Labour Party and anti semitism

I think OldMeg was being sarcastic about your long posts Allygran1 .

Trisher, please stop trying to put words into my mouth. My position is clear, your position is clear. You say you have no need to be against Israel because you support Palestine, I am very pleased to hear that.

Although, you do go on to blame Israel for the failures of the aid agencies, International organisations and Host Countries to establish empowered communities over the last 70 years.

You take the Political stance and I prefer to take the practical and humanitarian stance, that would bring actual change to those living in the Camp/Enclaves in host Countries across the Levant for almost 70 years.

Tell me (although I will be off line from now until late in the evening) how do you envisage a State of Palestine to be? Practically, tell me where would it be? How would it house all of the people in the camps across the Levant, with the birth rate over the year's now thousands and thousands more people than the original displaced persons? Would the people living in the camps/enclaves, permanent "temporary" homes for over 70 years want to live in the place that you are going to describe to me?
By creating a State of Palestine, who would be displaced to house it?

Well Trisher only OldMeg can answer that one! It is a matter of indifference to me. Read them or don't!

Or if your right Trisher, OldMeg could just join in with the thread about Antisemitism in the Labour Party and the persecution of those members and MP's in the Labour Party who stand up against antisemitism.

allygran1 you said It seems to me that a lot of the far left cafe culture elite cannot support Palestine without being against Israel. That is the issue, not that he is supporting Palestine.
Just pointing out that it is possible.
Well we could begin by moving the settlers who have illegally occupied Palestinian land and return to the 1967 border www.un.org/press/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm

It's impossible, it seems to me.
I'm usually a bit Pollyanna about the power of positive thinking and talking between those most affected by any dreadful situation.
This particular dreadful situation seems to polarise views to the point of no return.
I've just watched Jeremy's video. I'm not Jewish and I am a LP supporter. I accept JC is the leader , though not the one I voted for or would have chosen. I can't imagine voting anything but Labour, especially as our constituency has a good Labour MP. I watched the video and felt increasingly like I was back at work, listening to an 'apology' from someone who'd behaved badly but didn't truly get it. More therapy would have been my initial thought. Then I'd have put my positive hat on and suggested this move may lead to some kind of constructive discussions with "the other side"
There, that's how positive I feel.

Iam, I really wish I could have a pinch of your positive thinking.

I regret I found the video pointless, he needs to speak to the country not just party members, unkind I know but was it an attempt to keep the membership up. He doesn’t seem to realise he has to reach out across the country, is he feeling safe with a high membership number ?

I listened to it and read all the comments. It still seems odd to me that no one bothers to mention that the all party committee of MPs that looked at the IHRA definition of anti-semitism recommended exactly the same adaptations and explanations be adopted as those the LP has used. Are all of those MPs anti-semitic? Or did they simply want a clearer and more understandable definition?

"It's not my thread OldMeg...it's Anniebach's. Sorry to see you go."
You could have fooled me.

That’s unfair, Allygran remains polite and sticks to the topic regardless of sarcasm

Annie, my positive thinking would only go so far as to allow opposing sides to try and find common ground. Reading the news this morning isn't reassuring on that front. good piece in the guardian (apologies again for my technical failures)

Iam, I have just heard there is now a campaign to get Tom Watson out, when I heard Tom had that article in the Observer I added - who will be the new deputy leader, seems my pessimistic view is spot on.

I do not know this party, bullying, racism, lies, and the loss of comradeship

It’s what extremes do though isn’t it? Extreme left or extreme right cannot tolerate any dissention.

It is lemon, it is . The rot of communism has set in.

I seem to recall that when Tom Watson used parliamentary privilege to make claims about Leon Brittan relating to sexual abuse and contributed to several articles in which he described Brittan as "as evil a person as one could get", many people on Gransnet, including me, weren't so impressed.

Not only did Watson disgrace himself by making claims that had not been tested in Court but he also undermined and called into question any then current or potential lines of investigation into other sexual abuse cases.

Watson was very bullish when first challenged about his remarks but eventually had to issue a grovelling apology.

At the time, Nick Cohen wrote in The Guardian "When he hounded a dying man to his grave, Watson sank lower than the News of the World reporters he and Hacked Off once fought ..... In all fairness, and on the balance of evidence before us, I would say that Tom Watson’s career deserves to be destroyed right now."

Now Watson joins the throng - saying "the party risks becoming lost in a “vortex of eternal shame” unless it addresses the fears of the Jewish community on the subject." Jumping on an opportunistic bandwagon again - and pretty rich coming from someone whose behaviour has been far from exemplary.

Perfect example, attack a party member for daring to speak the truth about the road the party is being taken.

Eloethan, the attempt to boot Watson out isn’t linked to the child sexual abuse enquiry though. It’s directly linked to his recent comments in support of Margaret Hodge, Ian Austen and the Ongoing issues relating to allegations of anti semitism.
I’m despairing and don’t put all the blame with a right wing press, or a so called Blairite campaign to get JC out of his post as part leader. I wish it was so simple

Iam64 perhaps that is true but no-one has yet explained to me why the all party committee looking at the IHRA definition advised that additions needed to be made for legal clarity. Very similar additions to those adopted by the NEC. No one appears to know why they were not added and why the IHRA definition was simply endorsed without them. It seems to me that it was possibly a case of it looking good to adopt them as they stand rather than making certain the definitions are legally clear, which, as we have seen, results in cries of anti-semitism from many. In which case we are being governed with, what might be termed ad-man legislation. If it looks good, and sounds good, and you can sell it, never mind if it's fit for purpose. It's dangerous ground to be on.

Nope, they wanted to omit certain parts of it so that they then didn’t have to take action against the antisemitic in their midst.They were rewriting the rule book if you like to suit themselves.
Trying to depress it up as anything else stinks.

Dress not depress.

Although it is depressing.

For legal clarity? The Judiciary, Police, over 100 countries need the help of the Labour Party to clarify it?

I would prefer the LP to focus on challenging this awful government, its assaults on public services and the shambles that is Brexit, rather than on the International Definition of anti Semitism.
It's been accepted by the majority of countries. I'm unconvinced but if there is an argument to re examine the wording, is this the time for the opposition to have this as the focus of its work, rather than its job which is to be HM party of opposition to this awful government.

I agree Iam64 but I think the problem is that they are being pushed to do this because of the extraordinary amount of publicity it has received. (Perhaps because this gov is so awful)

Not so, they chose to amend it, no pushing , the publicity started because of their decision not as you claim trisher

They were not pushed to do it at all!
They could have carried on and accepted the International definition, but they chose not to because they didn’t want to have to punish anyone, especially friends of Corbyn.
They are a lousy Opposition.