• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yup.

And J'nuh, fair enough if you don't think that was criticism of Israel by comparing it to ISIS (the name that springs most readily to mind when we're talking self-styled Islamic states), but there's plenty who do think it was and think that had no place at Labour's formal repudiation of anti-Semitism.

Reportedly he clarified himself to say he meant ISIS when asked: https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/748503211036803072

Corbyn has cosied up to and allied with some of the world's most odious anti-semites for years. He's a despicable man who was voted into opposition leader by some very foolish people.
 
Yes but criticising Israel (not matter how justified it is) is not exactly the best of things to do at an antisemitism event. Anybody with some idea of Jewish community knows that.
It is the best time to do it.

Some on the left clearly struggle to separate Judaism and Israel, as several incidents have shown. Some high-profile, anti-Israel MPs have attacked Jewish people. It is the context that preceded this. It is a common occurrence on the left - people, angry with Israel, take it out on Jewish people.

It is the Labour leadership's responsibility to set boundaries, and I felt that it was Corbyn did. Some Jewish people, are pro-Israel, so some Jewish people will be upset with this. But the issue should be about confronting racism, not placating people with pro-Israel sentiment. It is not offensive to upset people for being pro-Israel, where it is to upset them for being Jewish.

Call it a comparison, I see it as an analogy, framing the debate in a language the left already understands. You wouldn't hold Muslims accountable for the actions of terrorists, so why hold Jews accountable for the actions of Israel? Basically don't let a group of people be tarred by the actions of the political extreme right.

For me, more worrying is that racism is hand-waved as a bad thing and it prompts people to hide their views rather than actually confront them. Ken Livingstone needs to be taught, not told to be quiet. IMO this is why the country has had such problems with racism in the last week. People didn't stop being racist, they just hid their views, and when those views were legitimised, the racism came back out into the open. As a country, we need to confront the issue of racism far more directly, and that means actually talking about it.
 
Last edited:
Anyone remember the Two Ronnies Worm That Turned series of sketches where women ruled?

OK neither May nor Eagle are Diana Dors, but there's a strong possibility that both our main parties could soon be led by women. Throw Hilary into the mix over the Pond and times really are a changing.
 
Moving onto the Tories, Johnson is a spineless cretin.

He clearly has absolutely no conviction in the politics he pushed on the country.

The theorising that people have been doing that Cameron chose not to enact Section 50 and mic dropped the **** outta there, leaving Leave to put the bullet in their own heads, must be starting to be seen as credible. Johnson knows that being the PM over the next few years will be toxic to that person's credibility. Enact Section 50 and destroy the UK. Don't enact it and go against the (current) will of the people.
 
Anyone remember the Two Ronnies Worm That Turned series of sketches where women ruled?

OK neither May nor Eagle are Diana Dors, but there's a strong possibility that both our main parties could soon be led by women. Throw Hilary into the mix over the Pond and times really are a changing.

Does that mean I will have to escape to Wales?
 
It is the best time to do it.
No it's not you're at a lecture where your entire party is being criticised for it's attitudes towards Judaism. You don't stoke the fire this is Politics 101.

He can say what he likes out of that forum on Israel but its not the best place to do it and you're either foolish or naive to belive otherwise.
 
I mean, there's a conflict of what is good for the party, and what is good for tackling racism.

Pretending that the problem is over with a few choice words to make racists go quiet for the sake of the party is good for the party. The party gets to pretend that it was strong on racism. But it never actually did anything to tackle the racists. The party gets to pretend it doesn't actually have any problems with racism, and it will go away for a few months/years, until the next incident.

If you actually want to root out racism from the party, you need to drag it into the open, confront the racists and change their minds or kick them out. You need to trip them up in their own logic. Guys like Ken think they are not racist because they think that they are only hitting out at Israel, which is a legitimate target. Labour should have an open dialogue on racism in the party, but if it were to, it would drag out some nasty stuff into the public. So it doesn't, and the problem festers.

So I don't know, neither situation is particularly great.
 
It is the best time to do it.

Some on the left clearly struggle to separate Judaism and Israel, as several incidents have shown. Some high-profile, anti-Israel MPs have attacked Jewish people. It is the context that preceded this. It is a common occurrence on the left - people, angry with Israel, take it out on Jewish people.

It is the Labour leadership's responsibility to set boundaries, and I felt that it was Corbyn did. Some Jewish people, are pro-Israel, so some Jewish people will be upset with this. But the issue should be about confronting racism, not placating people with pro-Israel sentiment. It is not offensive to upset people for being pro-Israel, where it is to upset them for being Jewish.

