Corbyn turns down invitation from Holocaust Museum

Announcements
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    No anti-semitism in the Labour Party... oh,well if Baroness Charkrabarti said it (after receiving a peerage from Jezbollah) then it must be true.
    :laugh: :lol: I'm really hoping the person who posted that was joking, otherwise I've lost all hope
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JamesN88)
    It's akin to George Galloway and his sympathies towards Saddam Hussein.

    That would be the same mass torturing, chemical weapons dropping, total nutcase Saddam Hussein who we're all familiar with.

    Edit: Before anyone says it I'm not condoning the 2003 debacle.
    This very interesting opinion piece just went up on the Guardian, written by a policy adviser to Corbyn (now left that position) who is also Jewish, calle Josh Simons.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-corbyn-israel

    After six months working as a policy adviser for Jeremy Corbyn, it was clear to me that the way Corbyn and those around him think about Jewish people is shaped by a frenetic anti-imperialism, focused on Israel and America. Without a hint of irony, one senior aide asked that I remove the greeting “Chag Kasher VeSameach” from Corbyn’s Passover message, for fear that Corbyn’s supporters might think the use of Hebrew “Zionist”.
    He has previously pointed out that staff in Corbyn's office spoke about a "Jewish conspiracy" and Chakrabarti failed to put any of that in her report.

    https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk...r-spoke-jewish
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zayn008)
    :laugh: :lol: I'm really hoping the person who posted that was joking, otherwise I've lost all hope
    Yes I was thinking the same thing! Please let it be a parody of Corbynite extremism. Though in all honest I'm no longer surprised about just how resistant the Corbyn cult members can be to facts and logic.

    It's a great example of Poe's law

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Well it would upset his muslim voters.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    AlexanderHam

    An interesting read, which of course will be dismissed by the cultists.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by independent ocyclitis)
    This is simply a media smear. Shami Chakrabarti's report clearly said there is not antisemitism in the Labour Party.
    Baroness Shameless Chakrabarti's completely independent and comprehensive report settles the argument once and for all. 👍
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Meh. Stupid but to a large extent I'm past caring at this point. Corbyn's PR job as leader has never been great, though the leadership contest itself does seem to bring out the best in him. I hope it actually encourages him to pull his finger out. I don't think it's a hard-leftie backbench thing or anything like that - McDonnell has a good grasp of PR strategy in the face of media hostility, so it evidently can be done.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    The 1988 charter is their current organisational constitution.
    No, it isn't. They don't have one. The Hamas Charter was never given the same binding manifesto status that say, Fatah's, was.

    Hamas has repeatedly said it has no interest in a long-term peace, only in a short-term ceasefire.
    Hamas has referred to the possibility of a 'long-term truce' based on the 1967 boundaries on several occasions. Now, whether that is meant literally, or is just a circumlocution for 'peace agreement' but in which they are unwilling to say the words is anyone's guess, though I certainly believe it's at least possible to win them round to the latter if they're not there already.


    Zionism means the Jews are entitled to a state in the Levant, which they are.
    Why? Why is any particular ethnic group entitled to a state?


    Not all of Israel belongs to Jewish people, there is plenty of land in the north which belongs to Palestinians
    Private land ownership and political territory are quite different concepts. Also, it's worth pointing out that the Israeli land system, through the JNF, was directly discriminatory towards non-Jews until 2004-2007, and since then indirectly so.

    who are the same Palestinians who lived there prior to 1948.
    Well, they're some of them, anyway.

    There was no state of Palestine.
    There's never been a state of Wales. There had never been a state of Namibia before 1990. We still know/knew and could point out their respective territories.

    In 1948 the UN proposed a partition so that there would be a Jewish majority state and a Muslim majority state.
    According to the UNSCOP Subcommittee 2, the initial partition proposal had in fact not used up to date population statistics, and that more recents stats indicated that the area marked for the Jewish state in the proposal in fact had a very slight (about a 50.5-49.5 split) Palestinian Arab majority.


    Instead of accepting it, the Arabs and Palestinians declared war on Israel promising to exterminate it. They started a war and they lost.
    i) What exactly would have constituted Palestinian 'acceptance' of the plan, in your opinion? There wasn't a signing process, or any organisation(s) asked or designated to represent the Palestinians.

    ii) So when did 'the Palestinians' start/declare this war exactly? There had been violence in Mandatory Palestine by various different groups, both Palestinian and Zionist, for years, long before the UNSCOP proposal.

