All things Labour Party

[hypochondriac]

Glad then you’ve distanced yourself from your original statement.

I have done no such thing. You've clearly failed to understand what I've said. Given your history my guess is that it was a wilful misunderstanding but I'm happy to accept that you just made a mistake.

[shurlock]

I have done no such thing. You've clearly failed to understand what I've said. Given your history my guess is that it was a wilful misunderstanding but I'm happy to accept that you just made a mistake.

 

Even some of your own examples don’t support your claims but let’s leave it there.

[hypochondriac]

Even some of your own examples don’t support your claims but let’s leave it there.

I'll take that as an apology and an admission that you failed to understand my post then. As you are fully aware, that was only five or six examples but there are many more that I could easily post onto here but you're clearly not actually interested in examples.

 

My claim has always been that there are pressures on some women to wear the niqab and that it is a hated garment in much of the world by many who view it as a symbol of oppression. If you decide to read into my posts things that do not exist then that's not my problem.

Edited 8 August, 2018 by hypochondriac

[shurlock]

I'll take that as an apology and an admission that you failed to understand my post then. As you are fully aware, that was only five or six examples but there are many more that I could easily post onto here but you're clearly not actually interested in examples.

 

My claim has always been that there are pressures on some women to wear the niqab and that it is a hated garment in much of the world by many who view it as a symbol of oppression. If you decide to read into my posts things that do not exist then that's not my problem.

 

You initially accused aintforever of being “on the side of Salafists that use their hard line system to subjugate women” even though by your own subsequent admission many women in the UK wear the niqab, burka and hijab as a matter of individual choice.

 

And it wasn’t five or six examples. It was an extended cut and paste from one spectator article with a bit on the side. But who’s counting.

Edited 8 August, 2018 by shurlock

[hypochondriac]

I know it's terribly off topic to mention the people running the country into the ground so perhaps we could get back on track?

 

Where has Jeremy Corbyn ever made an anti-semitic remark that might warrant a headline or two in the papers?

I'm not sure anyone on this thread has said that Jeremy Corbyn has been personally anti semetic- although people who know him better than any of us believe that he is. He's definitely been complete rubbish at ha doling the issue within the party though and incredibly slow to act which has just made the whole thing worse.

[hypochondriac]

You initially accused aintforever of being “on the side of Salafists that use their hard line system to subjugate women” even though by your own subsequent admission many women in the UK choose as matter of individual preference to wear the niqab, burka and hijab.

 

And it wasn’t five or six examples. It was an extended cut and paste from one spectator article with a bit on the side.

 

And nowhere in your quote have I suggested that all women who wear the niqab burka and hijab have been forced to do so. I accept your apology.

 

And it was five examples from five separate news sources. I won't be going back and linking you to each one though because as I said earlier you aren't actually interested in them and you've been proven wrong enough for one evening.

[shurlock]

And nowhere in your quote have I suggested that all women who wear the niqab burka and hijab have been forced to do so. I accept your apology.

 

And it was five examples from five separate news sources. I won't be going back and linking you to each one though because as I said earlier you aren't actually interested in them and you've been proven wrong enough for one evening.

 

Great so you accept your initial statement was a bit silly and over the top. You’ve not really covered yourself in glory on this subject as others have noted.

[hypochondriac]

Great so you accept your initial statement was a bit silly and over the top. You’ve not really covered yourself in glory on this subject as others have noted.

My initial statement was neither silly nor over the top. You really should just accept that you misunderstood what I said and assumed I said all Muslim women when I said nothing of the sort. So that bit was wrong and the bit about the five sources was wrong too. Let's move on now that you've been thoroughly debunked.

[Jonnyboy]

I'm not sure anyone on this thread has said that Jeremy Corbyn has been personally anti semetic- although people who know him better than any of us believe that he is. He's definitely been complete rubbish at ha doling the issue within the party though and incredibly slow to act which has just made the whole thing worse.

 

hebergeur d images gratuit

[hypochondriac]

hebergeur d images gratuit

I'm failing to see the relevance of that to my post.

[Jonnyboy]

I'm failing to see the relevance of that to my post.

 

The "people that know him better than any of us" are full of sh*t.

[hypochondriac]

The "people that know him better than any of us" are full of sh*t.

