Ken Livingstone

Why would Livingstone want to destabilise the party, he is a very close friend of Corbyn.!

Livingstone went on that radio programme to defend a female MP who had been suspended for posting a comment that .israel should be moved to America - think I have thus correct - she apologise for her comments but Livingstone did his bit in Hitler supporting Ziionists, he even chose the radio show of a Jew to do so.

annie KL would have been deliberately invited by Feltz programme ..he did not wake up one day and think "I will go on the radio to delibreately upset people about Zionism!" In his clumsy way he was trying to do the opposte. The fact of the Havaara agreement exists. The fact that some Jewish Zionists and some leading Nazis were involved in the agreement is an historical fact. KL may have used this fact unwisely and made interpretations that others disagree with but it still does not mean KL hates Jews & is anti -semetic. He dislikes Zionism as a political ideal. If that offends Zionist supporters that is too bad. I dislike a lot of politcal ideals that others support as do most of us!

Penstemmon, I have never thought Livingstone is anti Semitic, just wish he would return to his newts, he really does love the limelight , I accept his right to free speech but he should respect party rules

www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/06/former-israeli-security-chiefs-warn-of-tyranny interesting article on "freedom of speech" in Israel.

I suppose it's a bit like the "Grandee or has been" debate. People finding it hard to come to terms with their loss of status, and clinging on to the limelight.

I think you are right llovecheese, now he is just a party member and suppose he finds this difficult after being London Msyor, plus the media are aware of his need to still be considered a politician and play on this need, similar with George Galloway

Thank you Penstemmon and others for the information about the Havaara agreement. I couldn't understand what the fuss was about. Either Hitler was or was not in favour of Zionism and this is a matter or verifiable record. Not a sign of anti-semitism to mention it surely?

I would say that Hitler was neither for or against Zionism. He just used the movement as another way of ridding Germany of some Jews.
I should imagine he despised Zionist members as much as he despised all Jews.

anniebach If you're referring to Naz Shah's Facebook post, did you actually see it? It had originally been posted by a satirical Jewish website and was originally intended as a satirical dig at America for not wanting to accept immigrants. The DM described it as an "anti-semitic outburst" - I don't think so!

Yes, he did, although he backed away from the whole idea in about 1937 when he realised that a hub was being created for a new Jewish state.

At the time, Palestine was a British mandate. The British had been lukewarm about creating a Jewish state. Hitler thought he was offloading Jews to a British colony.

Yes Daphne I saw it, but long before Trump and his anti immigrant rant . Was Obama anti immigrant ?

And I am sure the Jews are and were aware if Hitlers hatred of Jews, little wonder many Jews are angered and distressed to hear claims he supported Zionists untill he went mad.

If Livingston is expelled he is confident he will win in the courts, here we go again,

Trump doesn't have anything to do with it!!

Obama restricted immigration.

For goodness' sake, it was intended to be satirical, as was Naz Shah's comment, in the grand old tradition of British satire.

I don't suppose the fact that Shah is a Muslim has anything to do with it .

If people really thought it was an "outburst" we really are becoming a nation of snowflakes.

Why? For a start, Hitler didn't "support" Zionism. Livingstone was correct about stating some facts, which many people prefer to forget, but his interpretation and logic were faulty.

His interpretation has caused anger and distress but that doesn't matter ?

If I am upset and angry about someone saying something is that my problem or theirs? I see no point in asking someone to apologise and withdraw remarks just because someone is offended. In fact there as always been a long tradition in British politics of trading insults. Had he said something which really was anti-semitic or racist I could understand the suspension, he didn't and it wasn't. But the Labour Party has always had a tense relationship with KL anyway.

So all the Jews who are angered and distressed are in politics?

As to you saying something which causes distress to another, it's your choice and so your fault for causing the hurt Trisha

I thunk to say Jews are offended is watering down the truth, perhaps if your parents, grandparents, siblings and extended family had been murdered your feelings would be deeper than offended.

The truth is not watered down. The facts remain and have been extensively discussed and links provided. It is a question of interpretation. l don't understand what gives you the right to speak for Jews Anniebach as I have said before some were offended, some weren't. To regard them as having only one view about this is unacceptable. To make it simple it's as if I said all Welsh people can sing.

Yet you are speaking for Jews Trasher

Your far left loyalty has made you insensitive to people's emotions in my opinion.

It is far more insensitive to constantly insist that you know how all Jews feel. It is in fact anti-semitic, as I said before Jews are as different and diverse in their views as any other group of people.

I have never said all Jews, I have said many Jews, I know some are deeply hurt because I have been told by a Rhabbi and by a family who live in a strong Jewish community .

Some are deeply hurt and angry, you dismiss this as being offended

Trisher I can see where you are coming from but there is a real issue with what he said, and the problem is more than KL using clumsy language. There are different views around Zionism among Jewish people. However, Hitler is pretty much universally detested by all Jews, detested to a degree most non-jews can never experience. Added to that many Jews believe that the establishment of Israel is not just a good thing but a quite marvellous achievement for a people who have suffered worldwide discrimination over not just centuries but millennia. Finally, it is quite clear that Hitler did not in any any way support the creation of Israel for any reason other than as a dumping ground for exiled German Jews. For KL to in any way suggest that the most hated man in Jewish history was in any sense of the expression a true Zionist was more than offensive, it was an offensive distortion of the truth, so is closer to fake news than an example of a man exercising his right to freedom of speech. Having said that I don't see this as a reason to throw him out of the party. He has taken a lot of stick, rightly so, but my take would be leave it at that.

I can see some of that Fitzy54 but I think the issue also goes deeper, perhaps it is linked to 'survivor guilt' but there seems to have been an effort to restrict information about what happened just before the war and the Holocaust and to stop people talking about this. There was for example the censoring of the play "Perdition" at the Royal Court. If Hitler is the most hated man for Jews I suppose finding out that there may have been some collusion between him and Jewish leaders would be devastating.

Yes, I can see this opens up other issues, but KL did step over the line here, which is the central point of the thread.