    After the 1948 war, Gaza and West Bank were in the hands of Egypt and Jordan respectively. In 1967, Egypt ordered the UN peacekeepers in Sinai who were keeping the two sides apart to leave.
    And the UNEF forces offered to redeploy on the Israeli side of the border, an offer Israel rejected.

    It mobilised its army and moved troops up to the Israeli border, made repeated broadcasts saying it was going to destroy Israel
    Which was little more than posturing, and the Israeli government knew it - several Israeli cabinet ministers and generals from 1967 have openly admitted that they did not believe an Egyptian attack was coming.

    and then blockaded the Strait of Tiran which Israel had repeatedly said it would consider a cassus belli.
    Which means nothing. Israel has no authority on what is and isn't a casus belli. It was Nasser who offered to let the ICJ rule on the legality of the closure.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ael-yad-vashem

    Ugh. Why does he have to be so dishonest? The invitation was made almost 6 months ago, and he said his diary was too full. It wasn't too full for him to take a holiday during the middle of the EU referendum campaign. Also, the invitation was made almost half a year ago but he couldn't find some time in the subsequent 8 months of the year and fit it in sometime?
    Come on now, he's not even able to find the time to talk to his own MPs by all accounts or spend 5 minutes to make sure he turns up to war memorial services without looking like he just got out of bad so he's clearly a very busy man
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Corbyn may be extreme and have irrational beliefs, but holy hell, the insane stretches that Israel-supporters go to to justify themselves.

    "Hey, person who doesn't believe the same thing as I do - my beliefs tell me that this land is mine so maybe just move along. Also, prepare to watch your kids get blown to pieces if you try to fight back." It's Islamic State-level of insanity. I mean, imagine if they'd tried that with a Christian country (haha, they wouldn't have dared)? They'd have been wiped out.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Anyway, I for one applaud Corbyn for this move.It shows consistency in values and we always moan about politicians flip-flopping on issues. I mean I don't think his good friend (Corbyn's words, not mine) Ibrahim "so-called Holocaust" Hewitt or Holocaust denier Paul Eisen - whose openly-anti-semitic group Corbyn donated to, would have been best pleased if he'd attended. Neither would Stephen Sizer, who Corbyn found the time to write to Church of England authorities to defend Sizer, who attended a Holocaust denial conference in Jakarta. Not would Holocaust denier James Thring, a speaker at an event Corbyn himself hosted in 2014. I also don't think it would have please his chum "The Jews did 9/11" Raed Salah, who he nauseatingly gushed about. That's the same Raed Salah who in 2011 boasted about drawing swastikas on blackboards to intimidate Jewish teachers.

    So you see, he is simply being true to his pals. God bless you, Jeremy.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Love this North Korea-esque guilty by association witch-hunt against Corbyn.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sorani)
    Corbyn may be extreme and have irrational beliefs, but holy hell, the insane stretches that Israel-supporters go to to justify themselves.

    "Hey, person who doesn't believe the same thing as I do - my beliefs tell me that this land is mine so maybe just move along. Also, prepare to watch your kids get blown to pieces if you try to fight back." It's Islamic State-level of insanity. I mean, imagine if they'd tried that with a Christian country (haha, they wouldn't have dared)? They'd have been wiped out.
    What on earth are you babbling about? Seriously?

    This has to do with the Holocaust, and a double-standard against Israelis, not Israel's national policy. Or are you saying that disagreeing with Israel's policy makes it okay to call for all Jews worldwide to be killed?

