

Some folk can't move on. They are still holding out for Magic Grandpa to lead a new party to their particular sunlit uplands. For them everyone is out to get him. Starmer in particular. Though why Starmer would bother now is uncertain. Bit much when they can't take the decision of the EHRC.

Haha! I hadn't realised that Said is banned again. Always deserved. Though I find it extra funny re what Said says but doesn't get banned for.

Can't argue with that.

[local]

I think my heinous comment was "have you been on the gin" or something similar.

But I will stand correction.

[seivad]

I think my heinous comment was "have you been on the gin" or something similar.

But I will stand correction.

CommentS, plural. And none so innocuous as "have you been on the gin" But I'm sure you're aware of that.

Paraphrased, the last one mentioned "poke your gin soaked eye" The others were usually along the lines of "gin soaked, alcohol fuelled poster"

Good to see that at least one man is keeping the trope of gin soaked women alive.

[local]

CommentS, plural. And none so innocuous as "have you been on the gin" But I'm sure you're aware of that.

Paraphrased, the last one mentioned "poke your gin soaked eye" The others were usually along the lines of "gin soaked, alcohol fuelled poster"

Good to see that at least one man is keeping the trope of gin soaked women alive.

Well nothing I think to get excited about there.

Far far better than some of the invective I have been on the end of but of course I am not on the right or should that be the left side of the conversation

[seivad]

Well nothing I think to get excited about there.

I doubt that many readers would agree with your cavalier assessment.

Far far better than some of the invective I have been on the end of but of course I am not on the right or should that be the left side of the conversation

Apart from one recent incident, which I don't condone, I can't recall you ever being on the receiving end of damaging and unfounded personal abuse.

Your views are public, often coupled with playground insults, yet you have the gall to object when people respond in kind.