Corbyn ally re-elected to Labour ruling body after anti-Semitic rant Watch

AngeryPenguin
Badges: 18
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
Peter Willsman sparked fury in July when he criticised British rabbis who had complained about anti-Semitism, adding that some members of the Jewish community were “Trump fanatics making up information”.

Willsman beat Ann Black, who called for Labour to adopt in full the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) paper on anti-Semitism, which has already been adopted by the UK government, 130 UK local councils, the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the judiciary.

The parts of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism that Labour excluded are:

- Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

- Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.

- Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

The UK government adopted the IHRA definition in full, but Labour have so far refused to do so.

Willsman himself promised to undergo diversity training after his controversy speech, but it appears he never took it: https://twitter.com/Mendelpol/status...90708260892672

How long until Labour rebrands as the National Socialist British Workers' Party?

https://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-co...-rant-11489560
0
reply
alws
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
(Original post by AngeryPenguin)
Peter Willsman sparked fury in July when he criticised British rabbis who had complained about anti-Semitism, adding that some members of the Jewish community were “Trump fanatics making up information”.

Willsman beat Ann Black, who called for Labour to adopt in full the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) paper on anti-Semitism.

The parts of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism that Labour excluded are:

- Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

- Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.

- Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

The UK government adopted the IHRA definition in full, but Labour have so far refused to do so.

How long until Labour rebrands as the National Socialist British Workers' Party?

https://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-co...-rant-11489560
You are simply wrong for one reason: antizionism =/= antisemitism.
Many Jews acknowledge this fact, and they too often criticise the Israeli regime. Look at a group called "Neteuri Karta" who are extremely devout and conservative Jews but disagree with the Israeli occupation because they think religious texts do not warrant it - they believe that taking Israel was an interference with divine will.
Corbyn is a man of strong principles which is why he is not accepting the harmful IHRA definition.

You should suggest "How long until Labour rebrands as the National Socialist British Workers' Party?" as a title to the stupid Daily Mail, they would love that one.
0
reply
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 year ago
#3
If you replaced Jewish with Muslim, and the state of Israel with IS, I don't think you'd find many people agreeing with those excluded examples.
0
reply
Trinculo
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
(Original post by Dez)
If you replaced Jewish with Muslim, and the state of Israel with IS, I don't think you'd find many people agreeing with those excluded examples.
And who in their right mind would equate Israel with IS? This is an anti-Semitism all its own.
1
reply
Trinculo
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
Aside from WIllsman - just look at who else is on the NEC.

Yasmine Dar. A woman who actively supports and celebrates the Islamic revolution in Iran.

Huda Elmi - a radical trans-rights activist who promotes the whole TERF anti-feminism narrative. So presumably she gets on with Dar like a house on fire because Iran is so well known for its liberal values.

Claudia Webbe - head of the Labour disputes panel (and I think the only person left on it). Lol. How is she going to have time to serve on the NEC when she has that backlog of anti-semitism complaints to deal with?

Jon Lansman - who no one can decide if they want him there or not.

Ann Henderson - ardent feminist. So presumably not that keen to be on the NEC with Willman and Elmi

What an absolute joke of clownery and identity politics madness Corbyn's Labour is.
0
reply
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
(Original post by Trinculo)
And who in their right mind would equate Israel with IS? This is an anti-Semitism all its own.
Do you think IS should be free from any criticism? Why should any political state get a free pass to do what they like without scrutiny?
2
reply
alws
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
Israel has and is doing many unethical things and we should feel free to criticise it:

-Lack of democracy in occupied areas, Palestinian residents in land that has been illegally occupied by Israel are not entitled to vote.
-Different standards - different law applies to Palestinians in occupied territories, they are treated using military law whilst Israelis in those areas are subject to Israeli law.
-Illegal occupation of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, even the UN and ICJ refute their ownership of these areas.
-Preferential treatment of Israelis over Palestinians, a "two-tier" human rights system is in operation - non-Israeli citizens are treated more harshly, eg. with checkpoints that Israelis do not need to pass.
-Huge numbers of Palestinians are detained in Israel, they are prosecuted in military courts which do not meet international standards for a fair trial.
-Torture of Palestinian prisoners is well known.
-Israel holds nuclear weapons but does not subscribe to IAEA policy.

