Join the Labour Party and save your country!

DeVlaeminck

Yes, where is the evidence that anti-semitism is rife amongst the Labour leadership?

surrey_commuter

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Yes, where is the evidence that anti-semitism is rife amongst the Labour leadership?

well I would start off by pointing to JC and the various senior members who have been suspended or kicked out and then move on to the others whose words and deeds would suggest they are anti-semitic.

I suspect we would end up debating the meaning of the word rife.

I thought it no secret that the hard left (including Corbyn/McDonnell) see capitalism as the enemy and see Jews as being top of the pile when it comes to capitalism.

Ben6899

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Yes, where is the evidence that anti-semitism is rife amongst the Labour leadership?

This is the question I have.

Anti-Semitism will not be tolerated at all, but I am yet to have it conclusively explained to me what the Labour Party (or Corbyn himself) has done to constitute unquestionable anti-Semitism.

Maybe I'm missing something? I'm certainly not looking for an argument or to be controversial (I don't have the energy), so please don't view this post as such.

surrey_commuter

Ben6899 wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Yes, where is the evidence that anti-semitism is rife amongst the Labour leadership?

This is the question I have.

Anti-Semitism will not be tolerated at all, but I am yet to have it conclusively explained to me what the Labour Party (or Corbyn himself) has done to constitute unquestionable anti-Semitism.

Maybe I'm missing something? I'm certainly not looking for an argument or to be controversial (I don't have the energy), so please don't view this post as such.

other than the endless platforms that he has shared with enemies of the state of Israel, the wreath laying, the mural and support of Ken Livingstone what more do you want on JC?

I could Google and find endless links but I assume you have already done that so it is one of those subjects that two people can read the same evidence and come to completely different outcomes

Ben6899

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Yes, where is the evidence that anti-semitism is rife amongst the Labour leadership?

This is the question I have.

Anti-Semitism will not be tolerated at all, but I am yet to have it conclusively explained to me what the Labour Party (or Corbyn himself) has done to constitute unquestionable anti-Semitism.

Maybe I'm missing something? I'm certainly not looking for an argument or to be controversial (I don't have the energy), so please don't view this post as such.

other than the endless platforms that he has shared with enemies of the state of Israel, the wreath laying, the mural and support of Ken Livingstone what more do you want on JC?

I could Google and find endless links but I assume you have already done that so it is one of those subjects that two people can read the same evidence and come to completely different outcomes

Wasn't the wreath laying for innocents killed by an airstrike?
The mural was clearly anti-Semitic, not impressed with Corbyn on this one - he shouldn't have defended it as "free speech".
Ken Livingstone, I'm with you. Unsure why Corbyn defended him although not everything Livingstone said - which was cited as anti-Semitism - was anti-Semitism. Some of it was merely easy to make stick, given his other comments.
Criticising Israel is a complicated one and there's lots written on that.

You know I'm not going to sit here at my laptop and defend anti-Semitism, but a lot of the accusations of Jeremy Corbyn are really quite tenuous. No?

I am a left leaning voter, but not to the point where I'll defend anyone wearing a Labour rosette just because.

TheBigBean

Palestinian members of the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) think he is doing a good job.

As long as efforts to curb anti-Jewish sentiment in the UK are focused on combating the disparagement of Jews merely for their membership in a minority group, they have our full support. But when some try to force the Labour party into using as its litmus test a definition of antisemitism that goes far beyond anti-Jewish animus to include anti-Zionism, we must raise our voices and decry these efforts.

We commend Jeremy Corbyn for his decades of public service to the British people, and for his longstanding solidarity with all oppressed peoples around the world, including his unflinching support for the Palestinian people. We stand in solidarity with Jeremy Corbyn and we recognise him as a principled leftist leader who aspires for peace and justice and is opposed to all forms of racism, whether directed at Jews, Palestinians, or any other group.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/ ... nd-justice

shirley_basso

I am also very interested in this. I don't really mind about jews either way but cannot believe for a second that half the labour party hate jews. It's like presuming that half the conservatives are massive racists behind closed doors (maybe a bad analogy!)

I THINK (and do not know) that Corbyn has defined to the Labour party what he perceives to be anti semitism as different to that of the UN or whoever else defines it to the rest of the world. As I understand the main difference being that Corbyn is vocally critical of the Israeli PM and the UN's definition doesn't allow that. If the above is true then I have no problem with that as noone should be above critisism, even if they have never put a foot wrong.

