Don't fall for the "Project Jingoism; make Britain white again" line that the UK will not have to put up borders in the event of a hard Brexit.
The screw is being turned on the DUP
- Thread starter WolfeTone
- Start date
- Status
Early Riser
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,643
Well, Corbyn became leader on the votes of hard left people (largely Momentum) who joined Labour in droves once he managed to become a candidate - one person, one vote. Once he won, the same hard left came to dominate Labour's National Executive. They also dominate many of the constituency associations. So, it didn't "spring up overnight". Labour membership and Labour administration has been transformed since Corbyn became leader. A revolution in itself.
The hard left have a long history of anti-semitism. E.G., remember George Galloway?
You do know that Bernie Sanders is Jewish?
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
I don't know. You tell me.
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
Rev. Ian Paisley always claimed he had nothing against individual RCs, it was their church that he abominated. JC claims not to have a anti semitic bone in his body and yet he wants the Zionist state wiped off the face of the earth. Let RCs make the call in the former case and let Jews make the call in the latter.
There's a reason for the questions you ask. It's not "convenient" and it's not a conspiracy theory. There is a difference between being supportive of the Palestinian cause, moving towards the desire for the Israeli state to not be there to blaming Jewish people generally for the actions of the state. While Corbyn was always strong an the first, a lot of the support that joined labour were from organisations further down the above line. This was also mixed in with a certain thinking in some of the far left who resurfaced tropes around the "behind the scenes Jewish business people controlling the world economy" line from mid 20th century - who found a home supporting Corbyn. There is a reason it escalated when Corbyn became leader and why it didn't during the last few leaders. It was there previously in the far left and there was a big battle to get it out after Foot was leader.
You want to see examples - all you have to do is go through Rachel Riley's twitter timeline over the last 6 or 9 months. It's pretty brutal what is being directed at Jewish people. Or what any of the Labour Jewish MP's or Peers are highlighting. They are providing specific examples and evidence and it's unpleasant
This "I'm only saying - it's really convenient - I'm only asking questions" conspiracy nonsense is the problem. There is a real issue and it isn't being tackled. There is also a real problem in the Conservative party around Muslim people (or in fact any people of colour). The last few years have really brought out some of the nastiest undercurrents in politics - they have been given permission to speak out
galway_blow_in
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,992
Lovely bit of sectarianism there.
galway_blow_in
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,992
I'm well aware that bernie sanders is Jewish.
Early Riser
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,643
Corbyn is just as much a euro-sceptic and a brexiter as Johnson - indeed, ideologically probably more so. But they are both more interested in using the current situation to attain/keep power.
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
A
Purple himself has come out that he is neither nationalist nor catholic. I suppose he must be the exception that proves the rule. Only I think Purple is in a different space from the pan nationalists (catholics). I think he actually believes we will be plunged back to 1972 come November. The pans are only using it as a bargaining tool. And boy have they been successful. We have everybody from Pelosi to Barnier riffing on about the Peace Process.
Ahhh! You haven't been following the Great Debate between myself and Purple. I was remarking on the incredible consensus between FG, FF, SF, SDLP, FOT et. al. and had dubbed it as pan nationalist. Purple argued that since FG were Blueshirts this could not be called nationalist. I didn't quite follow the argument but looked for a more definitive common denominator and "catholic" sort of jumped off the page.
Purple himself has come out that he is neither nationalist nor catholic. I suppose he must be the exception that proves the rule. Only I think Purple is in a different space from the pan nationalists (catholics). I think he actually believes we will be plunged back to 1972 come November. The pans are only using it as a bargaining tool. And boy have they been successful. We have everybody from Pelosi to Barnier riffing on about the Peace Process.
Yes, and I think we are all agreed (?) that it was/is a bad idea.
Although what was the RUC officer was doing there if the UK was not imposing its own customs posts?
There is no-one touting the return to violence of the past as a consequence of the border. The issue is the prospect of a return to violence.
But before that, the collapse of the GFA is also a prospect.
If NI is pulled out of EU then, depending on whatever future relationship is established between Ireland and UK, the prospect of a restoration of power-sharing becomes more remote (my opinion).
Dissidents are feeding off this vacuum. And while Gerry Adams leadership kept a cohesion on all strands of republicanism within SF, my gut feeling is that Mary Lou and Michelle, while respected, do not resonate with hardcore faithful.
Its not even about the lack of progress on Irish language rights, abortion etc...its the fact that Unionism can still stall progress where it suits them.
Irish language rights should be inconsequential. Legislation that is passed and then left to dust, with ocassion for the odd inconvenience when one of the 1% invoke those rights.
But Unionism cannot even reach out that far. Cannot recognize the existence of its neighbors culture in their own country. Everything Irish, or rather Gaelic, to be treated with contempt.
So no power sharing, a prospective border, and what protections will Irish nationalists from EU courts? Are they reliant on the judgement of British courts alone?
Without power sharing, is it to be a return to direct rule? The Tories have already walked over the commitment in the GFA for the British government to exercise exclusive impartiality.