So essentially it holds different standards for the Palestinians and treats Jewish Israelis preferentially. It also operates as one of the only remaining countries that continues to colonise new territories freely and without international or even local approval. What a lovely state Israel sounds like!
1
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
What really depresses me about this whole saga is basically that, from now on, if a major political party is accused of institutional racism or bigotry, they're going to be incentivised to simply deny it and double down until everyone just gives up. The lesson they'll take from these past few years is that attempts to address concerns and find compromises will merely be taken as admission of guilt and followed up by further and further demands, gradually spiralling into everyone entrenching themselves in their positions and leaving no room for nuance at all.
1
reply
AlexanderHam
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by alws)
You are simply wrong for one reason: antizionism =/= antisemitism.
Many Jews acknowledge this fact, and they too often criticise the Israeli regime.
Nobody has said that any and all criticism of Israel is antisemitic. In fact, anti-Israel activists are constantly making that claim but I've never actually seen anyone say that all criticism of Israel is inherently anti-semitic. You're either exceptionally misguided, or deliberately setting up strawmen.

Look at a group called "Neteuri Karta"
The fact that anti-Israel activists rely on a group that is basically the Jewish equivalent of the Westboro Baptist Church says it all. It's like Trump's token black person that he drags around to all the rallies.
1
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by anarchism101)
What really depresses me about this whole saga is basically that, from now on, if a major political party is accused of institutional racism or bigotry, they're going to be incentivised to simply deny it and double down until everyone just gives up. The lesson they'll take from these past few years is that attempts to address concerns and find compromises will merely be taken as admission of guilt and followed up by further and further demands, gradually spiralling into everyone entrenching themselves in their positions and leaving no room for nuance at all.
Corbyn cannot win. Even if he did everything his opposition wanted they would still say it is not good enough.
0
reply
alws
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
(Original post by AlexanderHam)
Nobody has said that any and all criticism of Israel is antisemitic. In fact, anti-Israel activists are constantly making that claim but I've never actually seen anyone say that all criticism of Israel is inherently anti-semitic.
Guessing you didn't actually compare the Labour and IHRA definitions?
0
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 year ago
#12
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Corbyn cannot win. Even if he did everything his opposition wanted they would still say it is not good enough.
Exactly. If Corbyn doesn't give into a demand, it's proof he doesn't care about antisemitism. If he does give in, it's proof that antisemitism is so rampant that even Corbyn admits it.

It's true that Corbyn hasn't exactly handled this as well as he could've (he's been far too reactive rather than taking the initiative). But many of the actions the party has taken to address this have been unprecedented - special inquiries, adopting special definitions for one specific form of bigotry* - these are things that, as far as I'm aware, neither Labour nor any other party had ever done before. Yet the Dan Hodges of this world nevertheless manage to construe this as evidence that Labour actually takes antisemitism less seriously than other forms of racism.

That they don't get why this can really grate with other minority groups only further demonstrates the problem.
0
reply
username4171924
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 year ago
#13
Spoiler:
Show
0
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 year ago
#14
(Original post by Dez)
If you replaced Jewish with Muslim, and the state of Israel with IS, I don't think you'd find many people agreeing with those excluded examples.
IS and Israel are not comparable.