This is now deemd as anti semitism, so some within the labour party use this as an anchor to actually behave in inexcusable ways.

What I don't understand is why Corbyn doesn't come out and make a statement saying as much.

I am probably wrong and very very eager to be educated on the point as it makes absolutely no sense to me. I'm with Ben on this one.

rjsterry

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Margaret Hodge is a disgrace, her actions over the child abuse scandal in Islington (he guyshe had to apologise to was my old boss - a great guy) tell you all you need to know about her.

What's your point? How does her handling of investigation into child abuse in Islington relate to her current criticism of Corbyn's failure to deal with antisemitism in the Labour party? She has at least apologised for her error, whereas the latter seems unwilling to concede that he has ever made one.

My point is she is dishonest and lied for her own ends about one of the most serious issues there could be. If you think she apologised out of regret for having made an error you don't know the case.

That doesn't answer my question. Whether Corbyn personally holds antisemitic views is also secondary to his failure to do anything about what is a pretty well established problem within the party as a whole. I've no doubt that some are trying to exploit the situation but he could have so easily have shut this down weeks ago. If you want to be a credible party leader, let alone PM, you need to be able to handle people trying to exploit any perceived weakness and that ability is lacking.

Ben6899

Shirley Basso wrote:

As I understand the main difference being that Corbyn is vocally critical of the Israeli PM and the UN's definition doesn't allow that.

Which any right-minded person would challenge. Wouldn't they? If someone's being a pr1ck, call them out on it.

rjsterry

Shirley Basso wrote:

I am also very interested in this. I don't really mind about jews either way but cannot believe for a second that half the labour party hate jews. It's like presuming that half the conservatives are massive racists behind closed doors (maybe a bad analogy!)

I THINK (and do not know) that Corbyn has defined to the Labour party what he perceives to be anti semitism as different to that of the UN or whoever else defines it to the rest of the world. As I understand the main difference being that Corbyn is vocally critical of the Israeli PM and the UN's definition doesn't allow that. If the above is true then I have no problem with that as noone should be above critisism, even if they have never put a foot wrong.

This is now deemd as anti semitism, so some within the labour party use this as an anchor to actually behave in inexcusable ways.

What I don't understand is why Corbyn doesn't come out and make a statement saying as much.

I am probably wrong and very very eager to be educated on the point as it makes absolutely no sense to me. I'm with Ben on this one.

Here's a link to the IHRA definition and examples. I don't think they proscribe criticism of the Israeli government, but others disagree.

https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/wo ... tisemitism

shirley_basso

Here's a question to which I do not know the answer.

What's the difference between a Jew and an Israeli? Vs A Muslim and an Arab? I understand that his may be construed as extremely racist, but I ask it out of extreme ignorance as eager to learn.

"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor."

Ben6899

Shirley Basso wrote:

Here's a question to which I do not know the answer.

What's the difference between a Jew and an Israeli? Vs A Muslim and an Arab? I understand that his may be construed as extremely racist, but I ask it out of extreme ignorance as eager to learn.

"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor."

An "Israeli" is someone from the state of Israel. An "Arab" is someone from one of the Arab states.

If someone is "Jewish", that could be describing their race, religion or culture. Or all three.
If someone is "Muslim", that is describing their religion (Islam).

The last point about self-determination is a complicated one and I'm not sure of the post character limit on Bikeradar!

Asking such a question is only construed as racist by those who might wish to use it against you in that manner.

DeVlaeminck

rjsterry wrote:

e

That doesn't answer my question. Whether Corbyn personally holds antisemitic views is also secondary to his failure to do anything about what is a pretty well established problem within the party as a whole. I've no doubt that some are trying to exploit the situation but he could have so easily have shut this down weeks ago. If you want to be a credible party leader, let alone PM, you need to be able to handle people trying to exploit any perceived weakness and that ability is lacking.

It isn't a pretty well established problem, I've asked for specific examples that shows it is more of a problem in Labour than anywhere else already so let's have them. It's a complete nonsense.

surrey_commuter

Shirley Basso wrote:

I am also very interested in this. I don't really mind about jews either way but cannot believe for a second that half the labour party hate jews. It's like presuming that half the conservatives are massive racists behind closed doors (maybe a bad analogy!)