Are you suggesting that you know corbyn better than Margaret Hodge and Ian Austin?

 

The only thing I said was that some people who know corbyn better than we do are of the opinion that he is anti semetic which is factually accurate. Whether he is or not I have no idea but as I said earlier, I don't think anyone on this thread has said he is personally an anti semite.

Edited 8 August, 2018 by hypochondriac

[shurlock]

My initial statement was neither silly nor over the top. You really should just accept that you misunderstood what I said and assumed I said all Muslim women when I said nothing of the sort. So that bit was wrong and the bit about the five sources was wrong too. Let's move on now that you've been thoroughly debunked.

 

A system, by definition, cannot be hardline and subjugate women if a sizable number of those women voluntarily accept and participate in it. So yes your initial statement remains silly and plainly over the top.

 

Let's be clear: you've almost exclusively referenced Qanta Ahmed via the BBC and Spectator (one source) - never mind, in places, she claims that both men and women are agitating for the right to wear headscarves. You also cite a Mail piece about a heroin dealer subjecting his wife to a year of hell and forcing her to wear a niqab. Top marks for outrage -needless to say the article's accuracy has been questioned by others.

 

Most embarrassingly you cite a Daily Telegraph article by Nesrine Malik but don't seem to have bothered to have read it in full or understood its argument. The article discusses the author's traumatic experience in Saudi Arabia where the niqab is obligatory. You have to be uninformed or acting in bad faith to claim that experience has any relevance to the UK (as you attempted earlier).

 

Rather she points out that in the UK religious dress is far more linked to the assertion of identity which has nowt to do with religion in its narrow sense. Outside Saudi Arabia, she furthermore points out the niqab is considered a choice and indeed many women are dissuaded from wearing it. To be clear that doesn't mean women aren't under pressure to wear it (though as she implies social pressure exists in all religions when religious freedom itself is so malleable) but her tone and conclusions are far more measured than your breathless citing of the Mail and silly, sensationalist talk of hardline subjugation.

 

Take a break: you're not doing yourself any favours.

Edited 9 August, 2018 by shurlock

[Jonnyboy]

Are you suggesting that you know corbyn better than Margaret Hodge and Ian Austin?

 

The only thing I said was that some people who know corbyn better than we do are of the opinion that he is anti semetic which is factually accurate. Whether he is or not I have no idea but as I said earlier, I don't think anyone on this thread has said he is personally an anti semite.

 

You are.

[Batman]

People should be free to wear any coverings they want. Until they are forced to or in any instance where the the rest of the general public have to show their face.

That is pretty liberal, fair and correct IMO.

[Saint in Paradise]

People should be free to wear any coverings they want. Until they are forced to or in any instance where the the rest of the general public have to show their face.

That is pretty liberal, fair and correct IMO.

 

The Times letter column today......

 

Sir, Boris Johnson should not apologise for telling the truth. His evocative analogy is unfortunate but he is justified in reminding everyone that the Wahhabi/Salafi-inspired

fad of female facial masking has no Koranic legitimacy. It is, however, a nefarious component of a trendy gateway theology for religious extremism and militant Islam.

 

The burka and niqab are hideous tribal ninja-like garments that are pre-Islamic, non-Koranic and therefore un-Muslim. Although this deliberate identity-concealing contraption

is banned at the Kaaba in Mecca it is permitted in Britain, thus precipitating security risks, accelerating vitamin D deficiency, endorsing gender-inequality and inhibiting community

cohesion.

 

The retrogressive Islamic clergy has succeeded in persuading ill-informed Muslims through suspect secondary sources that God wants women to cover their faces, when in reality

it is a toxic patriarchy controlling women. Is it any wonder that many younger women have internalised this poisonous chauvinism by asserting that it is their human right to hide

their faces? Johnson did not go far enough. If Britain is to become a fully integrated society then it is incumbent that cultural practices, personal preferences and communal customs

that aggravate social division should be firmly resisted. For this reason Britain must emulate France, Belgium, Austria, Bulgaria and Denmark in banning the burka.

 

Dr Taj Hargey

 

Imam, Oxford Islamic Congregation

[Verbal]

Leaving aside hypo's preposterous claims about Islamophobia being invented yesterday 'by Islamists', and his desire to play the white man, I just wonder how long it's going to take before the physical assaults against Muslim women begin. I would be surprised if BoJo hasn't wound up his 'base' into a vengeful rage.

