Current Affairs The Labour Party

Status
Not open for further replies.
davek said:
It was straight away. "Anti-semitism" has been up and running for years even before Corbyn to de-legitimise anyone who isn't taking cash from Labour Friends of Israel. The scurrilous attacks on Miliband from Jewish groups and the LP right wing are a case in point. Miliband recognised a state for Palestine and that was it: he was on rocky ground.
Click to expand...

Tried it with Sanders in America, who himself is Jewish and had many family members killed by the Nazi's!! Apparently anti Zionism is automatically anti semitism.
 
tsubaki said:
There killer thing will be if there was discussion of, or evidence of, them delaying or wrecking investigations into antisemitism. The bias / leaking to the press / wrecking the left is something shocking to read, but on the other hand not that shocking as most people suspected it was doing on.

I haven’t seen anything leaked yet that directly says that, but there was some anecdotal evidence to suggest something odd was happening given that a lot of the people who went on to blow the whistle actually were in charge of the investigation units / had seats on the NEC at the time.
Click to expand...
I think that’s the thing, it was clear as day it was happening, the bloke that got suspended for saying Corbyn shouldn’t have to apologise was a fine example. It’s why it seems like a storm in a teacup in that nothing ‘new’ has been revealed in that sense apart from the actors in it all.
 
zzr45 said:
I think that’s the thing, it was clear as day it was happening, the bloke that got suspended for saying Corbyn shouldn’t have to apologise was a fine example. It’s why it seems like a storm in a teacup in that nothing ‘new’ has been revealed in that sense apart from the actors in it all.
Click to expand...

If all thats in it is the WhatsApp messages, you are right that it will blow over.

If on the other hand it really does provide evidence that AS investigations were blocked by them for the reasons there described (and the evidence gets to the EHRC who find it truthful) then its massive; the EHRC would have to find that Labour did treat allegations of AS differently (because they would have) but that it was the people blowing the whistle who were the ones who did it, for factional purposes. Thats probably why the lawyers objected to it going out.

I would not want to be in those peoples shoes if proof is found that such things happened, the amount of legal bother they would be in would be loads.
 
Tin-Tin said:
Good. Need a clearout
Click to expand...

The people on the hook probably have damning evidence of Starmer's role in trying to undermine and oust Corbyn.

Still, at least no one now is under any illusions about how much internal opposition Corbyn faced.

2,500 votes from winning the 2017 election Labour where. I think that might concentrate the minds of those who weren't completely anti-Corbyn on the so called 'soft left'.
 
Just had a gander at James O'Brien's Twitter feed. I think this is literally the first thing in history that he hasn't tweeted a comment about.

Anyway, I think I'll be voting Green in future.
 


if that is true (and it would be easy to check), then that is Labour getting found guilty by the EHRC on at least one (and possibly two others) of the four counts

edit: it should also be pointed out that the quote in the report isn't exactly as it appears there (the ..... has been added, to make it look as if Oldknow asked Watson to fix the NEC vote rather than Karie Murphy telling people that had been done)
 
Last edited:
davek said:
The people on the hook probably have damning evidence of Starmer's role in trying to undermine and oust Corbyn.

Still, at least no one now is under any illusions about how much internal opposition Corbyn faced.

2,500 votes from winning the 2017 election Labour where. I think that might concentrate the minds of those who weren't completely anti-Corbyn on the so called 'soft left'.
Click to expand...

What a shambles the Labour Party is. There's been a lot of criticism of the Government's handling of the Coronavirus crisis, all of which is completely justified, but if Labour were in charge they'd be more intent on doing each other down than dealing with the problem.

By the way, the 2017 result in votes was :

Conservatives = 13,636, 684

Labour = 12,878,460

Lib Dems = 2,371,910

SNP = 977,569


I suppose it could be argued that if a small number of voters in certain seats had changed their votes the result would have been significantly different, but I'm sure that a similar change in the Tories' favour could have given them a bigger majority. "If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle".

Is there anything suggesting Starmer actively tried to undermine Corbyn, or is that mere speculation?
 
Aberblue said:
What a shambles the Labour Party is. There's been a lot of criticism of the Government's handling of the Coronavirus crisis, all of which is completely justified, but if Labour were in charge they'd be more intent on doing each other down than dealing with the problem.

By the way, the 2017 result in votes was :

Conservatives = 13,636, 684

Labour = 12,878,460

Lib Dems = 2,371,910

SNP = 977,569


I suppose it could be argued that if a small number of voters in certain seats had changed their votes the result would have been significantly different, but I'm sure that a similar change in the Tories' favour could have given them a bigger majority. "If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle".

Is there anything suggesting Starmer actively tried to undermine Corbyn, or is that mere speculation?
Click to expand...

one of the people (Emilie Oldknow) who comes out really badly from those messages is apparently one of the people they are (were) considering for General Secretary

but if you are asking whether Starmer was involved, nothing has come out of that so far that I've seen
 
Aberblue said:
What a shambles the Labour Party is. There's been a lot of criticism of the Government's handling of the Coronavirus crisis, all of which is completely justified, but if Labour were in charge they'd be more intent on doing each other down than dealing with the problem.

By the way, the 2017 result in votes was :

Conservatives = 13,636, 684

Labour = 12,878,460

Lib Dems = 2,371,910

SNP = 977,569


I suppose it could be argued that if a small number of voters in certain seats had changed their votes the result would have been significantly different, but I'm sure that a similar change in the Tories' favour could have given them a bigger majority. "If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle".

Is there anything suggesting Starmer actively tried to undermine Corbyn, or is that mere speculation?
Click to expand...
Okay...

 
Aberblue said:
I suppose it could be argued that if a small number of voters in certain seats had changed their votes the result would have been significantly different, but I'm sure that a similar change in the Tories' favour could have given them a bigger majority. "If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle".

Is there anything suggesting Starmer actively tried to undermine Corbyn, or is that mere speculation?
Click to expand...
Ha Ha Ha Ha.

FFS.

No mate, nothing at all....other than a massive dagger placed between Corbyn's shoulder blades in the chicken coup of 2016.

Please try and familiarise yourself with the recent history of British politics....it'll stop you walking onto one like you did there ^^^
 
tsubaki said:
one of the people (Emilie Oldknow) who comes out really badly from those messages is apparently one of the people they are (were) considering for General Secretary

but if you are asking whether Starmer was involved, nothing has come out of that so far that I've seen
Click to expand...

Iirc Starmer was the one who put her forward for the position.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top