    I shouldn't be surprised, you people never pass up an opportunity to parade your ignorance and act in an unctuous and obnoxious way
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by malebo55)
    Love this North Korea-esque guilty by association witch-hunt against Corbyn.
    Yup, because pointing out things Corbyn has actually said and done is a "witch hunt". The level of whiney, butthurt victimhood from Corbynites and their other extremist sympathisers is genuinely pathetic
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    Anyway, I for one applaud Corbyn for this move.It shows consistency in values and we always moan about politicians flip-flopping on issues. I mean I don't think his good friend (Corbyn's words, not mine) Ibrahim "so-called Holocaust" Hewitt or Holocaust denier Paul Eisen - whose openly-anti-semitic group Corbyn donated to, would have been best pleased if he'd attended. Neither would Stephen Sizer, who Corbyn found the time to write to Church of England authorities to defend Sizer, who attended a Holocaust denial conference in Jakarta. Not would Holocaust denier James Thring, a speaker at an event Corbyn himself hosted in 2014. I also don't think it would have please his chum "The Jews did 9/11" Raed Salah, who he nauseatingly gushed about. That's the same Raed Salah who in 2011 boasted about drawing swastikas on blackboards to intimidate Jewish teachers.

    So you see, he is simply being true to his pals. God bless you, Jeremy.
    Damn, hit the nail on the head dude.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    Yup, because pointing out things Corbyn has actually said and done is a "witch hunt". The level of whiney, butthurt victimhood from Corbynites and their other extremist sympathisers is genuinely pathetic
    > makes 10 threads a day about Corbyn's ostensible hatred of Jews

    > cries about victimhood
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    AlexanderHam Why is this really such an issue?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zetamcfc)
    AlexanderHam Why is this really such an issue?
    uh oh

    be prepared to be labelled many bad things, it is OP's favourite tactic
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    No, it isn't. They don't have one. The Hamas Charter was never given the same binding manifesto status that say, Fatah's, was.
    You're confused. That charter is the current Hamas charter, it has never been superceded and in fact as recently as a few years ago they expressly refused to repeal that clause from it. Always fun to see a fellow traveller defending and supporting a fascist, homophobic organisation like Hamas, though.

    Private land ownership and political territory are quite different concepts
    And yet hard left nuts regularly point to the fact that Jews only owned 10% or something thereabouts of the land in Palestine/Israel before 1948 to justify the Jews getting nothing. Just holding you to your own standard

    recents stats
    This conspiracy theory has been completely debunked. Just quoting something you read on the Palestine Telegraph doesn't make it a fact.

    Which was little more than posturing
    So sad for Egypt then that their own incompetence and belligerence led to them getting hit so hard.

    and the Israeli government knew it - several Israeli cabinet ministers and generals from 1967 have openly admitted that they did not believe an Egyptian attack was coming
    It's unfortunate that you're so ignorant on this subject. You can actually go and read the Israeli cabinet papers, like I have, and then you will be in a better position to understand a subject you clearly do not. Anyone who does read the account of the diplomatic efforts by Eban and Harman, of the cabinet meetings and the intelligence assessments can see very clearly just how grave the Israeli government perceived the situation to be. The Israelis never would have mobilised its reserves which in a such small country with universal military service means the economy basically shutting down (which it did from mid-May), if they thought there was no danger.

    In fact, we now know that Nasser had planned a limited attack on Eilat on the 27th of May, called Operation Asad, and was warned off it by Kosygin. Levi Eshkol was indecisive and circumspect about attacking first, and he'd always favoured diplomacy. Anyone who has read anything about the run up to the war will know how hard Eshkol and Eban tried to find a diplomatic solution, which the Egyptians completely spurned. The Israeli generals said 'If we attack first we can definitely win, but we have to go now; we have to go first, and we have to be mobilised when we do it, and we can't wait until the Egyptians have fully fortified their forces in the Sinai into defensive positions'. The reason was that the Israelis' relative deficiency in manpower meant they would only get one shot at a first attack, not two or three, and if that attack failed they would be wide open. On the other hand, they couldn't win a defensive war either, the only way to overcome Egypt and Syria's massive advantage in manpower, tanks and aircraft was a first strike. In other words, they were in an impossible situation which Nasser had manoeuvred them into, which they didn't seek but which they had to deal with.