[hypochondriac]

The Times letter column today......

 

Sir, Boris Johnson should not apologise for telling the truth. His evocative analogy is unfortunate but he is justified in reminding everyone that the Wahhabi/Salafi-inspired

fad of female facial masking has no Koranic legitimacy. It is, however, a nefarious component of a trendy gateway theology for religious extremism and militant Islam.

 

The burka and niqab are hideous tribal ninja-like garments that are pre-Islamic, non-Koranic and therefore un-Muslim. Although this deliberate identity-concealing contraption

is banned at the Kaaba in Mecca it is permitted in Britain, thus precipitating security risks, accelerating vitamin D deficiency, endorsing gender-inequality and inhibiting community

cohesion.

 

The retrogressive Islamic clergy has succeeded in persuading ill-informed Muslims through suspect secondary sources that God wants women to cover their faces, when in reality

it is a toxic patriarchy controlling women. Is it any wonder that many younger women have internalised this poisonous chauvinism by asserting that it is their human right to hide

their faces? Johnson did not go far enough. If Britain is to become a fully integrated society then it is incumbent that cultural practices, personal preferences and communal customs

that aggravate social division should be firmly resisted. For this reason Britain must emulate France, Belgium, Austria, Bulgaria and Denmark in banning the burka.

 

Dr Taj Hargey

 

Imam, Oxford Islamic Congregation

Well that's very interesting. I agree 100%.

[Sheaf Saint]

Leaving aside hypo's preposterous claims about Islamophobia being invented yesterday 'by Islamists', and his desire to play the white man, I just wonder how long it's going to take before the physical assaults against Muslim women begin. I would be surprised if BoJo hasn't wound up his 'base' into a vengeful rage.

 

And this is entirely the point. There is undoubtedly a conversation to be had about whether or not niqabs/burqas represent a security threat, a symbol of patriarchal oppression or, as The Imam quoted above claims, a health risk due to vitamin D deficiency. But comparing women who wear them to letter boxes and bank robbers is absolutely not the right way to go about that.

 

BoZo knew what he was doing, and the fact that he refuses to apologise sends a signal to every one of his supporters that this kind of prejudice is perfectly OK. It legitimises their pre-existing bigotry and will only embolden them to start showing it outwardly. Only a matter of time before we see another spike in the reporting of hate crimes similar to the one we saw after the Brexit vote.

 

Remember, this is a man who only last week was reported to have had meetings with a white supremacist who has been quoted as saying "Let them call you racist. Wear it as a badge of honour".

 

We live in dark times when the prevailing attitudes among the media are to savagely villify a man who has spent his entire political career fighting racism of all kinds, yet give a man who has been an overt racist his entire life a free pass to stir up ethnic tensions however he sees fit.

[Sheaf Saint]

Are you suggesting that you know corbyn better than Margaret Hodge and Ian Austin?

 

The only thing I said was that some people who know corbyn better than we do are of the opinion that he is anti semetic which is factually accurate. Whether he is or not I have no idea but as I said earlier, I don't think anyone on this thread has said he is personally an anti semite.

 

Hodge has always had a grudge against Corbyn, as the below snippet from 1995 shows. I very much doubt she really knows him well at all. I would be minded to accept the word of people who have worked closely with him for decades over hers.

 

[hypochondriac]

And this is entirely the point. There is undoubtedly a conversation to be had about whether or not niqabs/burqas represent a security threat, a symbol of patriarchal oppression or, as The Imam quoted above claims, a health risk due to vitamin D deficiency. But comparing women who wear them to letter boxes and bank robbers is absolutely not the right way to go about that.

 

BoZo knew what he was doing, and the fact that he refuses to apologise sends a signal to every one of his supporters that this kind of prejudice is perfectly OK. It legitimises their pre-existing bigotry and will only embolden them to start showing it outwardly. Only a matter of time before we see another spike in the reporting of hate crimes similar to the one we saw after the Brexit vote.

 

Remember, this is a man who only last week was reported to have had meetings with a white supremacist who has been quoted as saying "Let them call you racist. Wear it as a badge of honour".

