So it’s not all over, thanks Margaret Hodge for letting the cat out of the bag. Because this was never about anti-Semitism it was always about Jeremy Corbyn. If it had been about anti-Semitism it would have been the Tory party and right-wingers in the frame, consistently scoring higher when surveyed on the question . It is about Jeremy Corbyn not because he is anti-Semitic; for anyone who knows his history the idea is absurd; it is because he is pro-justice and anti racism. …. For the rest go to my Blog
let the proper institutions carry out their duties. In the meantime we should be challenging racism wherever we find it especially in those so-called democratic countries with whom we are so friendly, (Israel, USA, Pakistan, India, Saudi Arabia, oops!).
Once again the British Labour Party is under attack from its own Members of Parliament because it refuses to accept wholesale a defintion of ‘Antisemitism’ that has been widely adopted elsewhere. Hardly anywhere is there a media mention of the fact that the ‘definition’ has actually been accepted by Labour (despite it not qualifying as a defintion since it is too vague and has to be supported by ‘examples’ – see previous posts).
But: am I the only person who thinks that defining antisemitism in this way is a demand by Zionist Jews to be treated differently? And isn’t that inherently racist?
Antisemitism is racism. Allegations of racism, including antisemitism, must be investigated by police, (the so-called ‘MacPherson principle’), to determine whether an offence has been committed. So, amidst this furore of allegations, how many have been reported to the police? How many have been investigated? How many people are being prosecuted for antisemitic actions including words spoken or written? How many convicted? Rather than suspending people, call the police!
I’ve previously written on the ‘Campaign Against Antisemitism’ including this: ‘As of 30th April 2018 I’ve looked at all of the incidents and many of the tweets/posts complained of. Some could be characterised as unwise but most are reasonable comment. Two merited action, which was taken. (Interestingly CAA classifies a person as an ‘incident’. If, however, we take a more normal approach to ‘incident’ and take specific dates; for the Labour Party there are 119 of which 2 are antisemitic, so under 2%. When we look at the other political parties the proportion is 18.5%.)’.
Are Zionists determined to destroy the Labour Party? If so, that surely would imply the interference in our political system of another nation, Israel. If our police force have investigated t
The recent outcry against Labour for not fully endorsing the IHRA definition of antisemitism demands comment.
The protesters have a legal opinion ‘prepared by law lecturer Tom Frost and confirmed by Doughty Street QC Jonathan Cooper’ (Guardian 16th) that ‘ Labour has ignored the so-called Macpherson principle – that a racist incident is one perceived to be racist by the victim’. As pointed out by others Macpherson was considerably more nuanced than that simple statement. see i.e. Antony Lerman
The Guardian follows up with this: ‘The Macpherson principle, read more
I’m just wondering whether we’ve already applied to be the 51st state, or do we have to wait till after ‘Brexit’? If they’re quick Eire could become 52nd and that would solve the ‘hard border’ problem (not!).
We are, naturally, closer to the Americans than we are to the Europeans. That must be so despite America being 3/4 full of European migrants, UK being completely full of migrants and Europe being a mixed, migrant population. The US constitution is based more on French than British, and their current president is a self-obsessed ego-maniac, which must be good reasons to want to join up. … see the post here