Sir Keir Starmer

[gringo]

I have sympathy with rejecting the IHRA definition of antisemitism. The problem as I researched this issue is that verbal attacks on the state of Israel lead to physical attacks on Jews in the UK. I also deplore the wilful ignoring of UN resolutions on illegal Israeli settlements, which makes a two-state solution more difficult to achieve. I think the reality now is that there will not be a Palestinian state as initially envisaged by the UN in 1947.

   The IHRA definition should, as you say, be rejected. It is antisemitic in itself according to its own definitions. By conflating Israel and being Jewish.
    Whilst I have no reason to doubt that physical attacks on Jews are real and based only on their being Jews which anyone condemns, I think that it is a stretch to link "verbal attacks" on Israel to physical assaults on Jewish people.
    The illegal settlements, and the "immigrants" they attract, are the biggest problem, as you allude. This cannot be seen realistically as anything but deliberately preventing a solution as envisaged by the UN. The side sabotaging this is undeniably Israel.
    The 1947 solution is, as you say, further away than ever.
    If Starmer were to confirm Palestine's right to exist, what do you think would happen?
    He would be smeared and hounded out in no time flat.
    He could make any pro Israel comment and there would be no such result.
    It is that influence on UK politics and Starmer's Labour Party that is cancerous.

[gringo]

I was a couple of mins into the first vid but was unable to get past the fact that I have no idea who the commentators are and was wondering why the first was wearing a Ralph Lauren polo shirt and the second a Lacoste polo shirt?! 

    It is made clear later who is who as video goes on, CC, and their stories are shocking. It is a long watch and as a result of doing so, I simultaneously am delighted that I did watch but wish that I hadn't.
    I feel unclean having seen the dirtiness of the Labour right(no better than Tories) so clearly displayed. They are vile people.

[killingeve]

    Starmer's complicity in the purging of left wing, anti zionist jews is laid bare. Particularly egregious, in my opinion, was his insistence against "unambiguous legal advice" to pay costs and damages to the liars and bigots that appeared on BBC Panorama "investigation" (hit piece) into Labour supposed anti semitism. The BBC and John Ware are also exposed as blatant propagandists. The lack of any response to this, almost complete omerta from media and political class, exposes their own roles in the whole scam.
     Starmer is definitely not the Messiah, he's a naughty boy. And the Al Jazeera Investigations would have finished him, and many many others, if we lived in a functioning democracy.
     I fear that things need to get much worse before they can begin to get better. For Roch, and anyone else who hasn't yet or watched the entire three episodes, below is a 10 minute you-tube piece better describing the events that I briefly touched on above by Michael Walker of Novara Media.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMIbbSsV6Xo&ab_channel=NovaraMedia

     Starmer and his merry band of working class despising racists and bigots are worse than the Tories. 

But what credentials do Michael Walker or Novra Media have that make them worthy sources of reliable unbiased information?  Walker appears to have 4 connections on Linkedin:

https://uk.linkedin.com/in/michael-walker-396b52189

Novra Media

https://novaramedia.com/about/

KS quickly arranged an investigation into Rupa Huq referring to Kwasi Kwarteng as "superfically black" and she was rightly suspended from the party. 

What is your definition of "working class"?

[killingeve]

   The IHRA definition should, as you say, be rejected. It is antisemitic in itself according to its own definitions. By conflating Israel and being Jewish.
    Whilst I have no reason to doubt that physical attacks on Jews are real and based only on their being Jews which anyone condemns, I think that it is a stretch to link "verbal attacks" on Israel to physical assaults on Jewish people.
    The illegal settlements, and the "immigrants" they attract, are the biggest problem, as you allude. This cannot be seen realistically as anything but deliberately preventing a solution as envisaged by the UN. The side sabotaging this is undeniably Israel.
    The 1947 solution is, as you say, further away than ever.
    If Starmer were to confirm Palestine's right to exist, what do you think would happen?
    He would be smeared and hounded out in no time flat.
    He could make any pro Israel comment and there would be no such result.
    It is that influence on UK politics and Starmer's Labour Party that is cancerous.