 

We live in dark times when the prevailing attitudes among the media are to savagely villify a man who has spent his entire political career fighting racism of all kinds, yet give a man who has been an overt racist his entire life a free pass to stir up ethnic tensions however he sees fit.

By all means give legitimate criticism of Bannan- there's a lot to criticise- but you've just taken his quote completely out of context there to make it seem like he was saying you should be proud to be racist which isn't what he said at all. It's something many in the media have done too and it just comes across as dishonest.

[Sheaf Saint]

By all means give legitimate criticism of Bannan- there's a lot to criticise- but you've just taken his quote completely out of context there to make it seem like he was saying you should be proud to be racist which isn't what he said at all. It's something many in the media have done too and it just comes across as dishonest.

 

Please enlighten us on the real context then.

 

FWIW, Bannon is also an extreme anti-semite. He is repsonisble for the publishing of articles on Breitbart where Richard Spencer stated that "Jews have no place in the United Sates". He also approved an article in which it was calimed "Hell hath no fury like a Polish, Jewish, American elitist scorned".

 

All the accusations against Corbyn currently are that he has hosted and engaged with people whose views could be considered antisemitic if you accept that the term also encompasses people who have deep misgivings about the treatment of the Palestinian people by the state of Israel. Yet when BoZo can have meetings withe people who are actual Jew-hating antisemites, the lack of equivalent outrage from the media is extremely telling.

Edited 9 August, 2018 by Sheaf Saint

[Plastic]

Well that's very interesting. I agree 100%.

 

I also agree. Boris is a clown however some of his straight from the hip commentary resonates with how I’d consider a liberal society should operate - I.e fighting against religious dogma impacting upon our day to day lives.

There is the risk of him sliding further towards Trumpism, but I think he has a valid point despite the poor choice of words, and he should not apologise.

[hypochondriac]

Please enlighten us on the real context then.

 

Certainly. The point he was making was that leftist types throw around these labels to everyone to the point that they are losing their power. He was not telling racists to be proud of being racist as your quote suggested, rather he was advising the audience not to allow these smears to affect them since they tend to toss them at everyone they disagree with. I'm not saying I agree with him by the way and I'm no fan of Bannon but that was clearly the intent behind that quote.

Edited 9 August, 2018 by hypochondriac

[hypochondriac]

I also agree. Boris is a clown however some of his straight from the hip commentary resonates with how I’d consider a liberal society should operate - I.e fighting against religious dogma impacting upon our day to day lives.

There is the risk of him sliding further towards Trumpism, but I think he has a valid point despite the poor choice of words, and he should not apologise.

 

Good post. I do think Boris could have been less abrasive with his words but like you I think it's a sentiment that many would agree with- maybe even a majority.

[Sheaf Saint]

https://twitter.com/ta_mills/status/1027112699237478400

 

A Google search of the @BBCNews website currently returns 30x more pages on Labour antisemitism than Conservative Islamophobia. So either (a) the former problem is massively more prevalent than the latter, or (b) the BBC is presenting a distorted picture to its audiences.

 

 

Let's see who's going to try and concoct a coherent argument in support of option (a), shall we?

[Verbal]

I suspect the high numbers reflect the Corbynista flashmobbing from supporters of the anti-Semitic gerontocracy around Corbyn.

[Lord Duckhunter]

 

BoZo knew what he was doing, and the fact that he refuses to apologise sends a signal to every one of his supporters that this kind of prejudice is perfectly OK.

 

Complete and utter pony.

 

This narrative that he’s somehow pandering and appealing to the extremists is pure horse Shiite . Had he been doing so would have called for its banning, rather than specifically criticise Denmark for doing so.

 

Brixitittis has affected so many of the political pygmies in our elite that they’re losing the plot. They’re criticising a bloke who respects the fact women can wear the burka, but totally ignores France, Austria, Belgium Denmark that ban it. I wonder why, oh yeah, they’re in the wonderful EU. Thornbury can say she doesn’t want people wearing it in front of her kids, and calls for women wearing it to work in back offices rather than in front of the public, Clarke calls it a “bag” and sourbry calls it a peculiar concept , yet nothing , why is that? Because they’re on the right side of the Brexit divide.