Call it a comparison, I see it as an analogy, framing the debate in a language the left already understands. You wouldn't hold Muslims accountable for the actions of terrorists, so why hold Jews accountable for the actions of Israel? Basically don't let a group of people be tarred by the actions of the political extreme right.

For me, more worrying is that racism is hand-waved as a bad thing and it prompts people to hide their views rather than actually confront them. Ken Livingstone needs to be taught, not told to be quiet. IMO this is why the country has had such problems with racism in the last week. People didn't stop being racist, they just hid their views, and when those views were legitimised, the racism came back out into the open. As a country, we need to confront the issue of racism far more directly, and that means actually talking about it.

Why pick the analogy most likely to be misunderstood and cause offence then? Particularly when in Corbyn's case he's a known critic of Israel which will slant people to seeing his comments in a negative light.

Maybe it is the analogy most understood on that section of the left but as long as he's leader of the Labour party, he's never ever speaking to just the left. He is talking to the entire nation and as such his language needs to be understood by an entire nation. It clearly hasn't been.
 
Where I will criticise Corbyn, where I think he's completely missed out, was not revoking membership from Livingstone. (That being said, I'm not even sure he's allowed to do that.) Sacking a friend and political ally would have sent a strong message on the subject.
 
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

This is not in reference to ISIS but to JC's relationship with Gerry Adams etc. I remember reading articles that Nelson Mandela was a terrorist but is now seen as a fighter social justice.
 
I had another realisation on how this is going to screw the young.

We have a lot of wonderful young minds coming out of university and landing in unskilled labour. If migration decreases, there will be a lot more pressure on the indigenous population to fill the unskilled labour gap, meaning even more graduates in unskilled labour.

And though graduates are not above unskilled labour, the thought that people need to burden themselves with thousands of pounds of debt in tuition fees to be able to land blue-collar work is frightening.
 
I had another realisation on how this is going to screw the young.

We have a lot of wonderful young minds coming out of university and landing in unskilled labour. If migration decreases, there will be a lot more pressure on the indigenous population to fill the unskilled labour gap, meaning even more graduates in unskilled labour.

And though graduates are not above unskilled labour, the thought that people need to burden themselves with thousands of pounds of debt in tuition fees to be able to land blue-collar work is frightening.

If you put your mind to something positive, you could probably sort everything out!
 
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

This is not in reference to ISIS but to JC's relationship with Gerry Adams etc. I remember reading articles that Nelson Mandela was a terrorist but is now seen as a fighter social justice.

Didn't know the ANC still ran drug rackets and punishment shooting in the area's they are supposed to 'protect'
 
I had another realisation on how this is going to screw the young.

We have a lot of wonderful young minds coming out of university and landing in unskilled labour. If migration decreases, there will be a lot more pressure on the indigenous population to fill the unskilled labour gap, meaning even more graduates in unskilled labour.

And though graduates are not above unskilled labour, the thought that people need to burden themselves with thousands of pounds of debt in tuition fees to be able to land blue-collar work is frightening.

Boo ****ing hoo
 
Didn't know the ANC still ran drug rackets and punishment shooting in the area's they are supposed to 'protect'
Didn't know Gerry Adams was still in the IRA. Know something we don't? Because the IRA was puritanically and rabidly anti drug in Gerry's day.
 
Didn't know Gerry Adams was still in the IRA. Know something we don't? Because the IRA was puritanically and rabidly anti drug in Gerry's day.

Of course he's in the IRA, always was always will be. Who do you think heads the army council? Or did you think he never made any decisions like that?

Also it wasn't anti drug it was anti anyone but them dealing drugs
 
Last edited:
Of course he's in the IRA, always was always will be. Who do you think heads the army council?
Of course, one of the highest profile politicians in the country definitely wouldn't have been exposed for this. Wonder which of the "IRA lite" groups he's leading?

- - - Updated - - -

It also raises the thought that NI's deputy 1st minister is organising local drug pushers to get the **** kicked out of then! :D
 
Of course, one of the highest profile politicians in the country definitely wouldn't have been exposed for this. Wonder which of the "IRA lite" groups he's leading?

He was exposed for it, everyone knew he was pulling the springs he only went into politics to stop himself getting interned.

Or do you all sign up to the romantic notions that make Americans called Smith put money in a pot to pay for bullets to knee cap people
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top