I THINK (and do not know) that Corbyn has defined to the Labour party what he perceives to be anti semitism as different to that of the UN or whoever else defines it to the rest of the world. As I understand the main difference being that Corbyn is vocally critical of the Israeli PM and the UN's definition doesn't allow that. If the above is true then I have no problem with that as noone should be above critisism, even if they have never put a foot wrong.

This is now deemd as anti semitism, so some within the labour party use this as an anchor to actually behave in inexcusable ways.

What I don't understand is why Corbyn doesn't come out and make a statement saying as much.

I am probably wrong and very very eager to be educated on the point as it makes absolutely no sense to me. I'm with Ben on this one.

could it be because he is a man of principle?

rjsterry

You missed the Chakrabarti inquiry into antisemitism in the Labour party then.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemit ... bour_Party

Or ask Jon Lansman if it's an issue.

It's not a question of it being a problem unique to Labour - the Conservatives have their own issues as does any large organisation - it's what they are doing about it and the leadership that is being shown or lack thereof.

surrey_commuter

Ben6899 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Yes, where is the evidence that anti-semitism is rife amongst the Labour leadership?

This is the question I have.

Anti-Semitism will not be tolerated at all, but I am yet to have it conclusively explained to me what the Labour Party (or Corbyn himself) has done to constitute unquestionable anti-Semitism.

Maybe I'm missing something? I'm certainly not looking for an argument or to be controversial (I don't have the energy), so please don't view this post as such.

other than the endless platforms that he has shared with enemies of the state of Israel, the wreath laying, the mural and support of Ken Livingstone what more do you want on JC?

I could Google and find endless links but I assume you have already done that so it is one of those subjects that two people can read the same evidence and come to completely different outcomes

Wasn't the wreath laying for innocents killed by an airstrike?
The mural was clearly anti-Semitic, not impressed with Corbyn on this one - he shouldn't have defended it as "free speech".
Ken Livingstone, I'm with you. Unsure why Corbyn defended him although not everything Livingstone said - which was cited as anti-Semitism - was anti-Semitism. Some of it was merely easy to make stick, given his other comments.
Criticising Israel is a complicated one and there's lots written on that.

You know I'm not going to sit here at my laptop and defend anti-Semitism, but a lot of the accusations of Jeremy Corbyn are really quite tenuous. No?

I am a left leaning voter, but not to the point where I'll defend anyone wearing a Labour rosette just because.

The wreath laying was for the Munich terrorists

how many tenuous pointers would convince you?

I have no problem with people criticising Israel or Israelis, I have always found them as obnoxious as Russians

Ben6899

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Yes, where is the evidence that anti-semitism is rife amongst the Labour leadership?

This is the question I have.

Anti-Semitism will not be tolerated at all, but I am yet to have it conclusively explained to me what the Labour Party (or Corbyn himself) has done to constitute unquestionable anti-Semitism.

Maybe I'm missing something? I'm certainly not looking for an argument or to be controversial (I don't have the energy), so please don't view this post as such.

other than the endless platforms that he has shared with enemies of the state of Israel, the wreath laying, the mural and support of Ken Livingstone what more do you want on JC?

I could Google and find endless links but I assume you have already done that so it is one of those subjects that two people can read the same evidence and come to completely different outcomes

Wasn't the wreath laying for innocents killed by an airstrike?
The mural was clearly anti-Semitic, not impressed with Corbyn on this one - he shouldn't have defended it as "free speech".
Ken Livingstone, I'm with you. Unsure why Corbyn defended him although not everything Livingstone said - which was cited as anti-Semitism - was anti-Semitism. Some of it was merely easy to make stick, given his other comments.
Criticising Israel is a complicated one and there's lots written on that.

You know I'm not going to sit here at my laptop and defend anti-Semitism, but a lot of the accusations of Jeremy Corbyn are really quite tenuous. No?

I am a left leaning voter, but not to the point where I'll defend anyone wearing a Labour rosette just because.

The wreath laying was for the Munich terrorists

how many tenuous pointers would convince you?

I have no problem with people criticising Israel or Israelis, I have always found them as obnoxious as Russians

Oh I thought it was for the victims in Tunis? Tenuous pointers - no matter of their number - are no more than exactly that. I'm not sure I'm comfortable with generalisations pertaining to Israelis or Russians (or any other people) either!

DeVlaeminck

Surrey Commuter wrote:

You know I'm not going to sit here at my laptop and defend anti-Semitism, but a lot of the accusations of Jeremy Corbyn are really quite tenuous. No?