I doubt the British electorate is that concerned with Middle East politics to the extent its a vote winner.  Probably more concerned with the cost of living crisis in terms of rising cost of food, fuel and any borrowings and to a lesser extent the conflict in east Europe, obtaining hospital and dental appointments and getting their kids into a decent school.  Even climate change is probably not a priority for most. 

[killingeve]

But what credentials do Michael Walker or Novra Media have that make them worthy sources of reliable unbiased information?  Walker appears to have 4 connections on Linkedin:

https://uk.linkedin.com/in/michael-walker-396b52189

Novra Media

https://novaramedia.com/about/

KS quickly arranged an investigation into Rupa Huq referring to Kwasi Kwarteng as "superfically black" and she was rightly suspended from the party. 

What is your definition of "working class"?

As an alternative to 'Michael Walker' I would recommend listening to nobel price winner Joseph Stiglitz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woerUgtufUo

Please also note the presenter who introduced JS is wearning an unbranded polo shirt! 

[gringo]

       You can tell that you haven't seen the docs by your ill informed comments, CC. Peter Oborne features heavily in the docs as well as many others, do you question his credentials too? Questioning the credentials of those who were featured displays your ignorance. Everything is confirmed by the massive leak of e-mails etc. The allegations made against Labour MP's and officials can be verified by evidence written by their own hand. They are a matter of record. Your opinion of the credentials of those on the program, that you haven't seen, is irrelevant.
     The question as to why MSM haven't reported on the evidence presented is worrying in what is a supposedly functioning democracy. It says nothing to the lack of truth of the allegations but speaks volumes to the MSM own role in the distortion and corruption of UK politics.
     
     

[killingeve]

       You can tell that you haven't seen the docs by your ill informed comments, CC. Peter Oborne features heavily in the docs as well as many others, do you question his credentials too? Questioning the credentials of those who were featured displays your ignorance. Everything is confirmed by the massive leak of e-mails etc. The allegations made against Labour MP's and officials can be verified by evidence written by their own hand. They are a matter of record. Your opinion of the credentials of those on the program, that you haven't seen, is irrelevant.
     The question as to why MSM haven't reported on the evidence presented is worrying in what is a supposedly functioning democracy. It says nothing to the lack of truth of the allegations but speaks volumes to the MSM own role in the distortion and corruption of UK politics. 

Why am I going to spend hours of my time listening to unsubstantiated claims and general in-fighting within the Lab party under JC's leadership?  Its hardly the stuff of the Snowdon files!  How do you expect me to take these people seriously when they're wearing US designer polo shirts and yet claim to be ideologically opposed to to American capitalism?  It's what's called hypocrisy!  And whoever made the Jekyll and Hyde comment misspelt the latter!

JC lost 2 elections because he was/is too left wing, was too divisive and didn't have a set of credible policies that appealed to the British electorate. 

I would hardly describe the Morning Star as MSM 

What sort of political party would you like to see in power and what sort of policies would you like it to implement?

[nugnug]

Why am I going to spend hours of my time listening to unsubstantiated claims and general in-fighting within the Lab party under JC's leadership?  Its hardly the stuff of the Snowdon files!  How do you expect me to take these people seriously when they're wearing US designer polo shirts and yet claim to be ideologically opposed to to American capitalism?  It's what's called hypocrisy!  And whoever made the Jekyll and Hyde comment misspelt the latter!

JC lost 2 elections because he was/is too left wing, was too divisive and didn't have a set of credible policies that appealed to the British electorate. 

I would hardly describe the Morning Star as MSM 

What sort of political party would you like to see in power and what sort of policies would you like it to implement?

when you have the  support of  people like owen jones and billy brag your pretty much fucked

[Roch]

  Starmer is establishment. He is dealing ruthlessly with the left because he is right wing and despises the real left and the working class. Gives Labour Files a watch if you have time, Roch, all 3 parts, and all your questions about Starmer are answered.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elp18OvnNV0&ab_channel=AlJazeeraEnglish

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DTMF0MSXng&ab_channel=AlJazeeraEnglish

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-cHBQf5z_M&ab_channel=AlJazeeraEnglish

   
    Any notions of Starmer's "realism", "savvy" and "good intentions will be swiftly dispatched. The docs are shocking and infuriating.

.

