Corbyn is Being Destroyed, Like Blowing Up a Bridge to Stop an Advancing Army <<MOD WARNNG>>

So again when presented with facts you reply with your feelings, give me an example of Corbyn being antisemetic and stop telling me how you feel, I do not care!

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ke-firms-give-shares-to-workers-politics-live

Labour are wasting time again being in the news but not being in power.

This time they want to nationalise the water, and boot out a CEO.
Typical Labour; someone worked hard to get that highly paid job, and Labour just don't appreciate their position vowing to procure the company and boot them out; they want the government to be in charge of everything.

They want to make a skilled job pay less because they're idiots who say 'vote for us, we'd force you to take a pay cut as we help ourselves to your company'.

 

They can't be on BDS's side and not attack Jews in the UK, it's sad.
And I don't mean Jews are like glass, no, I mean, this political party are getting violent towards the Jews because they/their horrid manifesto for the country isn't in charge - it's dangerous.
They want the state to own everything but since it doesn't they hold personal beliefs that go against a minority in the UK resulting in cover ups of race hate crimes against the Jews from the far left.
They can take that ideology to France, in Britain, we have the rights of minorities and that's how I like it.

 

Yes, a Corbyn govt won't a problem to the Jews as it will be to the rest of England.
I suppose (not being English) that Corbyn can't win an election, but May can lose it.

 

Corbyn can cease power, like he tried in 2017.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4612250/Militants-warn-summer-discontent.html
Chavez and Corbyn were good chums as were Livingstone and Chavez.

I mean it spits on the democratic and due process, but Corbyn's inline to usurp power in the UK.

This was Corbyn's second attack on my country, I became a Tory that summer caught up in that, which was annoying at the least of times, and costly at the worst of times.

 

I am an optimist. There can't be a parallel between Corbyn and Chavez because England has
a thousand years of what we might call "democracy" (or at least, constitutional govt..) This isn't
Venezuela's situation.
And I suppose that deep down Corbyn doesn't really believe his policies will lead to brutal
suppression and a million percent inflation - but it could, had it not been for England's deeply
held traditions of democracy, Capitalism, constitutional monarchy etc..

 

Yeah, Corbyn wants to abolish the Queen, Capitalism and Democracy.
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2018/04/jeremy-corbyns-jewdas-seder-buddies.html

 

I disagree, or at least as far as democracy and most of capitalism goes.

From my perspective, the trouble isn't with Jeremy Corbyn per-se, he's a decent enough human being with some deeply held (but IMO grossly outdated) views on the world and how it should be changed. The problem I have is how easy it is to misrepresent his views, what a distraction that is and how it means that he cannot really function as an effective leader of the opposition as a consequence.

Take the recent proposal for 10% of shares in big companies to be taken by the government and the dividends to be shared between the employees (to a maximum of £500 annually) and the government. There is a case to be made that if employees share in the ownership of a company they they are more productive (mainly through working unpaid hours, not a great proposal for the Labour Party but nevertheless...) which is a good thing. Indeed many major companies already offer the opportunity for employees to become shareholders at a significant discount. The trouble with the Labour Party's proposal is:

• The employees cannot buy and sell the shares, so they're not shareholders in the truest sense, they just get dividends
• The government would be the largest single beneficiary, all excess dividends would be collected by the government as a kind of tax
• The government is simply going to appropriate these shares, presumably diluting the value of other shareholders. In the case of large companies, the largest shareholders are often institutions who manage working people's retirement funds.
• It's therefore too easy to misrepresent this move as an attack on capitalism

So a proposal which could have got widespread support from both employers and employees "increase productivity by increasing employee ownership of companies" and been a real vote winner can be too easily spun as "Red Jezza stealing our businesses"

 

So having failed to give one single piece of evidence of any kind of antisemitism from Corbyn you have resulted to insulting the poster, typical show of how when asked to provide facts rather than feelings the right crumbles.

 

Please give one example of Labour being violent towards Jews in the UK. Fake News!

 

No, no no no no. There have been times when Corbyn has spotted antsemitism when others have missed it. Whoever is doing it whether they are pro Israeli or not, I get very uncomfortable when people stereotype all Jews together. This is the basis of racism. Jews like all other people have different opinions, different values. Prior to WW2 most Jews did not support Zionism. Yes after the holocaust this changed for several reasons so that most Jews did start to support Israel. However we have a different situation now. Israel herself has made her claim that she is an ethnic nationalist state where those who are not Jews even though they are citizens of Israel have lesser rights than Jews and where those who were to get their own state as agreed in Oslo are instead to lose everything having been held prisoners for over 50 years. Not all Jews agree with this. Hence to try to minimise opposition to these actions which Israel has taken as antisemitism is a fraud.