I am a left leaning voter, but not to the point where I'll defend anyone wearing a Labour rosette just because.

The wreath laying was for the Munich terrorists

how many tenuous pointers would convince you?

I have no problem with people criticising Israel or Israelis, I have always found them as obnoxious as Russians[/quote]

I don't think it's a secret that Corbyn is more sympathetic to the Palestinian cause than some but being present at a wreath laying or sharing a platform with someone does not imply agreement with everything those other people ever did or said. If Corbyn thought the Munich killings were ok then no doubt you'd have a quote from his mouth to that affect - but you don't because he doesn't.

In any case there has been terrorism on both sides, many early Israeli statesmen were former terrorists, and of course being anti the Israeli state is not equivalent to anti semitism.

shirley_basso

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

I am also very interested in this. I don't really mind about jews either way but cannot believe for a second that half the labour party hate jews. It's like presuming that half the conservatives are massive racists behind closed doors (maybe a bad analogy!)

I THINK (and do not know) that Corbyn has defined to the Labour party what he perceives to be anti semitism as different to that of the UN or whoever else defines it to the rest of the world. As I understand the main difference being that Corbyn is vocally critical of the Israeli PM and the UN's definition doesn't allow that. If the above is true then I have no problem with that as noone should be above critisism, even if they have never put a foot wrong.

This is now deemd as anti semitism, so some within the labour party use this as an anchor to actually behave in inexcusable ways.

What I don't understand is why Corbyn doesn't come out and make a statement saying as much.

I am probably wrong and very very eager to be educated on the point as it makes absolutely no sense to me. I'm with Ben on this one.

could it be because he is a man of principle?

I'm sorry I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

shirley_basso

Ben6899 wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

Here's a question to which I do not know the answer.

What's the difference between a Jew and an Israeli? Vs A Muslim and an Arab? I understand that his may be construed as extremely racist, but I ask it out of extreme ignorance as eager to learn.

"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor."

An "Israeli" is someone from the state of Israel. An "Arab" is someone from one of the Arab states.

If someone is "Jewish", that could be describing their race, religion or culture. Or all three.
If someone is "Muslim", that is describing their religion (Islam).

The last point about self-determination is a complicated one and I'm not sure of the post character limit on Bikeradar!

Asking such a question is only construed as racist by those who might wish to use it against you in that manner.

May be it was a bit rhetorical as I know what an Israeli and an Arab are, but why should one religion have the right to a State of Israel and the other not have a right to a State of Islam? I guess I meant more how is an Israeli to a Jew different from an Arab to Muslim.

The para above I put in Speech bubbles is taken from the IHRA website as a definition for an act of anti-semitism.

rjsterry

Shirley Basso wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

Here's a question to which I do not know the answer.

What's the difference between a Jew and an Israeli? Vs A Muslim and an Arab? I understand that his may be construed as extremely racist, but I ask it out of extreme ignorance as eager to learn.

"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor."

An "Israeli" is someone from the state of Israel. An "Arab" is someone from one of the Arab states.

If someone is "Jewish", that could be describing their race, religion or culture. Or all three.
If someone is "Muslim", that is describing their religion (Islam).

The last point about self-determination is a complicated one and I'm not sure of the post character limit on Bikeradar!

Asking such a question is only construed as racist by those who might wish to use it against you in that manner.

May be it was a bit rhetorical as I know what an Israeli and an Arab are, but why should one religion have the right to a State of Israel and the other not have a right to a State of Islam? I guess I meant more how is an Israeli to a Jew different from an Arab to Muslim.

The para above I put in Speech bubbles is taken from the IHRA website as a definition for an act of anti-semitism.

There are plenty of countries where Islam is the established religion.

surrey_commuter

Shirley Basso wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

I am also very interested in this. I don't really mind about jews either way but cannot believe for a second that half the labour party hate jews. It's like presuming that half the conservatives are massive racists behind closed doors (maybe a bad analogy!)

I THINK (and do not know) that Corbyn has defined to the Labour party what he perceives to be anti semitism as different to that of the UN or whoever else defines it to the rest of the world. As I understand the main difference being that Corbyn is vocally critical of the Israeli PM and the UN's definition doesn't allow that. If the above is true then I have no problem with that as noone should be above critisism, even if they have never put a foot wrong.

