Corbyn 23: Hail Discorbia

[pancreas]

He'll have had advice from some of the best libel lawyers and political advisors in the country. There must be a reason he hasn't sued the shit out of everyone who's called him anti-Semitic over the years, but I don't know what that is exactly.

Because proving you're not antisemitic is impossible, and you'd cover yourself in shit trying to do so.

[Johnny Yesno]

Yes, he's a cunt and I'd love to see him kicked out of Parliament and have his political career destroyed too. I just don't want that done with rumors and gossip and lies, because baseless smears like that can be used to destroy anyone, good or bad. I would have thought my reasons were self evident from my post.

Trenter has already given you an excellent answer, but I will say that it's clear you've not taken in the contents of my post. Which is that whatever the truth of the current allegations, he has already proven himself to be unfit for office. If the racism isn't enough for you, how about the Darius Guppy tape? And then there's the Garden Bridge fiasco. All of these are matters of public record, yet he still continues.

By contrast, all the shit thrown at Corbyn has turned out to be baseless. Stop conflating the two.

[Johnny Yesno]

Because proving you're not antisemitic is impossible, and you'd cover yourself in shit trying to do so.

Yes, and Chris Williamson is an example of this. I think the sad truth is that this is the reason everyone, including Novara, has bailed on him. It's got to the point now where whatever you say is open to interpretation by those with the loudest voices.

Another example is the ECHR investigation. They won't find evidence of institutional antisemitism as clearly there is nothing preventing Jewish people from holding office in the party. But 'no smoke without fire' is enough of a stick to beat Corbyn with for the time being, and it will go on for months.

There's a witch hunt happening where if you're found guilty, it's evidence the party harbours antisemites and if you're found innocent, it's evidence that the party is unable to deal with antisemitism. It's a very Cold War American way of thinking: if we can't detect the new advanced Russian radar we're expecting them to have, that must mean they've found a way of making it undetectable.

[Paul Calf]

He'll have had advice from some of the best libel lawyers and political advisors in the country. There must be a reason he hasn't sued the shit out of everyone who's called him anti-Semitic over the years, but I don't know what that is exactly.

A politician suing a private citizen over something they said is not considered to be good form whatever the truth or otherwise of what was said.

[Buelligan]

You're absolutely correct Johnny. 

The people who've chosen to create this situation, because they're afraid of BDS, because they're afraid of an honest person, a person who cannot be bought and will not bend to threats, getting to run Britain, because it threatens their power over all of us, have used the bodies of all those who've died, in the Holocaust, in the war on Palestine, as weapons.  That should be enough to shame anyone.  That is the measure of them, that they continue, shamelessly, for their power.

[sponk]

Trenter has already given you an excellent answer, but I will say that it's clear you've not taken in the contents of my post. Which is that whatever the truth of the current allegations, he has already proven himself to be unfit for office. If the racism isn't enough for you, how about the Darius Guppy tape? And then there's the Garden Bridge fiasco.

You realise, in the post you just responded to of mine, I said I hope BJ's political career is destroyed? If you realise this, why are you trying to convince me he's unfit for office? And you accuse me of not reading your posts.

[BlodwynPig]

You realise, in the post you just responded to of mine, I said I hope BJ's political career is destroyed? If you realise this, why are you trying to convince me he's unfit for office? And you accuse me of not reading your posts.

A new angle to try I suppose Milverton, but it still doesn't work

[Johnny Yesno]

You realise, in the post you just responded to of mine, I said I hope BJ's political career is destroyed? If you realise this, why are you trying to convince me he's unfit for office? And you accuse me of not reading your posts.

It's you that was all 'Oh noes, how do I know which 'smears' to believe and which ones to ignore?' I'm saying I don't have that issue with the 'smears' against Johnson because they are irrelevant, since he has already proven he is a cunt who is not fit for office anyway.

Corbyn, on the other hand, has a good record, so whether the smears against him are justified is hugely relevant. Can you not see the difference?

[Johnny Yesno]

You're absolutely correct Johnny. 

The people who've chosen to create this situation, because they're afraid of BDS, because they're afraid of an honest person, a person who cannot be bought and will not bend to threats, getting to run Britain, because it threatens their power over all of us, have used the bodies of all those who've died, in the Holocaust, in the war on Palestine, as weapons.  That should be enough to shame anyone.  That is the measure of them, that they continue, shamelessly, for their power.

