That Corbyn fella...

Correct me if I'm wrong

That’d be a terrible burden on the NHS but a strong case-in-point for better integration with social care.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/22/labour-given-10m-more-than-tories-last-year-says-electoral-commission

.

1 Attachment

Is that real?

(question all the things)

Is Corbyn in power?

.

1 Attachment

This is ridiculous, honestly. Not even Crick, a veteran journalist and broadcaster, can bring himself do the most basic of research before mouthing off on twitter.

It does depend a little who first told him and how they put it. But yes. And no apology for the initial aspersion, unless it is further up/down his tw@tter feed?

Would Labour want to be in power in the immediate Brexit aftermath? Genuine question...

They'd spend the next 8 years blaming the Tory party for every single thing thats gone wrong, much like the Tories do now. Its the rules, isn't it?

Yes, but Brexit aftermath will be several orders of magnitude more fucked up than usual.

Labour not wanting to have to deal with it (being the party to either implement or pull out of Brexit) is probably the reason they're so ambivalent about being the current opposition party.

Not wanting to deal with it i.e. run the country would be one heck of a dereliction of duty and reduce government of the country to a one party state.

ssst...the people have spoken and it was democracy that must be respected.

Though it seems Labour now backs a vote if parliament rejects the deal. Independent just reported it, waiting for a better news source.

Still not really a position or an answer. With Labour voters being indifferent to Brexit/remainers I still don't understand why Labour is so afraid to piss off a few leave areas. Especially as the leave voters there were mostly kippers.

It is not looking at the gain that can be made I think. Oh well.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/08/context-jeremy-corbyn-anti-semitism-john-mcdonnell-today-show-labour

If you doubt this, try reading the above excerpt and replacing “Zionists” with “blacks” and see whether you see racism.

Well yes if you change the subject to a racial epithet, many sentences are racist.
Isn’t Zionism a specific political belief that doesn’t indicate race/nationality/religion?

I'll just leave this here....

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/jeremy-corbyn-zionists-have-no-sense-of-english-irony-1.468795

“It is precisely this euphemistic use of the word ‘Zionist’ to refer to Jews and direct smears at us which used to be the preserve of antisemites amongst the aristocracy.
That's an assertion, not a fact. If you think he meant jews then, yes, it is anti-semitic. But that's still an assertion.
And 'black' (or Muslim or gay) and zionist are not interchangeable: you could be both at the same time. Anyone can be a zionist.
I've no doubt the Mail will keep digging and it will make zero difference to either side.

Still not really a position or an answer. With Labour voters being indifferent to Brexit/remainers I still don't understand why Labour is so afraid to piss off a few leave areas. Especially as the leave voters there were mostly kippers.

This is pure fantasy. The problem as it stands is that for remainers, Brexit is to be opposed and not understood. I've said it before here but you should realise that it is detrimental to your cause (used loosely) to ignore the legitimate concerns of those who voted to leave.

Are you referring to that MP writing in the Indy yesterday? Where he wrote unfounded nonsense like:

The public mood is shifting. Increasingly, Leave voters are saying Brexit is too costly, taking too long and is much more complicated than they were told and want a public vote on the deal – ideally “legitimised” with Labour’s support.

Replace "Zionists" with "members of the Labour Friends of Israel"/ name of other zionist political group? Doesn't take a great deal of comprehension to see that that's exactly the sense in which he means it and it's a frankly ludicrous reach to conclude he's characterising Zionists in general as a group, let alone Jewish people in general. He's referring to the specific complaints of specific people who were presumably at a speech by the Palestinian ambassador under the pretext of being pro-Israel - hence "the zionists in the audience"= "those people who showed up to the speech by the Palestinian ambassador specifically under the pretext of being pro-Israel" – and saying that their specific complaints about the speech showed a lack of understanding of irony. It's an absolute piss-take that anyone is managing to read anything else into this.

Wow, the Jewish Chronicle came out as finding Corbyn bad? I am shocked, just fucking shocked mate. Who would have thought that the Jewish Chronicle, edited by a leading neoconservative, would find Corbyn out of order for using the Z-word.

Actually it's my experience that the more right-wing a person is, the less funny they are. If you're right wing enough to think that annexing Palestine and bulldozing kids is super cool, you're probably incredibly boring and bad in bed.

‘Black’ is only a racial epithet in certain contexts. In others it is purely descriptive.

In this instance, was Corbyn using ‘Zionist’ as a descriptor or as an epithet signifying an alien and not necessarily welcome ‘other’? The latter would arguably be racism. You may feel his usage was in the former spirit. The problem is that to people who are sensitive to its use as an epithet, it sounds distinctly like the latter.

Gee, if only we could look at the context in which he said it and figure it out one way or the other! O to have that luxury!

The usage is "people who showed up to a speech by the Palestinian ambassador under the pretext of being pro-Israel". Now, does that sound like one usage, or the other?

Like, he's not even saying "Zionists don't understand English irony". He's saying "these people in the audience of this speech don't understand English irony". Fucking bizarre that everyone has latched on to it as tho it's the first of these despite how blindingly obvious it is that it's the second

Where do I say that you should ignore legitimate concerns?

I think Labour is wrong in their calculations of loss / gain and brexit voters in their area.

Remain should not be a mandate to ignore concerns. It seems austerity and rising costs of living vs wages are key drivers.

Everywhere from northern Ireland to England low wages and low social standing and education correlate with brexit voting. (Not much with people that want a united Ireland though) Why? Can't be just xenophobia.

Those need to be resolved but thrashing the UK's GDP more I don't think fixes it. Therefore I prefer for labour to can the thing as they otherwise have good plans.

I think the party is dishonest by pretending they can get a deal the Tories can't.

It's an absolute piss-take
Fucking bizarre that everyone has latched on to it

I don't think this is much help for the Jewish labour members and MPs who found his comments offensive.

Well, Corbyn acknowledges the complexities around the current use of the term in his clarification.

Forever amused that coming onto this thread and pointing out what other people are saying, largely because the fact of their saying it is newsworthy, starts off a whole ‘how dare you post this’ reaction. I mean, really?