If it is a return to direct rule, expect SF vote to drop dramatically. Some might welcome this, but I think it is dangerous.
Pressure will come for SF from the heartlands to withdraw from Policing Board.
We are back to a cold war in NI.
Early Riser
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,643
I don't know about Purple but I have never heard anyone suggest that we will be plunged back to 1972 come November. But that is not to say that a hard Brexit is not playing with fire. There will be no alternative to a hard border ( talk about "we wont impose a border if you won't" is, at the very kindest, disingenuous - more likely plain dishonest) and that will be very alienating for nationalist people on people on both sides of the border - not to mention the economic consequences for both communities. As to where it will lead, who knows - but who could have foreseen 1972 from 1968?
I been through it. It is awful. Full of inconsistencies and bogus assertions. She is typical of the mob that equates criticism of Israeli government policy and the murders by IDF of Palestinians with anti-semitism.
I recommend linking to her pinned post which she asserts is evidence of anti-semitism in the Labour party. It is no such thing. Just more unproven assertions.
Did you not see any problematic stuff directed at her? It is all bogus assertions?
It's not the critique of IDL that concerns me. It is the "Rothschild's rule the world" mentalists - that is literally out of the 1930's
The assertion made here is that Jeremy Corbyn is anti-Semitic. He is not.
Riley is asserting anti-semitism within the UK Labour party. She has not provided evidence, as she claims to do, to substantiate those assertions.
If people are directing bile anti-semitism towards her, what has that got to do with JC or the Labour party?
galway_blow_in
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,992
Every time someone talks about conspiracies involving rich bankers trying to rule the Country, that in my opinion has very worrying undertones. We have been here before. If Corbyn doesn't have an anti-Semitic bone in his body, he can start by avoiding putting himself in the position where is sharing platforms with terrorists, holocaust deniers, Anti Israeli nut jobs and start dealing with the anti semitic problem in his own party that has been brought to his attention by people in his own party (Not by Jewish Bankers). He won't do that though. So the only conclusion can be that he shares the same views or he is an enabler for these views as he knows that these hard left nut job supporters are the ones keeping him in a job. Either way, he is not fit to lead the main opposition party.
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,448
Theobold, the hopes for the end of sectarian division, which might have flowed from the GFA, are now in ruins. Simon Varadkar has made this a winner takes all struggle. Any sort of increased visibility of the border on the island and nationalists will have been deserted, a sea border inside the UK and unionists have been duped by a process which supposedly required their consent for any major change to NI's position within the UK.
Early Riser
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,643
Anyone can criticise Israeli gov policy - it is easily done. That is not the same as consorting with Hamas who are committed to "driving the Jews into the sea" and obliterating the state of Israel - violently and indiscrimately. It is also different from promoting anti Jewish tropes.
Someone on this thread mentioned Bernie Sanders. He is someone who has ofetn criticised Israel - but he has not associated himself with the type of anti-semitism so often seen on Britain's far left (now controlling Labour).
Anyway, best to wait for the outcome ot the investigation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission - by the way, only the second time it has ever investigated a political party, the other being the BNP. Here's the ref:
"We are using our powers under the Equality Act to open an investigation, which will look at:
- whether unlawful acts have been committed by the Party or its employees or agents
- the steps taken by the Party to implement the recommendations made in the reports on antisemitism by Baroness Royall, the Home Affairs Select Committee and in the Chakrabarti Report
- whether the Rule Book and the Party’s investigatory and disciplinary processes have enabled or could enable it to deal efficiently and effectively with complaints of race or religion or belief discrimination and racial harassment or victimisation, including whether appropriate sanctions have been or could be applied
- whether the Party has responded to complaints of unlawful acts in a lawful, efficient and effective manner."
Investigation into the Labour Party | Equality and Human Rights Commission
How were Unionists duped and by who? They were duped by the people that they are so keen to align to. The majority of people in Northern Ireland voted against Brexit. The politicians and people in the mainland UK never gave NI a second thought when voting for Brexit. The position of the Irish Government hasn't changed once. They looked at alternatives to the back stop and never found one. The UK still haven't suggested one apart from fluffy language around promises and technology that doesn't exist. The UK signed the GFA. The UK decided to hold a referendum to vote to leave the EU. The UK voted to leave the EU. It is not up to Ireland to square that circle for the UK. They created the mess. They now have to either accept the consequences or offer an alternative that Ireland and the EU can live with. It hasn't happened and the fault to that lies in London. Not in Dublin.
She has actually. At local Councillor and Local branch level there is a significant amount of holocaust denial, "Rothschild" conspiracy and "Middle East" one nation solution material shared by her and others. What it has to do with the Labour party is that they are party officials and representatives.
I don't know whether Corbyn is or isn't supportive. But he has put in charge of the investigation team people that have been pretty explicit in the past. A big issue is that complaints are being ignored or not dealt with and that there has been interference in the process. Alongside that, the failure to adopt a recognised policy (and the subsequent investigation as mentioned). So, at the very least he is open to the accusation of being complacent about it.
- Status