I think it's more than just BDS, although that is one aspect. It's the threatened end to gravy train of death that is the military industrial complex and their city backers. I know I've posted this many times before but here it is again:

John McDonnell MP The War Machine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppEixLyaR40

Israel is just one of many economies, including our own, heavily reliant on the arms industry. IIRC, France is another.

The people Corbyn and McDonnell have put themselves up against will use absolutely any weapon available to them to keep them from power.

[Johnny Yesno]

Couple of more recent McDonnell clips:

https://twitter.com/chunkymark/status/1139955775512743938

https://twitter.com/chunkymark/status/1140478724154023936

lol at the characterisation of Rory the Tory.

[sponk]

It's you that was all 'Oh noes, how do I know which 'smears' to believe and which ones to ignore?' I'm saying I don't have that issue with the 'smears' against Johnson because they are irrelevant, since he has already proven he is a cunt who is not fit for office anyway.

Okay, fair point. The BJ gossip is irrelevant to you, and me, but not to a few people on this thread who were sharing the story and discussing it like it mattered. That's who my original point was directed at.

[lipsink]

There was a Guardian article today saying the fact that Corbyn isn't at Glastonbury this year or last is proof that he's finished. Erm, maybe he's a bit fucking busy at the moment if you hadn't noticed? Even Radiohead don't play EVERY year.

If he did appear at Glastonbury there'd probably be loads of articles about how he's swanning off to get his ego boosted instead of dealing with the anti-semitism crisis.

[Howj Begg]

I'm going to go against the grain expressed by the titans of this thread, and I hope we can all agree that it's perfectly appropriate for Corbyn/Labour supporters to have different opinions about Chris Williamson. I hope that can be accepted by one or two posters who have shown particular agression over this issue. He's just been resuspended. I think this is right. Here's an article from New Socialist which explains why:

https://newsocialist.org.uk/editorial-chris-williamson/#

Williamson should not be readmitted to the Party, and it would be a particular disaster— ethically and strategically—for him to be permitted to stand at the next election. The decision to suspend him was prompted by his claim that "[Labour] have backed off far too much, we have given too much ground, we have been too apologetic" over antisemitism. It is intolerable to argue that anybody, or any institution, could ever be "too apologetic" about any sort of racism. To treat claims like this as though they are acceptable undermines all antiracist struggle. Williamson's apology compounded this problem, firstly by apologising only for the form ("how I chose to express myself") rather than the content of what he said; and secondly by asserting that both he and the Labour Party have always been antiracist. This claim, as well as being inaccurate about the Party's history, reproduces a dangerous attitude towards racism, in which complacent assertions of antiracist commitments are supposed to exempt people from the important task of listening to—and learning from—criticism. This attitude is corrosive, and is common amongst those defending Williamson.

The comments that led to his suspension did not come out of the blue. They form part of a pattern of behaviour that includes (content note for antisemitism in the links provided):

Signing and promoting a petition in defence of Gilad Atzmon
Referring to claims of antisemitism within Labour as "bullshit" and "smears" (terms that his supporters continue to use to dismiss any suggestions of antisemitism within the Party)
Defending Scott Nelson ('SocialistVoice' on Twitter), who was expelled from Labour after posting antisemitic tweets of which Williamson was aware
His continued—and deliberately provocative—endorsement of Pete Willsman, including placing Willsman at the top of a list of NEC candidates to vote for
Defending Ken Livingstone after Livingstone's indefinite suspension, and subsequent resignation, from Labour over antisemitism. (It is interesting that Williamson was more vehement defending Livingstone than Livingstone himself.)
Two things are particularly notable in this pattern of behaviour. Firstly, it is deliberately provocative and hurtful, and Williamson persists in this despite having been repeatedly asked by Jewish comrades to stop it. Secondly, none of these comments have anything to do—even in a distorted way—with Palestine. It is concerning that Williamson's supporters seem to confuse aggressively-expressed antisemitism with Palestinian solidarity. This is absolutely not the case, and is a confusion that must be resisted. As we wrote in our previous editorial on antisemitism:
at least anecdotally, antisemitism seems significantly more prevalent within the Labour left than within directly pro-Palestinian campaigns and organisations. It is necessary to insist on an absolute, unconditional rejection of antisemitism and simultaneously an absolute, unconditional solidarity with Palestine. Both these positions are foundational for a meaningful and useful left politics.

