Labour gone mad

Another supporter of deselection, the disgrace to the once great broad church Labour Party is Corbyn and his supporters

I do not think that policies can dot every I and cross every T - each policy would take years and years to create and there would still be objections from some. What is needed is an ethos within parties, and especially from the leadership, that makes racist attitudes completely out of order.

I find that this attention signalling the virtue of organisations really rather tedious. I visited a hospital ward recently that had a notice board outside the ward with a vast list of their "vision" - which basically said we are going to take care of you - what a pointless exercise.

When Livingston finally left the party after nothing was done when he claimed Hitler supported Zionism Corbyn said how sorry he was that he had left, he should have had him thrown out.

Anniebach Quote [ Another supporter of deselection, the disgrace to the once great broad church Labour Party is Corbyn and his supporters] End Quote

Anniebach, Jeremy Corbyn won the last Labour Party leadership election against Owen Smith by receiving 313,209 votes against Smiths 193,229. That is a very convincing majority in any reasonable persons reckoning I would believe.

However, since that very convincing win, we still have seen a continuous campaign by a number of old Blairites in the party to undermine Corbyn in everything he attempts to undertake. In collusion with Ian McNicholl the General Secretary of the movement in 2017, this group attempted to wreck the whole Labour party General Election campaign because of their own self-serving dislike of Corbyn.

It had been rumoured that such action had taken place following the election, and that was part the reason that McNickoll was "requested" to consider his position by the NEC, which he did.

However, Jennie Formby the new General Secretary has now revealed the true disgusting depth of those actions and the names of all the so called "moderate Blairites" involved.

I am no great supporter of Corbyn as party leader, but I accept that he was democratically elected as leader and so should all who are members of the movement. Therefore those MPs involved in the foregoing action should now be immediately be removed as Labour party parliamentary representatives by their constituency party and also be expelled entirely from the Labour movement by the National executive.

What these people carried out was to attempt to effect the outcome of a British General Election, and therefore as this matter is investigated further I would hope that the Crown Prosecution service may find grounds for prosecution, for that is what they deserve I feel.

Ah yes, Jennie Formby, her son with Len McClusky must be an adult now.

Anniebach Quote[Ah yes, Jennie Formby, her son with Len McClusky must be an adult now.] End Quote

SO, what has Len McCluskey or Jennie Formby in their private lives have in consequence to the discussion in this thread.

I believe the anniebach post above states far more about the person(s) making such statements than anything they may say in regard to the persons they are disparaging about.....Totally Ridiculous.

Just chatting. Nothing unkind or untrue said ,

I agree with Jura2

But Hitler did support zionism at one time. It's a known fact. Don't understand why KL was blamed for saying this. Maybe he gave the wrong emphasis/context. Don't know too much about it.

Anniebach, as the opening poster to the thread anyone would have believed you would have wished to make serious responsive posts to those who take the trouble to reply to the topic.

Although, thinking about it, that would be undoutedly to much to expect.

Grandad1943, I respond to the posts I choose to respond to

inews.co.uk/news/politics/john-woodcock-labour-party-letter-full/

polly if you mean Hitler supported Zionism as a easy way of getting rid of the Jews in Germany, then for short while he did.Then he decided that killing them all was a better way.
The Labour Party is a disgrace for not just adopting the International definition of anti-Semitism.

I think that was it sadly Lemongrove, yes. So KL stated a fact but I'm not really sure how he used it so I'd better shut up. But it just annoys me when people say he was sacked for stating a true fact! I assume there was more to it.

Exactly polly it was only because it was a good way to get rid of them (by Hitler) nobody can say that he supported Zionism, that makes a mockery of it.

polly, he wasn’t sacked, he didn’t hold any position, he made the decision to leave the party

I see Im.showing my ignorance (of KL, not Hitler!) So will bow out gracefully!

.polly, he was suspended from the party, perhaps this is what you were thinking of

Yes, probably!

The guns are out for Margaret Hodge , if they get her out will it cause the breakup of the party?

www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/18/labour-party-to-take-action-against-mp-who-called-corbyn-a-racist

pollyperkins I agree, I was always confused about why saying that was antisemitism; according to the BBC, he said "When Hitler won his election in 1932 his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews."

According to party rules behaviour has to be respectful between colleagues.

Was John Macdonald calling fellow labour MP’s f*****g losers respectful ?

Have you actually read the Code of Conduct for Antisemitism? Labour has not gone mad and the NEC is NOT deciding on a "new definition" - they have accepted the IHRA definition of anti semitism. This article may help your understanding.

"As definitions go, this one (IHRA working definition) is, to say the least, somewhat vague. Accordingly, the drafters of the IHRA text provide “examples” which, they say, “may serve as illustrations” to “guide” IHRA in its work. Similarly, the NEC Code includes “guidelines” to assist Labour in its work, including a set of seven “examples”. Here is where there is a degree of variation from the IHRA text; and this is where the confusion arises. For, when critics say that the NEC has not adopted the IHRA definition (“in full”), they allude to these variations.

They thus confuse the definition and the examples that are meant as illustrations only. The examples are precisely not intended to be definitive. The definition itself might be vague, but nothing could be clearer than this distinction – between the definition proper and ancillary examples – in the body of the IHRA text".

www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brian-klug/code-of-conduct-for-antisemitism-tale-of-two-texts

I think it's sad that a more comprehensive definition has to be enforced. From a brief reading the main points are criticising individual Jews, because of assumed qualities of their race. Denying the Holocaust. Criticising the Israeli govt. because of assumed qualities of their race.
But it seems that only by using these rules, in their broadest interpretation, consistently, can antisemitism be controlled. And that's why all those rabbis are so insistent.
As for the Labour Party, and Corbyn's sympathy for the Palestinians, many people feel the same way, including many Israeli Jews.

After "criticising the Israeli govt. because of assumed qualities of their race" I should have added " and their treatment of the Palestinians."