Tricky Dicky had the good taste to step down before he could be impeached...Trump is too arrogant to do that
Fair point. We are led by idiots. But have you seen the electorate? We, the people, keep voting for these idiots. Could be worse though. Have you seen the POTUS? And people voted for him - lots of people.
One thing the yanks have a good record for, is holding the powerful to account. The senior operators in their legal and political institutions seem to delight in proving that no one is above the law.
I've got a question about anti-semitism...is it anti-semitic to show support for organisations that oppose Israel, or criticise Israel in any way? I'm struggling to see how the supposed institutionalised anti-semitism in the Labour Party manifests itself otherwise. I'm genuinely curious so don't mind being educated. I've never experienced it as I'm not Jewish, but I cannot remember ever seeing or hearing about any incidents in over 35 years in various workplaces. I appreciate that there is bound to be the same sort of casual discrimination that many minority groups experience but I can't for the life of me understand how this becomes institutionalised and detrimental to a whole group of people. I'm not a big fan of how Israel operates and certainly have a deal of sympathy for the plight of Palestinians...am I an anti-semite, as it would be handy to know in advance. Thx
Spot on RJ. It is in no way anti-Semitic to be anti-Zionist, or to be against the monoculturist state of Israel. It is laughable to suggest that people on the left, and the Labour Party in particular, whose parents and grandparents prevented Mosley’s Blackshirts marching through Jewish areas in the East End, are in any way anti-Jewish.
Luciana Berger claimed anti-semiticism was why there was a vote of no confidence in her by her local party - they said it was because she was openly critical of Corbyn. This seems to be the only actual incident I can find and is of course, completely open to interpretation. Corbyn gets targeted because of his support for Palestine and the hijacking of the word Zionist to mean Jewish hence anti Israel in any way is anti semitism...
Thats true, but they had the option of voting for a lying, rascist, thieving corrupt dirt bag, or they could vote for Trump
Kenan Malik's piece in last Sunday's Observer is worth a read.. Central to his argument is this... 'To oppose Zionism but not other forms of ethnic nationalism would indeed be antisemitic, but to oppose Zionism because one opposes ethnic nationalism is a legitimate view.'
I think the crossover we are seeing is because a lot of these "activists" and "members" are indeed attacking Israel itself rather than Jews as a whole however they direct a lot of this abuse AT Jews and are very quick to attack any Jews that complain about it. It is a hard one. There is most definitely a lot of nasty stuff around and not just on the net, not just anti-semitism and most definitely not just Labour. The 500k membership as well as a vast amount more that aren't members but happy to join in, just amplifies the Labour problems visibility. It's weird because I was thinking earlier on, when the news was on, there seem to be an awful lot of Jewish MPs considering the last census counted 270,000. I am wondering how we are going to fit all the "minorities" in to try and reach "equality." That above paragraph would be deemed "anti-semite" in the current climate, because on the face of it I am asking the question due to them being Jewish. The reality however is am querying the drive to quotas and diversity, constant talk of parliament being representative. Also when I thought it I was thinking that it wasn't right. It was merely a passing thought as I had read the 270,000 figure earlier in the day.
I think we have to accept that both sides will utilise these sort of things to their own advantage. These things also evolve. Berger, like the others, was initially receiving flak for her opposition to the leadership (and possibly the manifesto itself.) There is no doubt that then she was attacked on the anti-semite angle just as many awful people these days go for whatever angle they can attack from. Like Alison McGovern (think it was her) today was attacked for speaking out on something (I don't think she is Jewish) and the angle they took on her was her weight and being a woman. SO no doubt there is a large element of anti-semitism in the Luciana Berger case but it isn't a fact that they are trying to deselect her for being a Jew. That maybe the angle they attack her with mostly and her criticising the leadership r.e. anti-semitism may be a major part of why they pushed on with it however I don't think they want her out because she is Jewish. anti-semitism is just the subject matter. It could have been anything. It is that the twitterati mob (and on the ground Corbynites) just see any attack as opportunistic and they think this anti-semitism thing is that "opportunistic" vehicle to use to bash the leadership with. The main problem now is that while they say that people are using this vehicle they think doesn't exist, they end up proving that vehicle right by actually making anti-semite statements which kind of counter the denial.
I don't really get it Imps, I don't care what brand of imaginary friend people are affiliated to so the fact that about a dozen MPs are Jewish despite being a tiny percentage of the population is a: not important b: not actually relevant to anything because anyone can represent a constituency and I really don't think quotas come into play too much in candidate selection. Could it be that Jewish families tend to have a high regard for a good education, and see the value in a political career, hence a seeming over representation of Jews in Parliament? I've met and worked with lots of Jews, and they all had aspirations toward professional careers or had already got there. That's my opinion only of course.
I wasn't questioning it. I thought I had stressed that. It was just a passing thought. I don;t care if the house is all black, all women, al LGBT. It doesn't bother me. It was just a passing thought due to me reading that number earlier. It is why I hate "equality" quotas. Because it should not matter if something is "representative" in that way. What should matter is that the best people are there, that they are there on merit, that everybody had an equal chance. I think we can both agree that is not the case. But it doesn't bother me what the "numbers" say. Although it would matter a lot to a massive amount of people. Not just the "far right" lot but also those that drive to "equalise" by quota discrimination. I agree with both your points a & b. And all the other points you make in your post Some people assume I have a thing for black women, seeing as I am married to one and have had 2 black girlfriends in the past. The reality is that I don't. I just have a thing for Brunettes/dark hair and dark eyes which means 99.9% of "brown" skinned folk meet my preferences but all the white Essex girls don't. Oh and we can rule out Nicki Minaj because she only has dark hair occasionally.