As I said months previously, it's not the comments individually, which taken on their own can seem harmless and puny. It's the pattern of behaviour, of someone who doesn't care about offending Jewish Labour voters. He's a chancer, an opportunist, a deluded martyr, and a showbiz rebel. He has no Palestinian constituency, and needs to recognise what his job is. He doesn't want to.

Jewish socialists have played a huge role in the history of the Labour party, in London particularly. I see no reason why we should be alienating them by pandering to this clown.

Wen you're pissing off Rhea Wolfson, a young socialist who we all elected to the NEC 2 years ago (we all remember, yes?) then you have to ask, why?

[pancreas]

He did not say Labour were too apologetic about antisemitism. The placement of the quotation marks is misleading. He said that Labour should be celebrating its tradition of being an antiracist party more than it has been. It's a perfectly reasonable point on one's reaction to being called racism. You can say: 'We are sorry for being racist,' or you can say 'We will look into this, but let me remind you that we have a proud anti-racist tradition'. This is the point he was making.

Which Jewish socialists are calling for him to be resuspended, please? The pandering that is being done here is to the Right of the party.

JVL want him back. JLM do not. I know which side I am on.

[KennyMonster]

There was a Guardian article today saying the fact that Corbyn isn't at Glastonbury this year or last is proof that he's finished. Erm, maybe he's a bit fucking busy at the moment if you hadn't noticed? Even Radiohead don't play EVERY year.

If he did appear at Glastonbury there'd probably be loads of articles about how he's swanning off to get his ego boosted instead of dealing with the anti-semitism crisis.

Was there even a festival last year?

'Corbyn didn't roam around Worthy Farm trying to gain the bovine vote' is probably a good thing Mr Grauniad.

There was a photo of some woman brummie MP demanding Emily Eavis book 50% female acts next year though,
(I didn't open the link).

Anyone guess which MP it was that got a bit of Graun limelight?

[Dr Rock]

Defending Ken Livingstone after Livingstone's indefinite suspension, and subsequent resignation, from Labour over antisemitism.

Implies Ken Livingstone said or did anything antisemitic. Defending him was the right thing to do.

[Howj Begg]

Which Jewish socialists are calling for him to be resuspended, please? The pandering that is being done here is to the Right of the party..

Second clause is a red herring, but as I mentioned here is one who was upset by the suspension lifting:

https://twitter.com/rheawolfson/status/1143969695541989377

The pandering that is being done here is to the Right of the party.

Disagree, as the article suggests. The procedure seems to be at fault.

"I have got to say I think our party's response has been partly responsible for that because in my opinion... we have backed off far too much, we have given too much ground, we have been too apologetic.

This is the quote, shorn of it's larger context. What do you think he was specifically referring to here?
His wider point about Labour's record is indisputable.

JVL want him back. JLM do not. I know which side I am on.

I refuse to take sides with groups in that way on Chris Williamson, because I agree with JVL over most things.

This is not a hill I will die on, and I think it's absurd that anyone else would want to. Williamson is not a hero, he's a gobshite chancer. There are much more important fish to fry. If he's readmitted, I'm fine with that. But the process needs to be carried out with due diligence.

[New folder]

I've just had a revelation here: why are these people even MPs? Like, properly, why? There are over 60 million people on those fair British Isles, and 600 of them have been chosen out of this 60 million to do this job, of being an MP.

But why - they're fucking shite at it. Jess Phillips is shit at being an MP. She knows nothing, and does nothing - why is she still employed? A normal person would have lost their job for either negligence or incompetence or both. And they like to pretend that some people are 'voting for the person, not the party'. NOBODY WANTS YOU JESS PHILLIPS EVEN YOUR TWITTER LIKES ARE PROBABLY BOTS.

She's not an MP she doesn't even do any MPing she just shits on Jezza and pretends to be a feminist and nothing else. That Tory cunt who strangled a woman last week (which political discourse seems to have forgotten about in favour of some trumped-up bullshit designed to take down one of the MPs that actually fucking DOES HIS JOB), he did it at a black tie dinner. But why the fuck was he even at that dinner anyway - most people, when they have a job, live somewhere and then go into work every day and do something. But he hangs around in marble palaces eating food - and that's his job for some reason.

People are dying and they are asking YOU for help - the person supposed to do things because apparently for some reason along with this job where you just hang around and do fuck-all, you apparently run the whole of the UK for no real reason why do you have this power you are just a fucking cunt who knows nothing. There are surely 600 people out there who actually would care about this job and do it well, but you have it Jess. For some reason Jess, you run this country. Give up your job you are not very good at it please why.