 

This is not some sort of principled criticism, it’s a calculated political move by soft arsed remainers trying to shore up May. The useful idiots on the labour side have jumped in to deflect attention away from Corbyns anti semitism. But like anything the pinkos in the Tory party do, they ****ed it up. Boris is actually pretty liberal when it comes to immigration, he’s on “their” side of that debate, yet they’ve managed to brush all that aside & defuse one issue that could have been a problem for him with the grassroots. When Grieve says he’ll leave the party & Yasmin Alibhai-Brown says she’ll leave the country the day after he becomes prime minister, what do you think that does to the average conservative member deciding on a leader? Personally if I was running his leadership campaign, I’d put that on the side of a ****ing bus. He’d win with a landslide.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Batman]

Complete and utter pony.

 

This narrative that he’s somehow pandering and appealing to the extremists is pure horse Shiite . Had he been doing so would have called for its banning, rather than specifically criticise Denmark for doing so.

 

Brixitittis has affected so many of the political pygmies in our elite that they’re losing the plot. They’re criticising a bloke who respects the fact women can wear the burka, but totally ignores France, Austria, Belgium Denmark that ban it. I wonder why, oh yeah, they’re in the wonderful EU. Thornbury can say she doesn’t want people wearing it in front of her kids, and calls for women wearing it to work in back offices rather than in front of the public, Clarke calls it a “bag” and sourbry calls it a peculiar concept , yet nothing , why is that? Because they’re on the right side of the Brexit divide.

 

This is not some sort of principled criticism, it’s a calculated political move by soft arsed remainers trying to shore up May. The useful idiots on the labour side have jumped in to deflect attention away from Corbyns anti semitism. But like anything the pinkos in the Tory party do, they ****ed it up. Boris is actually pretty liberal when it comes to immigration, he’s on “their” side of that debate, yet they’ve managed to brush all that aside & defuse one issue that could have been a problem for him with the grassroots. When Grieve says he’ll leave the party & Yasmin Alibhai-Brown says she’ll leave the country the day after he becomes prime minister, what do you think that does to the average conservative member deciding on a leader? Personally if I was running his leadership campaign, I’d put that on the side of a ****ing bus. He’d win with a landslide.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

that racist old bag!!!

[buctootim]

This narrative that he’s somehow pandering and appealing to the extremists is pure horse Shiite . Had he been doing so would have called for its banning, rather than specifically criticise Denmark for doing so.

 

Brixitittis has affected so many of the political pygmies in our elite that they’re losing the plot. They’re criticising a bloke who respects the fact women can wear the burka, but totally ignores France, Austria, Belgium Denmark that ban it. I wonder why, oh yeah, they’re in the wonderful EU. Thornbury can say she doesn’t want people wearing it in front of her kids, and calls for women wearing it to work in back offices rather than in front of the public, Clarke calls it a “bag” and sourbry calls it a peculiar concept , yet nothing , why is that? Because they’re on the right side of the Brexit divide.

 

This is not some sort of principled criticism, it’s a calculated political move by soft arsed remainers trying to shore up May. The useful idiots on the labour side have jumped in to deflect attention away from Corbyns anti semitism. But like anything the pinkos in the Tory party do, they ****ed it up. Boris is actually pretty liberal when it comes to immigration, he’s on “their” side of that debate, yet they’ve managed to brush all that aside & defuse one issue that could have been a problem for him with the grassroots. When Grieve says he’ll leave the party & Yasmin Alibhai-Brown says she’ll leave the country the day after he becomes prime minister, what do you think that does to the average conservative member deciding on a leader? Personally if I was running his leadership campaign, I’d put that on the side of a ****ing bus. He’d win with a landslide.

 

I agree about the hysteria whipped up around Johnson - although its just as much to do with his political manoveuring shenanigans and his reputation for rent a quote that has generated it. He wants to draw the spotlight so he shouldnt complain when it goes both ways. Corbyn is probably hostile to Israel but not anti-semitic. He is suffering the same kind of abuse for many of the same reasons as Johnson - they want to be PM and is under much greater scrutiny / attack than Soubry or Grieve.

[Sheaf Saint]

In case anybody is still under any doubt about how much influence Israel has over British media reporting...

 

https://twitter.com/benabyad/status/1027456223262793729

 

 

then...

 

 

then...

