Donate SIGN UP

Jeremy Corbyns Antisemitism.

Avatar Image
Theland | 04:36 Fri 20th Jul 2018 | Society & Culture
36 Answers
I am convinced that Jeremy Corbyns blind allegiance to the Palestinians has spilled over into antizionism and then antisemitism.
For a man I always admired, I have to believe it is due to stupidity rather than racism.
I definitely could never vote Labour while he is in charge.
And imagine Diane Abbot as a Home Secretary? Oh gosh! What a nightmare!
Any thoughts to add?
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 36 of 36rss feed

First Previous 1 2

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Theland. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"Blind allegiance" comes in many guises Theland, as you should be well aware.

Word like 'definition' and 'guide' appear to blind many:

"Working Definition of Antisemitism

In the spirit of the Stockholm Declaration that states: “With humanity still scarred by …antisemitism and xenophobia the international community shares a solemn responsibility to fight those evils” the committee on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial called the IHRA Plenary in Budapest 2015 to adopt the following working definition of antisemitism.

On 26 May 2016, the Plenary in Bucharest decided to:


Adopt the following non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism:

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”


To guide IHRA in its work, the following examples may serve as illustrations:

Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.

Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.

Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.

Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).

Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.

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.

Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.

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

Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).

Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or link to Jews.

Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries."

https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/working-definition-antisemitism

P.C. and not even conscious of it.

The UK and Scottish governments, the Welsh Assembly, the Crown Prosecution Service, the College of Policing, the National Union of Students and more than 120 local authorities including Bradford councilhave adopted the definition - and so have the Labour Party.
The additional attachment to the document is not the definition.
"Gromit, if it's good enough to be used by the UK and Scottish governments, the Welsh Assembly, the Crown Prosecution Service, the College of Policing, the National Union of Students and more than 120 local authorities including Bradford council, which recently adopted it, why do you think Labour found it necessary to amend it?"

Classic 'groupthink'.
Apparently it is not just the Labour Party who are happy to adopt the definition, but baulk at the examples:

// In May 2017, the University and College Union – which represents 110,000 academics and other staff – carried a motion overwhelmingly rejecting use of the IHRA definition, and noting “government-inspired attempts to ban Palestine solidarity events” such as “Israel Apartheid Week”.

Now the London School of Economics (LSE) has also joined those who, while accepting the 38-word definition of anti-Semitism produced by the IHRA, have explicitly rejected the list of suggested illustrative examples, which include criticism of Israel. “The School wishes to clarify that it is not anti-Semitic to criticise the Government of Israel without additional evidence to suggest anti-Semitic intent,” an LSE official wrote in a letter last month. “The School also does not accept that all the examples the IHRA lists as illustrations of anti-Semitism fall within the definition of anti-Semitism” //
Right, so there are other people as well as the Labour party that have adopted an amended version of the definition.

I feel we're making progress.
Ludwig
This is the definition adopted by Labour.

// “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” //

How is it amended from the IHRA version?
//How is it amended from the IHRA version? //

It doesn't include the examples. The examples that give clarity to the definition and help prevent it being interpreted in different ways.

No amount of 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman' type weasel words can get around that.
Effectively what they're doing is saying , we're adopting the definition, but we reserve the right to put our own interpretation on it, that may be different to yours or anyone elses.

Which sort of makes adopting it a bit meaningless.
Words like 'definition' and 'guide' appear to blind many:

you can add 'amend' to that list...
The IHRA have 11 examples, but I am sure there are more than 11 ways to be anti semitic. So the examples are a guide to support the definition, not part of the definition itself. By having, 11 examples, 30 examples or 7, an organisation is still adopting the definition.
Question Author
And the bottom line is Corbyn is compromising his integrity and losing support.
Serves him right.
The guys in the Dog and Duck would consider him antisemitic.
// ..I am sure there are more than 11 ways to be anti semitic //

Not according to the Labour party. It turns out there are less than 11 when you ignore the ways that they do it.
I really think Gromit is a wind-up merchant. Best thing is lol and those of us living on earth get on with it.
Good performance Gromit, but your honest tenacity may be futile against this ad hominem brigade.
// And the bottom line is Corbyn is compromising his integrity and losing support. //

Not really. No one really much cares about anti semitism, racism, sexism to change their vote.

The Labour anti semitism nonsense was rampant before the last election, and did not impact significantly at the ballot box. Labour gained 30 seats last year, so this black propaganda isn’t working.
Lol.

21 to 36 of 36rss feed

First Previous 1 2

Do you know the answer?

Jeremy Corbyns Antisemitism.

Answer Question >>

Related Questions