[Johnny Yesno]

This is the quote, shorn of it's larger context. What do you think he was specifically referring to here?
His wider point about Labour's record is indisputable.

That being on auto-apologise for every accusation misrepresents the party. He's not suggesting the party shouldn't carry out investigations and apologise for actual incidents of antisemitism. That's how I understood it, anyway.

[pancreas]

Second clause is a red herring, but as I mentioned here is one who was upset by the suspension lifting:

https://twitter.com/rheawolfson/status/1143969695541989377

Alright, she's a socialist, but has given no full explanation for why she believes the lifting of the suspension is wrong. The fact that she is pissed off for unspecific reasons is not evidence of anything, unless you're planning a no-smoke-without-fire style argument.

Disagree, as the article suggests. The procedure seems to be at fault.

Exactly how? There were two barristers involved. Plus he hasn't said anything antisemitic.

This is the quote, shorn of it's larger context. What do you think he was specifically referring to here?
His wider point about Labour's record is indisputable.

Christ, I mean you're saying his wider point is indisputable, yet *still* should have been suspended? Because there might possibly be a slight whiff of something barely detectable which might possibly be interpreted in some contexts as being 'bad'?

Of course, I don't know what he was asked when he gave that precise response. But it could have been: 'The Labour Party, all of a sudden, seems to being cast as a racist party. How do you explain that?' To which his response would be perfectly reasonable, and not at all offensive, *unless* it is presented disingenuously *and* you are hysterically jumping to conclusions.

[sponk]

I've just had a revelation here: why are these people even MPs? Like, properly, why? There are over 60 million people on those fair British Isles, and 600 of them have been chosen out of this 60 million to do this job, of being an MP.

But why - they're fucking shite at it. Jess Phillips is shit at being an MP. She knows nothing, and does nothing - why is she still employed? A normal person would have lost their job for either negligence or incompetence or both. And they like to pretend that some people are 'voting for the person, not the party'. NOBODY WANTS YOU JESS PHILLIPS EVEN YOUR TWITTER LIKES ARE PROBABLY BOTS.

She's not an MP she doesn't even do any MPing she just shits on Jezza and pretends to be a feminist and nothing else. That Tory cunt who strangled a woman last week (which political discourse seems to have forgotten about in favour of some trumped-up bullshit designed to take down one of the MPs that actually fucking DOES HIS JOB), he did it at a black tie dinner. But why the fuck was he even at that dinner anyway - most people, when they have a job, live somewhere and then go into work every day and do something. But he hangs around in marble palaces eating food - and that's his job for some reason.

People are dying and they are asking YOU for help - the person supposed to do things because apparently for some reason along with this job where you just hang around and do fuck-all, you apparently run the whole of the UK for no real reason why do you have this power you are just a fucking cunt who knows nothing. There are surely 600 people out there who actually would care about this job and do it well, but you have it Jess. For some reason Jess, you run this country. Give up your job you are not very good at it please why.

But she sticks her tongue out on pictures and does withering putdowns on Twitter!

[Howj Begg]

Pancreas: I suspect you are deliberately not reading things or doing any research on this because you want to hold on to your opinion. Maybe I am "hysterically" (seriously?) jumping to conclusions about you there, but you do seem to want me to do the work for you. You also seem to want to ignore CW's tweets in support of antisemtic comments and individuals, as outlined in the article.

Here's another Jewish socialist, Mike Segalov, addressing a number of your questions, including the procedural faults:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/27/labour-chris-williamson-mp-antisemitism

Of course, in an organisation of more than half a million people, a small number of people with reprehensible views or unsavoury conduct might well occasionally fall through the cracks until they're discovered. There also has to be space for people to grow and to learn, if they're willing. But Williamson fell into neither category. This wasn't a single incident. This was a pattern from which he refused to learn or change. He wasn't an anonymous troll on the internet.

In that moment I made a decision: if he wasn't suspended immediately, my time as a member of the Labour party was up. It wasn't an easy conclusion to come to. Much to my relief, Labour's general secretary did what she could and temporarily kicked him out. From Labour's leadership this was a signifiant, and welcome, change of tack. But four months later, Williamson has been readmitted to the party. With the Conservative party busy eating itself, I suppose it was only a matter of time before someone in Labour remembered that it, too, is good at self-destruction.