 

[Lord Duckhunter]

I agree about the hysteria whipped up around Johnson - although its just as much to do with his political manoveuring shenanigans and his reputation for rent a quote that has generated it. He wants to draw the spotlight so he shouldnt complain when it goes both ways. Corbyn is probably hostile to Israel but not anti-semitic. He is suffering the same kind of abuse for many of the same reasons as Johnson - they want to be PM and is under much greater scrutiny / attack than Soubry or Grieve.

 

It’s interesting how Brexit is changing and dividing the political landscape. I’ve always considered Boris a pinko, he’s certainly way to the liberal side of the party than May, particularly over immigration. In fact Boris, politically, has got more in common with Soubry , Clarke & Grieve than he has with Redwood, Cash or IDS. He couldn’t have won London twice, without being from that wing of the party. Yet Brexit has redfined everything, he’s lazily lumped into the “right” category rather than the pinko wing. Walking my dog today I listened to Dellingpoles latest podcast where his guest was Tim Martin. He’d spent a lot of his early like in NI and claimed the Brexit divide here is now exactly the same as the religious divide in NI. Unionists can have policies that chime more with the republican parties on economics, law and order, everything apart from separation but they’ll never vote for them, they’ll always vote along religious lines. Brexit is starting to have that effect. Look at someone like Gove, there’s a ciggie paper between him and Cameron, but when that ciggie paper is Brexit, it becomes a massive unbreachable gap. Gove & Boris are basically new labour on everything bar Brexit,so they’re perceived as miles away from Kendall, Chucka, Clegg and other soft arsed pinkos. Don’t get me wrong I’d rather they led the country than this idiot, but if Brexit wasn’t happening I wouldn’t want another John Major /Tony Blair type Government . Which is exactly what they’d be.

[Jonnyboy]

I suspect the high numbers reflect the Corbynista flashmobbing from supporters of the anti-Semitic gerontocracy around Corbyn.

 

please.

[Jonnyboy]

In case anybody is still under any doubt about how much influence Israel has over British media reporting...

 

https://twitter.com/benabyad/status/1027456223262793729

 

 

then...

 

 

then...

 

 

Sickening. Imagine the barrage of Israeli pressure if the BBC ever did an even mildly positive Corbyn headline (unheard of I know).

[Verbal]

How big is a ‘very substantial minority’? The success of Avi Gabbay says everything about the current state of the country and the left.

 

Anecdotal as it is, I don’t know one Jewish friend or acquaintance over here who is critical of the Israeli government. I hear expressions that the situation is unfortunate (though often because the optics aren’t good) but that usually is the prologue to a far longer and more impassioned justification of the government’s actions. I even have friends who have swallowed every trope about Iran as the bogeyman -and these are otherwise educated and politically moderate people.

 

It's substantial enough, not least because 20% of the country's population is Arab. Then there's Labour (even Gabbay's version) plus a number of smaller parties in a ferociously complicated party-political system.

 

This, though, is impressive -if only St Jez and his anti-Semitic acolytes could build some support and solidarity around it...

 

https://twitter.com/stephane_ulrich/status/1028337699743309826

[Verbal]

Saint Jez is in even more trouble now. The Mail's expose about his wreath-laying could easily, and lazily, be dismissed as a 'classic MSM smear'. But Corbyn has now been caught in a hugely damaging lie.

 

His reaction to the Mail article is to say that he was definitely not laying a wreath to anyone but the victims of the Israeli bombing, on 1 October 1986, of the PLO HQ in Tunis. But that's not what he said himself, in an article he personally wrote for the Morning Star immediately after the ceremony.

 

Wreaths were laid at the graves of those who died on that day and on the graves of others killed by Mossad agents in Paris in 1991.

 

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/a-98de-palestine-united-1

 

Who were these 'others'? Members of the Black September leadership directly involved in the planning and execution of the massacre at Munich (a massacre conducted with arms supplied by German neo-Nazis). Damning details here:

 

https://twitter.com/JBickertonUK/status/1028325785889894401

[Jonnyboy]

Saint Jez is in even more trouble now. The Mail's expose about his wreath-laying could easily, and lazily, be dismissed as a 'classic MSM smear'. But Corbyn has now been caught in a hugely damaging lie.

 

His reaction to the Mail article is to say that he was definitely not laying a wreath to anyone but the victims of the Israeli bombing, on 1 October 1986, of the PLO HQ in Tunis. But that's not what he said himself, in an article he personally wrote for the Morning Star immediately after the ceremony.

