UK Politics Thread

Hon PM 

What part of no it won’t you plank didn’t you understand ? 

There is none nada zilch pressure from their base to take up their seats in wm on the contrary they would shed votes if they did 

And you can imagine how voting with SF the opposition would be painted by the government 

SF taking up their seats in wm ? at least it gave me a laugh

Okay. I’ll humour you. My second paragraph attempted to make the following points:

1.The anti semitism has occurred due to the words of some members of Labour’s Parliamentary Party, some local elected representatives, and some grassroots members.

2.Williamson has been at the forefront of downplaying the issue be it by his statements, or the people he has consorted with.  

Sinn Fein will not take their seats. They have a mandate not to take their seats. Could you image if they took the oath, their entire support would collapse, everything they have ever stood for would be gone.

I am well aware of those, but I asked you to provide them. The reason should be obvious as to why. I want to see what you view as anti-Semitism. What Shah did and posted was anti-Zionist and anti-Israeli, I do not see how in any way it is anti-Semitic.   To say that is anti-Semitic is ludicrous to me. She apologised for the sake of her career, rightly or wrongly. She has also made far bigger blunders on social media, but then that didn't bother the Zionists.

Ken has just lost it, I am afraid. He wants to remain relevant and has got sillier and sillier to do so. Even if I feel his heart is still very much in the right place. 

That report was a load of wank. This bollocks that you cannot compare Israel to the Nazis is just wrong; if they do not want to be compared then the state should start behaving in a humane manner and respecting international law.

I respect Jones, I disagree with him here. Because of that I want him expelled from..sorry, I want nothing to happen. I do agree with him that Labour should have done more at the start and I agree that Labour cannot be too apologetic about any form of racism. Those blurred lines have made the situation enormously difficult though and that is why there has to be an element of patience and common sense to this. The whole point of it is to divide Labour, it certainly  isn't because anybody cares if someone made an offensive remark or not.

What he has said is that Labour has been too apologetic. I would disagree, personally, but that is not something to be thrown out, sorry, suspended for. If it is then there should be suspensions left, centre and centre-right across the party for all manner of things. I also do not believe that inviting people to speak at events or talking to them, unless they are inexcusably bad should be the Labour way. Dialogue and hearing things out is the way forward. Williamson has faults, I am not championing him, even if he seems a decent MP and all that, but there is nowhere near enough to suspend him for but the neo-Liberals are going to win out anyway. I have accepted that. This isn't about Williamson, it is about stopping the first genuinely good man from becoming PM in generations. That isn't allowed anymore.

Nobody is denying that anti-Semitism is horrible or pernicious or any of the rest. This is the sort of nonsense that I struggled with earlier, saying the obvious to avoid the actual matter in hand, which is a deliberate problem in this debate. This is blurring the lines. 

If Williamson was suspended for Salisbury, I could understand it. He wasn't. If he was suspended for being anti-Semitic, I could understand. If he was suspended for engaging with Holocaust deniers, I could understand. He was thrown out for saying Labour was 'too apologetic' on the matter, in a speech which in its full context describes that the party should have been standing up for itself to a media that is demonising it.

I don't agree with that. I don't think enough can ever be done against any and all racism and prejudice, but the wider point he was making is broadly correct and to be suspended for that is frankly absurd and shows that those who wanted to split the party are winning. I for one would like to welcome our new, bland and corporate leader, the one that looks like all other politicians everywhere, the type that meant Farage and Johnson and Trump could masquerade as anti-establishment and get away with it, by leaving.

By the way, I thought there was some merit on his council tax policy, albeit I would be more in favour of it on second homes.

That wasn't the argument or the point! The point is that British people being deported for being British seemed to be equal, or even less important than deciding whether something was anti-Zionist or anti-Semitic.

Of course the latter is important, but if you landed in Britain for Mars you would certainly think there is a hierarchy of races and ethnicities, which is in itself the problem. That was my point, not who was doing them. 

It is completely illogical and something I would struggle to get my head around, if the reason why wasn't so obvious.