It appears he was laying a wreath in remembrance of the 62 people Israel killed in Tunisia that is 50 Palestinians and 12 Tunisians including women and children. This is interesting as it may be the first time Israel had taken the liberty of invading another countries sovereign space - something she does now with impunity. This was when the American Christian Right had their first President and the beginning of the US encouraging Israel to go against International law.

Regan at fist condoned it and then thought better. It was resolutely condemned at the UN. Here Christian Science Monitor are pondering the implications of Regan's position

https://www.csmonitor.com/1985/1008/etuni.html

Of course the US has relied on having superior power in order to have one rule for itself and Israel and another for the world. Hence we now have many Americans who believe there is no morality about anything. It simply is might is right.

I don't know how old you are but prior to 9/11 most of the West believed in jaw jaw rather than war war and Corbyn was probably one of the earlier people to engage in this. You cannot solve a problem if you do not talk to the people involved and that is what Corbyn was doing which you could have found out if you had looked at the link I gave you.

https://medium.com/justpolitical/corbyns-links-to-terrorists-antisemites-and-dictators-6018ad09a14

Now as far as Hamas is concerned there is no question that they could be brought to the table if Israel had wanted to ensure a two state solution so there was nothing unrealistic in Corbyn wanting to talk to them. He was in any case following the process which worked for Northern Ireland. The EU hired Alistair Crook to work with Hamas to see if they would be up to a two state solution. Unfortunately just when Crook had got them to the point that he believed they were getting ready for being involved in talks, Blair following Bush's demands got the EU through Germany to pull him out, declare Hamas a terrorist group and instead of working for the two state solution, to give Israel a free hand to use her world class military against civilians with some guerilla attackers. The agreement also allowed Israel to assassinate Palestinians at will, one of the main reasons there are so few decent Palestinian politicians and to build prisons to put the politically active in.

There are a lot of people who owe the Palestinians.

https://www.lrb.co.uk/v33/n05/alastair-crooke/permanent-temporariness

 

Again give evidence of Corbyns policies that would mean the abolisham of the Queen, capitalism or democracy. A pro-Jewish State opinion piece is not evidence.

 

Here is a link to a list of Labour's policies

https://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2017/04/how-many-of-jeremy-corbyns-policies-do.html

 

The problem with this thread is no one actually has any evidence of antisemitism against Corbyn.

 

They have an abundance of evidence, but it all hinges on whether you consider anti Israeli sentiment to be anti Semitic.
By and large I separate the two in my mind.

That get's Corbyn off the hook, but frankly it's a position under review.

 

Iraq today is a democracy.
It doesn't gas its own people, have WMD's or invade other countries.
The Palestinians are not interested in 67 borders but land, all of it.
No peace will be entertained without the removal of the Jews from
their own homeland.
Corbyn doesn't concern himself with injustices that don't involve
Western civilization. He paid tribute to Hamas terrorists & the Munich
massacre terrorists. He has no solution to the issues of the Middle
East other than the removal of the Jews to someone elses land.

Trust him - Corbyn won't turn England into another socialist paradise
like his friend Maduro is doing to Venezuela. You have his lying word
for it.

 

Corbyn sees the problem of England as being democracy, monarchy and
Capitalism.
He has sympathized with Communists, Palestinian terrorists, Venezuelan
Socialists or anyone with a grudge. He has turned a blind eye to some of
the world's great atrocities. And worse - he denies all this, despite it being
on the public record.
His followers are no different - they wouldn't want to live in a Corbyn style
country, but they will exercise the rights given by their country to vote for
him.

 

ISIS invaded Syria from Iraq.
OS Iraq isn't a great place.

What's new.

Corybn is defined not what he stands for but what he stands against.
Which is essentially, us.

Anything that is popular he rejects.
I don't see this as an election winning strategy in what is essentially a popularity contest.
That said, there are enough people with axes to grind to have propelled him this far.

Personally I think he has already peaked. History may prove me wrong, but I would put money on this willingly.

 

"... defined not what he stands for but what he stands against." is actually what
most "peace activists" said during the Vietnam War.
All pretense of "peace", "liberation" and "self determination" went out the window
later when the various Communist parties slugged it out between them for the
spoils - and murdered millions.

 

More feelings no facts.

 

Re: it all hinges on whether you consider anti Israeli sentiment to be anti Semitic.

Or to possibly put it another way whether you believe opposition to how Israel is acting is antisemitism.

TBH until seeing someone saying that, I had never actually believed that people could believe that that was antisemitism. I thought that people did not understand that what was being suggested is not prejudice according to what is meant by prejudice or even what is said in the IHRA definition itself. The actual definition of antisemitism in the IHRA is not contentious. It is '“a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews”. No one has a problem with this and this fits with what is considered prejudice. The 'certain perception of Jews' which it speaks about is a hatred towards a people due to some myth as to what they are, that is, in this instance, projecting some myth of a 'Jew' who may or may not have existed at some time onto all Jews at the present time. Even if one or more Jews have been seen to express the traits which one is hating, the projecting of that onto all Jews, is what antisemitism is about and in that it just like every other racism.