 

 

 

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/a-98de-palestine-united-1

 

Who were these 'others'? Members of the Black September leadership directly involved in the planning and execution of the massacre at Munich (a massacre conducted with arms supplied by German neo-Nazis). Damning details here:

 

https://twitter.com/JBickertonUK/status/1028325785889894401

 

What's your suggestion for ending the ongoing conflict? Do you not support a two state solution?

[edprice1984]

A two state solution is the only way to end the ongoing conflict - however it is dependent on a number of very unlikely factors. Firstly, the Palestinian Authority have to clamp down and stop rocket attacks. (I don't necessarily agree that it should be the Palestinians who act first, but realistically that is the only way it is going to work). If they can achieve some sort of extended ceasefire, it will increase the pressure on Israel to finally do something about illegal settlers - the State won't do anything if they feel that they are being pressured by Palestinian violence.

 

If Israel doesn't tackle illegal settlers, it would need the international community led by the USA to impose sanctions etc to make it a moral issue - the key will be restraining the Arab world from inflammatory rhetoric; almost abstaining from the debate.

 

Finally, there would need to be a change in public opinion in Israel. Currently not enough people are willing to give up land or compromise and there is always the spectre of the assassination of Yitsak Rabin.

 

Basically a hell of a lot of things would have to fall into place and most of them are currently unthinkable. I don't know enough about the next generation of Israeli leaders and politicians; whether they are more liberal or more hawkish than their current counterparts.

 

Regarding Corbyn and the Tunisian wreath placing ceremony - even if you take his denials at face value; isn't just another example of his poor judgement - the reason for the Israeli attack on the PLO compound can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wooden_Leg. I am perfectly prepared to debate the rights/wrongs and proportionality of the Israeli response but it needs to be seen in the context of the time. The whole thing is a giant mess and on the weekend that polls suggest that support for Remain is now ahead of Leave (especially in Labour supporting heartlands in the North) and a potential easy political win is available - Corbyn, Momentum and his cabal are paralysed by accusations of anti-semitism.

[Lord Duckhunter]

What's your suggestion for ending the ongoing conflict? Do you not support a two state solution?

 

Is that the way to show your support, by honouring terrorists. I don’t know how old you are, hopefully you don’t remember Munich. But if you do, and are somehow sticking up for Corbyn over this, you should have a good look at your self.

 

I doubt very much privately Corbyn supports a two state solution anyway, like his shadow cabinet colleague Naz Shah his solution would be for Israel to disappear.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Lord Duckhunter]

**** me, the blokes shameless.

 

He now admits he was there when a wreath was laid honouring a Munich terrorist, but he didn’t take part. **** me, he’s so unlucky . He’s innocently wandered into a wreath laying ceremony, been photographed, but didn’t know anything about it. He went on to add that he was only looking for peace and always honours the victims from both sides. Funny I’ve yet to see any photos of him meeting, or honouring Protestants or Israeli victims.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Batman]

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/a-98de-palestine-united-1

[Jonnyboy]

Is that the way to show your support, by honouring terrorists. I don’t know how old you are, hopefully you don’t remember Munich. But if you do, and are somehow sticking up for Corbyn over this, you should have a good look at your self.

 

I doubt very much privately Corbyn supports a two state solution anyway, like his shadow cabinet colleague Naz Shah his solution would be for Israel to disappear.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I disagree. What would your solution be? I can only assume as a right winger it would be for massive Israeli expansion and the expulsion of all Palestinians?

[Verbal]

He now admits he was there when a wreath was laid honouring a Munich terrorist, but he didn’t take part. **** me, he’s so unlucky . He’s innocently wandered into a wreath laying ceremony, been photographed, but didn’t know anything about it.

 

Yet there are three photographs. The first one shows him actually holding the wreath. The second shows the wreath in position behind the tombstone commemorating three Black September leaders who organised the Munich massacre. And the third, hilariously, shows Corbyn attempting to mime a Muslim prayer.

 

He knew exactly what he was doing. It's a transparent lie.

 

He went on to add that he was only looking for peace and always honours the victims from both sides. Funny I’ve yet to see any photos of him meeting, or honouring Protestants or Israeli victims.