This is now deemd as anti semitism, so some within the labour party use this as an anchor to actually behave in inexcusable ways.

What I don't understand is why Corbyn doesn't come out and make a statement saying as much.

I am probably wrong and very very eager to be educated on the point as it makes absolutely no sense to me. I'm with Ben on this one.

could it be because he is a man of principle?

I'm sorry I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

personally I think that Corbyn is a man of principle and lies a lot less than most other politicians. If he swallowed his principles and said "the right thing" he would make his life a lot easier.

shirley_basso

rjsterry wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

Here's a question to which I do not know the answer.

What's the difference between a Jew and an Israeli? Vs A Muslim and an Arab? I understand that his may be construed as extremely racist, but I ask it out of extreme ignorance as eager to learn.

"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor."

An "Israeli" is someone from the state of Israel. An "Arab" is someone from one of the Arab states.

If someone is "Jewish", that could be describing their race, religion or culture. Or all three.
If someone is "Muslim", that is describing their religion (Islam).

The last point about self-determination is a complicated one and I'm not sure of the post character limit on Bikeradar!

Asking such a question is only construed as racist by those who might wish to use it against you in that manner.

May be it was a bit rhetorical as I know what an Israeli and an Arab are, but why should one religion have the right to a State of Israel and the other not have a right to a State of Islam? I guess I meant more how is an Israeli to a Jew different from an Arab to Muslim.

The para above I put in Speech bubbles is taken from the IHRA website as a definition for an act of anti-semitism.

There are plenty of countries where Islam is the established religion.

And Israel is where Judaism is the established religion (75%). Are these arab countries seen as States of Islam?

These are again, genuine questions. I simply don't understand what aspect of being a Jew requires a State of Israel, in much the same way I don't see why any religin requires a "state". Isn't the point of all religions that they are without borders?

shirley_basso

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

I am also very interested in this. I don't really mind about jews either way but cannot believe for a second that half the labour party hate jews. It's like presuming that half the conservatives are massive racists behind closed doors (maybe a bad analogy!)

I THINK (and do not know) that Corbyn has defined to the Labour party what he perceives to be anti semitism as different to that of the UN or whoever else defines it to the rest of the world. As I understand the main difference being that Corbyn is vocally critical of the Israeli PM and the UN's definition doesn't allow that. If the above is true then I have no problem with that as noone should be above critisism, even if they have never put a foot wrong.

This is now deemd as anti semitism, so some within the labour party use this as an anchor to actually behave in inexcusable ways.

What I don't understand is why Corbyn doesn't come out and make a statement saying as much.

I am probably wrong and very very eager to be educated on the point as it makes absolutely no sense to me. I'm with Ben on this one.

could it be because he is a man of principle?

I'm sorry I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

personally I think that Corbyn is a man of principle and lies a lot less than most other politicians. If he swallowed his principles and said "the right thing" he would make his life a lot easier.

But I am saying he wouldn't need to swallow his principles.

By simply saying 'no-one should be above critisism and the Israeli PM has carried out some atrocities and should be called out on it. Unforunately, this is in contradiction of the IHRA. The atrocoties are as follows.....'

The thing is that he says nothing and it makes his party sound like holocaust deniers because there is no clarity on the issue. Now I don't really like the man, but he really isn't helping the Labour party here.

surrey_commuter

Shirley Basso wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

I am also very interested in this. I don't really mind about jews either way but cannot believe for a second that half the labour party hate jews. It's like presuming that half the conservatives are massive racists behind closed doors (maybe a bad analogy!)

I THINK (and do not know) that Corbyn has defined to the Labour party what he perceives to be anti semitism as different to that of the UN or whoever else defines it to the rest of the world. As I understand the main difference being that Corbyn is vocally critical of the Israeli PM and the UN's definition doesn't allow that. If the above is true then I have no problem with that as noone should be above critisism, even if they have never put a foot wrong.

This is now deemd as anti semitism, so some within the labour party use this as an anchor to actually behave in inexcusable ways.

What I don't understand is why Corbyn doesn't come out and make a statement saying as much.

I am probably wrong and very very eager to be educated on the point as it makes absolutely no sense to me. I'm with Ben on this one.

could it be because he is a man of principle?

I'm sorry I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

personally I think that Corbyn is a man of principle and lies a lot less than most other politicians. If he swallowed his principles and said "the right thing" he would make his life a lot easier.