I watched the first video. I can remember at the time that Angela Eagle came across as thoroughly disingenuous. I found it hilarious that successive attempts to challenge Corbyn for the leadership failed miserably. It was blatantly obvious that the 'anti-semitism' card was an all out  last throw of the dice to get rid of him. It's a great shame that he was undermined in his campaign Vs May. If he had been backed we could have seen genuinely new UK, ran along lines that benefited the majority.

[killingeve]

.

I watched the first video. I can remember at the time that Angela Eagle came across as thoroughly disingenuous. I found it hilarious that successive attempts to challenge Corbyn for the leadership failed miserably. It was blatantly obvious that the 'anti-semitism' card was an all out  last throw of the dice to get rid of him. It's a great shame that he was undermined in his campaign Vs May. If he had been backed we could have seen genuinely new UK, ran along lines that benefited the majority.

I don't believe under any set of circumstances the British electorate would have voted for JC.

Roch how about changing your username to Citizen Smith? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eabA4rz6hU

[Roch]

I don't believe under any set of circumstances the British electorate would have voted for JC.

Roch how about changing your username to Citizen Smith? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eabA4rz6hU

I only ever saw clips of this. Think it was just before my time.

I think large sections of the public were conned in to despising JC. Just like they're now being conned in to considering Starmer, on account of the singing the national anthem at the labour party conference.

[killingeve]

I only ever saw clips of this. Think it was just before my time.

Is this a not so subtle dig at my advancing years 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eabA4rz6hU

I think large sections of the public were conned in to despising JC. Just like they're now being conned in to considering Starmer, on account of the singing the national anthem at the labour party conference.

I can't really account for folk oop North but down South I don't believe anyone was conned into despising JC.  He was just seen as too left!

We'll have to see how it goes over the next two years.  I would have preferred Rishi Sunak over Liz Truss.  Although the former voted for Brexit and the latter to remain.  I'm a remoaner and hope one day the UK (or England) rejoins the EU. 

[Roch]

Is this a not so subtle dig at my advancing years 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eabA4rz6hU
I would have preferred Rishi Sunak over Liz Truss.

He reminds me of Roland Rat. But I have to admit, I'd rather have him than Truss.

[gringo]

.

I watched the first video. I can remember at the time that Angela Eagle came across as thoroughly disingenuous. I found it hilarious that successive attempts to challenge Corbyn for the leadership failed miserably. It was blatantly obvious that the 'anti-semitism' card was an all out  last throw of the dice to get rid of him. It's a great shame that he was undermined in his campaign Vs May. If he had been backed we could have seen genuinely new UK, ran along lines that benefited the majority.

    Your first impression of Angela Eagle is on the money. The "anti-semitism" card has been so overplayed by now that everyone except the wilfully blind and biased has seen through it.
    More Jewish members have been expelled for "anti-semitism" under Starmer than all other Labour leaders combined.
    That he came so close despite overwhelming opposition from the entire media and political class, including the right wing of his own party machinery and MP's shows how much of a threat he was to the establishment and corporate class.
     In my opinion, Roch, the new UK benefiting the majority, that could have been, has only been postponed, not cancelled. Corbyn's policies are not unique to Corbyn, his election as leader came about because an increasing number of people are demanding a fairer system. Corbyn was, and still is to some extent, the public face of those demands. The demands will only grow louder and aren't going away. Getting rid of Corbyn is only a sticking plaster for the broken system.
     
   

[ngb1066]

    Your first impression of Angela Eagle is on the money. The "anti-semitism" card has been so overplayed by now that everyone except the wilfully blind and biased has seen through it.
    More Jewish members have been expelled for "anti-semitism" under Starmer than all other Labour leaders combined.
    That he came so close despite overwhelming opposition from the entire media and political class, including the right wing of his own party machinery and MP's shows how much of a threat he was to the establishment and corporate class.
     In my opinion, Roch, the new UK benefiting the majority, that could have been, has only been postponed, not cancelled. Corbyn's policies are not unique to Corbyn, his election as leader came about because an increasing number of people are demanding a fairer system. Corbyn was, and still is to some extent, the public face of those demands. The demands will only grow louder and aren't going away. Getting rid of Corbyn is only a sticking plaster for the broken system.
     
   

Very well put.