    By the end of May Israel was already experiencing shortages of oil and essential foodstuffs because of the blockade. Israeli hospitals were told in late May, before the decision to go, to prepare for hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties, and local authorities started digging mass graves. Anyone who bothers to go and read the cabinet papers can see the Israeli government's deliberations and approach was completely reactive and in response to the situation in which they found themselves, a situation they didn't want to be in. And anyone who does read those papers can see that the Israeli cabinet was in a state of high neurosis, with people shouting at each other and banging the table, others (like Moshe Shapira) in tears, and many in the country terrified by the repeated statements (by late May, being made every day) by Arab leaders that now was the time to wipe out Israel and fix the "stain of 1948", statements like these;

    “Those who survive will remain in Palestine. I estimate that none of them will survive.” - Ahmed Shuqayri, PLO Chair

    "The existence of Israel is an error that must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear—to wipe Israel off the face of the map. We shall, God willing, meet in Tel Aviv and Haifa.” - President Abdul Arif of Iraq

    "The withdrawal of the UN forces means ‘make way, our forces are on their way to battle.’” - Ibrahim Makhous, Syrian Foreign Minister

    "We are now ready to confront Israel. We are now ready to deal with the entire Palestine question. The issue now at hand is not the Gulf of Aqaba, the Straits of Tiran or the withdrawal of UNEF, but… the aggression which took place in Palestine in 1948 with the collaboration of Britain and the United States." President Nasser of Egypt
    It's very clear to any unbiased person from Israel's mobilisation, its military preparations, its civil defence measures, that it perceived a very high level of danger. It is indisputably true that Israel was capable of winning a war against Egypt and Syria so long as it went first, and Egypt and Syria were not completely mobilised but people at the time didn't necessarily know that and some in the cabinet were very circumspect about whether Moked and associated ground offensive could succeed as planned. Israel was also in a difficult position because mobilisation of the reserves (and thus the absence of many working-age males from their places of work) was costing it $20 million a day (in 1967 dollars) in lost economic activity (a tremendous amount for a country that size, at that time) and the country came to a standstill, but if they demobilised it was very hard to get mobilised again quickly. If Egypt had attacked then they'd be ****ed

    It's very clear from the papers that the intelligence advice to the cabinet after May 22nd was that Nasser was willing to go into a general conflagration and perhaps even willing to start one himself, and that even if he didn't Israel was in an impossible position because of the blockade and the fact they couldn't stay mobilised forever, but demobilising might invite an attack. This is what actually happened, not conspiracy theories coming second hand from some alienated hard left son of an Israeli general about how the whole thing was orchestrated by an Israeli government bent on regional domination. Unfortunately your blind hatred for Israelis completely prevents you from looking objectively, or even empathetically, at their situation and putting yourself in their shoes.

    Which means nothing. Israel has no authority on what is and isn't a casus belli.
    That a military blockade is an act of war is not disputed by any serious or knowledgeable person. Are you going to deny it is? And in any case, any country is entitled to identify whatever it likes as a casus belli. The fact Israel had done so with the Strait, and the Egyptians crossed that line anyway, means they can not be surprised or complain when they find themselves in a war that is to their disadvantage.

    It takes an extraordinary level of anti-Israeli xenophobia for someone to look at a situation where Egypt makes speeches calling for Israel to be destroyed, Egypt removes the UN peacekeeping troops from the Sinai, Egypt blockades the Straits of Tiran, Egypt agrees military alliance with Jordan, Egypt repeatedly spurns diplomatic initiatives to resolve the crisis and then call Egypt the victim when they get knocked out. Though there is a degree to which your ignorance of the detailed history of the Six Day War contributes, that much is also clear.

    KimKallstrom JamesN88 KingBradly
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    Anyway, I for one applaud Corbyn for this move.It shows consistency in values and we always moan about politicians flip-flopping on issues. I mean I don't think his good friend (Corbyn's words, not mine) Ibrahim "so-called Holocaust" Hewitt or Holocaust denier Paul Eisen - whose openly-anti-semitic group Corbyn donated to, would have been best pleased if he'd attended. Neither would Stephen Sizer, who Corbyn found the time to write to Church of England authorities to defend Sizer, who attended a Holocaust denial conference in Jakarta. Not would Holocaust denier James Thring, a speaker at an event Corbyn himself hosted in 2014. I also don't think it would have please his chum "The Jews did 9/11" Raed Salah, who he nauseatingly gushed about. That's the same Raed Salah who in 2011 boasted about drawing swastikas on blackboards to intimidate Jewish teachers.

    So you see, he is simply being true to his pals. God bless you, Jeremy.
    "meh, meh, conspiracy"

    "meh, meh, establishment"

    There's isn't a witch hunt going on here at all, none of this is a secret if people can be bothered to look.
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: September 20, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Which is the best season?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.