On the actual story, party members voted for him. They don’t see it as a huge problem.
0
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 year ago
#15
(Original post by alws)
Many Jews acknowledge this fact, and they too often criticise the Israeli regime. Look at a group called "Neteuri Karta" who are extremely devout and conservative Jews but disagree with the Israeli occupation because they think religious texts do not warrant it - they believe that taking Israel was an interference with divine will.
Or, don't. Most people even among pro-Palestine groups acknowledge that NK are generally kind of weirdos. They can believe what they want, sure, but their eschatologist reasons for being anti-Israel aren't really very useful for people who are anti-Israel for secular reasons. If you want the perspective of more sane Jewish groups who are good examples of the latter, check out people like Jewdas (UK), Jewish Voice for Peace (US) or Anarchists Against the Wall (Israel) for a start.
0
reply
alws
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 year ago
#16
(Original post by anarchism101)
Or, don't. Most people even among pro-Palestine groups acknowledge that NK are generally kind of weirdos. They can believe what they want, sure, but their eschatologist reasons for being anti-Israel aren't really very useful for people who are anti-Israel for secular reasons. If you want the perspective of more sane Jewish groups who are good examples of the latter, check out people like Jewdas (UK), Jewish Voice for Peace (US) or Anarchists Against the Wall (Israel) for a start.
Thanks, I'll take a look at those people, sounds interesting. I agree, Neteuri Karta certainly don't provide a secular view in this argument, I just wanted to explain that even these highly studious and conservative Jews have found religious arguments against Israel, and religion is used as a major pro-Zionist argument by many other conservative (and even liberal) Jews.
0
reply
username2950448
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 year ago
#17
The IHRA definition of anti-semitism has been heavily criticised and rightfully so.

David Feldman, Director of the Pears Institute for the Study of Anti-Semitism at Birbeck, UoL, for example, criticised the IHRA definition/document as "bewilderingly imprecise".

The IHRA definition extends far too deeply into stifling free speech and criticism of Israeli policies and crimes, which is of course the intent.

The IHRA document also "isolates antisemitism from other forms of bigotry".

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-jewish-people
0
reply
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 year ago
#18
(Original post by Andrew97)
IS and Israel are not comparable.


On the actual story, party members voted for him. They don’t see it as a huge problem.
Feel free to replace IS with Palestine, or Pakistan, or wherever you like really. The point remains the same: political entites cannot be absolved of any criticism just because they claim to be religious.
0
reply
username2950448
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#19
Report 1 year ago
#19
(Original post by Dez)
Feel free to replace IS with Palestine, or Pakistan, or wherever you like really. The point remains the same: political entites cannot be absolved of any criticism just because they claim to be religious.
This is what Corbyn wanted the NEC to accept as part of the definition:



He withdrew this when it was clear he would be defeated (credit: Robert Peston).


Seems like some people really don't want Israel to be held to the same standards of international law as every other country in the world.
1
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 year ago
#20
(Original post by AngeryPenguin)
Peter Willsman sparked fury in July when he criticised British rabbis who had complained about anti-Semitism, adding that some members of the Jewish community were “Trump fanatics making up information”.
In what way is that anti-semetic?
- Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
If you can accuse other groups of the same thing why not Jews?
- Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
It would help if they didnt ethnically cleanse the arabs, treat them as second class citizens and then enact a specifically racist law...

The UK government adopted the IHRA definition in full, but Labour have so far refused to do so.
The IHRA definition is disgracefully broad and as Mr Corbyn rightly pointed out whilst it might highlight things which are indeed anti-semitic it also does a marvelous job of completely covering Israel from even the slightest hint of criticism. Just because the British government is spineless shouldnt reflect on anything else.

How long until Labour rebrands as the National Socialist British Workers' Party?
So comparing Israel to the Nazis = bad but comparing labour to neo-nazis is cool? Right...
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What's stopping you doing a masters?

It's too expensive (49)
23.44%
My career doesn't need one (28)
13.4%
I'm sick of studying (43)
20.57%
I can't find a course I want to do (5)
2.39%
I don't know enough about them (15)
7.18%
Nothing, I'm going to do it! (69)
33.01%

Watched Threads

View All