Israel's argument is that this prejudice is now being projected onto Israel and this is the false argument. Israel now is aligned with the hard right antisemetic countries of Europe and the same in the US, This is not something which Jews outside of Israel support and also highly unlikely to be what the majority of Jews inside Israel support. However this puts Jews who do support Israel above all else, who have been pulled into this false attack against Corbyn into a difficult position...and people do believe that British Jews are being used in this way. Labour's previous Leader Ed Miliband, himself a Jew, came under similar if different pressure from the media due to also being from the left, the original position of the Labour party. Ironically with him it often appeared to assert itself in a potentially racist/antisemetic way. Miliband was also not popular with British Jews, most of whom do not vote for the Labour Party. He did not increase the Labour vote among British Jews. While it is true that with Miliband his position on Israel was also questionable (Mum is a member of Jews for Justice for Palestinians) arguably the primary reason for antagonism towards both was their position on the left of the Labour Party. In that way some people have suggested that British Jews are being used in this onslaught against Corbyn, many of whom, just like everyone else will not be keeping up with politics and will just hear that the Labour Party has apparently turned antisemetic and that they should be afraid of it.

We can see that this position in reality puts British Jews in an awkward place. The movement to the far right in the West is regardless of how anyone may kid themselves a danger to them. We have already seen this both in the US and in actions in both Poland and Hungary – actions which Netanyahu rather than confronting turns a blind eye to and whose leaders actions he expresses solidarity with. Hence we have a situation where the political orientation of Israel could be said to be a danger to Jews not living in Israel. I think it would generally be accepted that support for the far right is anti Jewish and yet our Jews did not feel able to confront the PM over the Tories aligning with and support for same in the EU – presumably because they are already busy declaring that the Labour Party antisemetic, when it is highly unlikely it is as antisemetic as the Tories, and having made an almighty scream at one of Britian's parties they might look somewhat OTT if they then started on the other major Party. David Schneider, a British Jew and supporter of the IHRA definition recently said on twitter that much of the antisemitism in the Labour party is inadvertent and not motivated by hatred towards Jews.

British Jews are being asked to support a form of Government, ethnic nationalism, which is antagonistic to them and in the past has caused them massive harm. In reality in the current situation their support for that political system, ethnic nationalism, puts them at risk. How can this be? If supporting Israel shows one is not antisemetic how can supporting Israel itself lead to dangers of antsemitism towards them. That is the position Jews find themselves in when antisemitism, hatred of Jews for being 'Jews', turns away from that to antipathy to the political actions of a State. The political position of a state can change of course, in which case Israel may become supported by those who now oppose her and not supported by those who now support her. Whether one supports a State or not will depend on ones values and political leaning. Whether one supports hatred of Jews for being 'Jews' will remain regardless of what one thinks of the state of Israel. It is the hatred of Jews for being 'Jews' which is antisemitism. One's position on Israel will depend on ones values and political leaning. It is for example unlikely at the moment that people who believe in equal rights for all could support Israel – while in those who believe in ethnic nationalism like the US White Nationalists support for Israel is high but the likelihood of them being good for America's Jews is extremely low.

In BellaCaledonia a Brit, presumably a Scot of Jewish descent expresses her position over the example which Labour did not want to accept and which incidentally the Tories have not accepted.

https://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2018/09/22/loyalty-labour-and-the-ihra/

I think possibly this is a question she is asking as a Jew to Jews. Not being a Jew it is a little different to me. I believe Israel could change but if she cannot that is the question – is it worth it. Can people support it? Whether they can will depend on their political leaning and values not on prejudice against Jews. What Jews living outside Israel certainly need is to live in an environment with is not antisemetic – that is not facing hatred for being 'Jews'. Supporting Ethnic Nationalism is not going to provide that for them.

Here a member of Jewdas explains his journey away from Zioism.
https://www.jewdas.org/am-i-an-anti-zionist-jew/

Everything changes.

 

deleted wrong thread

 

This is why we need a Labour government,

Remploy sold to an american company for 2m now making profits of 7m a year.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ff-by-ministers-led-by-esther-mcvey-ns5jqrfkp

Selling the nations assets to overseas buyers that is "taking back our country" according to Tory speak.

 

Very true. It is also known that the 'privatisation' of public assets has been extremely costly, inefficient and led to corruption. Yesterday I was looking for some information on that and found this - we have State owned railways - only problem is they are not owned by our State but by other European ones.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/22/sale-of-century-privatisation-scam

Vote Labour for renationalisation of the railways!!

 

Amazes me how other countries are allowed to own our railways but the UK is not! Another example of "taking back our country" tory style!