 

He's not interested in 'dialogue' between opposing sides in conflict - only in standing on platforms with people he agrees with. As these people have included Holocaust deniers, anti-Semites, reactionary terrorist groups like Hamas and the provos, and the media platforms of the clerical-fascist regime in Iran and the violent gangsters around Putin, you get a measure of our supposed future prime minister.

[Lord Duckhunter]

And the third, hilariously, shows Corbyn attempting to mime a Muslim prayer.

 

He knew exactly what he was doing. It's a transparent lie.

 

 

.

 

 

****ing hell verbal, stop with this witch hunter. Stop spreading fake news about the messiah. He’s admitted he was there, but is not sure he actually took part. Pictures have emerged of him that prove he didn’t.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Verbal]

And so the vastly incompetent cover-up continues. Corbyn has not made a declaration on the Commons register for his 2014 trip to the Black September memorial and wreath-laying ceremony in which he both didn't lay a wreath and was photographed laying a wreath (is this some Jezza version of Schrodinger's cat?)

 

His office say this is because the cost is 'below the reporting threshold'. Unless St Jez hitch-hiked to Tunis and stayed in a tent, that's impossible.

 

I suspect it's going to take no more than a few days to unearth the truth about where the money came from, and it'll be yet another clusterfu ck.

[Saint86]

Did anyone read the guardian defense of Corbyn? Shocking newspaper that one. Biased articles, no/limited area for public debate, and almost brutal fake news to push the Corbyn cause (at least on this point). You know you're in trouble reputationally when the Mail is able to one rings around your level of reporting on such a serious issue.

 

I can't decide if I want the man gone, or if I want him to cling on as leader to ensure Labour don't get in. One thing is certain however, A JC leadership would decimate the country for a decade.

 

That lot will be positively frothing at the mouth if BoJo ever made it to No.10.

[warsash saint]

How much longer has this cretin got?

 

Please do the honourable thing & just go (with all your cronies) & give us someone creditable to battle against the Tories & Brexit!

[LGTL]

He is an utter embarrassment to the Labour party. Now more then ever we need a strong opposition, May is a disgrace and don't get me started on Brexit. And what do we get? This bumbling old fool.

[Batman]

Just think how much the Labour Party would be cleaning up right now had they put someone normal in charge

[edprice1984]

And so the vastly incompetent cover-up continues. Corbyn has not made a declaration on the Commons register for his 2014 trip to the Black September memorial and wreath-laying ceremony in which he both didn't lay a wreath and was photographed laying a wreath (is this some Jezza version of Schrodinger's cat?)

 

His office say this is because the cost is 'below the reporting threshold'. Unless St Jez hitch-hiked to Tunis and stayed in a tent, that's impossible.

 

I suspect it's going to take no more than a few days to unearth the truth about where the money came from, and it'll be yet another clusterfu ck.

 

This may end up being the bigger problem for him. Lord Sheikh (he who wants Boris reprimanded for his comments about the Burkha) declared his visit to the same event on the register of interests, stating it was paid for by Tunisian government. The threshold for reporting is £300. The only way around it is if you paid for the trip yourself, or if it was paid by UK funds. Labour have stated that the event was paid for by the event and conference organisers. The best I can come up with in terms of possible organisers is: https://www.csis.org/regions/middle-east/africa/north-africa (courtesy of Jezza's own piece in The Morning Star). Well CSIS are based in Washington DC, so would still need to be declared under members interests.

 

Is it likely that the trip cost less than £300? Is it likely that Jezza paid for all or part of the costs himself - if so, why don't Labour confirm this? Even if the costs were met by CSIS - they still would need to be declared as they are based in the US. If CSIS didn't fund it, who the hell did? Why would the Tunisian gov. offr to pay for Lord Sheikh but not Jezza who is far more supportive of the PLO and Palestine, and couldn't care less if he is pictured with Hamas (he has called them 'Friends' previously).

 

Ian Paisley Jnr has recently been suspended for 30 days for breaching the rule on paid advocacy - ie) lobbying for Sri Lanka after getting loads of free luxury holidays. You could easily argue that if Jezza is advocating Palestinian rights (however justified) on the back of receiving a free holiday to Tunisia, is he not breaking the same rule. I admit it is a stretch, but it doesn't look good nonetheless.