But I am saying he wouldn't need to swallow his principles.

By simply saying 'no-one should be above critisism and the Israeli PM has carried out some atrocities and should be called out on it. Unforunately, this is in contradiction of the IHRA. The atrocoties are as follows.....'

The thing is that he says nothing and it makes his party sound like holocaust deniers because there is no clarity on the issue. Now I don't really like the man, but he really isn't helping the Labour party here.

do you really not think there could be another reason why he does not criticise anti-semitic behaviour, why he hangs out with anti-Israel terrorists and lays wreaths in their honour

Of course he may just be really unlucky

shirley_basso

Haha now you say it like that!

rjsterry

Shirley Basso wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

Here's a question to which I do not know the answer.

What's the difference between a Jew and an Israeli? Vs A Muslim and an Arab? I understand that his may be construed as extremely racist, but I ask it out of extreme ignorance as eager to learn.

"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor."

An "Israeli" is someone from the state of Israel. An "Arab" is someone from one of the Arab states.

If someone is "Jewish", that could be describing their race, religion or culture. Or all three.
If someone is "Muslim", that is describing their religion (Islam).

The last point about self-determination is a complicated one and I'm not sure of the post character limit on Bikeradar!

Asking such a question is only construed as racist by those who might wish to use it against you in that manner.

May be it was a bit rhetorical as I know what an Israeli and an Arab are, but why should one religion have the right to a State of Israel and the other not have a right to a State of Islam? I guess I meant more how is an Israeli to a Jew different from an Arab to Muslim.

The para above I put in Speech bubbles is taken from the IHRA website as a definition for an act of anti-semitism.

There are plenty of countries where Islam is the established religion.

And Israel is where Judaism is the established religion (75%). Are these arab countries seen as States of Islam?

These are again, genuine questions. I simply don't understand what aspect of being a Jew requires a State of Israel, in much the same way I don't see why any religin requires a "state". Isn't the point of all religions that they are without borders?

Saudi Arabia comes pretty close to that. If you accept the right to self determination then it's difficult to argue that a group shouldn't be allowed to set up a state if that's what they choose to do. Where that state should be, what borders it should have and what happens to people already living there are different questions.

DeVlaeminck

Shirley Basso wrote:

The thing is that he says nothing and it makes his party sound like holocaust deniers because there is no clarity on the issue. Now I don't really like the man, but he really isn't helping the Labour party here.

Holocaust deniers now! That really is both outrageous and absolutely ludicrous. Try reading the official Labour guidelines on anti-semitism and tell me what you find so unsatisfactory about them.

tangled_metal

Why is one religion described differently to another? What I mean is the comment about Muslim describing people who practise the religion of Islam but Jewish describes race, religion or culture. Judaism is a religion and you're described as Jewish if you follow it. IMHO there's no difference between Jewish and Muslim other than religion, they are both equivalent for their different religions.

Now IMHO all organised religions are a cultural thing so the way the poster described Jewish applies to Muslim and Christian IMHO (well apart from race, that's not necessarily fixed for each religion).

The other point I have is whether you think the accusation of being an anti-semites applies only to people who are antiJew? It does seem that the only group who are semites out can be called semites are Jews. That is technically not accurate if you actually look it up.

shirley_basso

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

The thing is that he says nothing and it makes his party sound like holocaust deniers because there is no clarity on the issue. Now I don't really like the man, but he really isn't helping the Labour party here.

Holocaust deniers now! That really is both outrageous and absolutely ludicrous. Try reading the official Labour guidelines on anti-semitism and tell me what you find so unsatisfactory about them.

That's what I am try to say and ask. I don't find anything unsatisfactory about them, but apparently the press finds reason lay into them heavily on their stance on the jews, calling the level of anti-semetism extreme, with people now resigning and the situation seems to be worsening.

I understand that the guidelines are in contradiction to the IHRA in that he continues to critisise the Israeli goverment, and therefore this has become the foundation for these allogations and the reason extremists within the party are able to harbour and worse, develop anti-semetic opinions in the party.

Read all my posts. I do not understand why this is such a big deal, but apparently it is, as a senior labour MP has just resigned and you cant open a paper without reading about accusations of anti semitisim within the party. It seems to me is that due to the reason I stated above, some extremists feel they have free reign to habour genuine anti-jewish sentiment.

Now maybe Corbyn's silence is simply because he is just an anti-semite in which case he can do one.