It is important to take note of the details that surround this decision, in no small part because the awful outcome wasn't what insiders and staffers expected, and it certainly wasn't the doing of the Jeremy Corbyn-supporting left. It was assumed that Williamson would be referred to the national constitutional committee (NCC), the only body with the power to expel members. Instead, he was handed a formal warning, in essence a glorified slap on the wrist. Three national executive committee (NEC) members made up the panel that came to this conclusion; the decision to be unacceptably lenient seems to have been the preferred position of MP Keith Vaz, neither an ally of Corbyn nor the Labour left.

Vaz's thinking was apparently that with just two weeks to go until MPs must decide if they'll be re-standing, and the fact that Williamson's is a marginal seat, he should therefore be let off the hook. Baffled? Yes, we all are. I've tried to talk to Vaz in the hope of receiving an explanation, but nobody is picking up the phone.

I'm not saying he should be suspended as such, especially if he changes his approach, I am saying he's a gobshite chancer who does not need our support. His CLP may be about to deselect him in any case, solving the problem at a stroke:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/29/chris-williamson-deselection-labour-antisemitism

[Johnny Yesno]

you do seem to want me to do the work for you

Yes, please. Where, for example, do you get this opinion from?

I am saying he's a gobshite chancer

[Howj Begg]

Yes, please. Where, for example, do you get this opinion from?

I don't really know what you mean by that. You can put forward your differing opinion without trying to insinuate something about mine. The words in that epithet have a clear enough meaning. They refer to CW's tweets, quotes and pattern of behaviour.

[pancreas]

I'm not trying to hold onto any opinion. I've seen no evidence to change it.

You cannot arrest someone and say, 'you stole that car' and then they say, 'actually I was in Estonia when it happened', and you check your records and say, 'okay but there's a pattern of behaviour so we're going to put you in prison for stealing cars anyway.'

That is not fair and your defence of it is appalling, i'm sorry to say.

[Howj Begg]

I'm not trying to hold onto any opinion. I've seen no evidence to change it.

You cannot arrest someone and say, 'you stole that car' and then they say, 'actually I was in Estonia when it happened', and you check your records and say, 'okay but there's a pattern of behaviour so we're going to put you in prison for stealing cars anyway.'

That is not fair and your defence of it is appalling, i'm sorry to say.

I think your defence of CW in the face of his behaviour is appalling, if you want to have an online slap fight. Not interested however. Your posts in response to the articles I've posted have been contentless. It does rather seem that defending CW has become a matter of personal integrity, for some.

I'm going to make an effort to leave it there, before this becomes a thing. Try and accept that I have a difference of opinion, and do your best not to make it personal.

[Johnny Yesno]

I don't really know what you mean by that. You can put forward your differing opinion without trying to insinuate something about mine. The words in that epithet have a clear enough meaning. They refer to CW's tweets, quotes and pattern of behaviour.

I've had a look at his twitter stream and it didn't strike me as the twitter stream of a chancer. Perhaps I'm wrong and he's better at this deception than I think he is. What pattern of behaviour are you referring to that marks him out as a chancer?

[Johnny Yesno]

I think your defence of CW in the face of his behaviour is appalling, if you want to have an online slap fight. Not interested however. Your posts in response to the articles I've posted have been contentless. It does rather seem that defending CW has become a matter of personal integrity, for some.

I'm going to make an effort to leave it there, before this becomes a thing. Try and accept that I have a difference of opinion, and do your best not to make it personal.

You're not providing much content yourself at the moment, Howj. 'You know, that pattern of behaviour everyone knows about' isn't cutting it for me, I'm afraid.

And let's not waste time arguing about who's taking things personally, eh? You're better than that usually.

[Howj Begg]

Are you making a specific effort to ignore the evidence listed in the new socialist article? Or Mike Segalov's article?

And let's not waste time arguing about who's taking things personally, eh? You're better than that usually.

Well, both you and pancs have made somewhat pointed comments at me seemingly because of my comments about CW.
I am probably returning fire in a similar way, though. I do object to you saying I am "usually better" because I'm exactly as bad or good today as I always am and always want to be. The difference is that I am discussing something that you take an opposite opinion on. Only difference.

[Jockice]

He'll have had advice from some of the best libel lawyers and political advisors in the country. There must be a reason he hasn't sued the shit out of everyone who's called him anti-Semitic over the years, but I don't know what that is exactly.

It's the tattoo on his arse saying 'I fucking hate Jews me.' Allegedly.