Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Jeremy Corbyn's time is up

Stop being a knob, pointing out the whole process is fundamentally flawed and won’t achieve its proclaimed outcomes for umpteen reasons is quite reasonable.
we weren't talking about whether the whole process is fundamentally flawed though, we were talking about whether this guy being a bit of tory buffoon has a bearing on the content of the report.

I'm not very interested in debating the fundamental flaws of the process though, so please don't tell me all about it.
 
Sure, but the report is still broadly correct in it's findings, whether you like it or not, and whether this guy is a bellend or not.
 
Fine. And it makes a couple of potentially sound suggestions at resolution.

That doesn’t mean we should simply take it all at face value or not criticise it at all. It’s definition of harassment IS debatable, so whether the leader (a Mr Corbyn) is therefore responsible for the words of Ken Livingstone is also highly debatable. That they thought an inquiry into labour was necessary but not one into the tories over islamophobia is a point worth making.

otherwise, as Angela Rayner threatened the other day, we will be seeing thousands more expulsions.
 
I don't think this new development has any bearing on the content of the report FWIW, but it's also not at all unexpected. It's the inevitable result of a politics where everything someone has done on the internet is recorded forever and searchable by people who want to damage you.

Like the Labour members who made antisemitic posts? You disagree with everything they've done being recorded forever and searched by people who want to damage them?

A board member of the government’s equality watchdog has ‘liked’ or retweeted social media posts criticising Black Lives Matters protesters and describing the words misogynist and homophobe as “highly ideological propaganda terms” in the latest controversy to beset the EHRC, the Guardian can reveal.

Alasdair Henderson, who led the Equality and Human Rights Commission inquiry into Labour party antisemitism this year, also liked a tweet decrying “offence-taking zealots” who accused Roger Scruton of antisemitism, Islamophobia and homophobia, and one by Douglas Murray, who once called for Muslim immigration to Europe to be banned.

The EHRC report he led, published last month, stated: “The Labour party failed to investigate antisemitism complaints based on likes, retweets and shares on social media.”

He seems to be quite selective as to who's antisemitic though, surely not a political decision :eek:
 
Like the Labour members who made antisemitic posts? You disagree with everything they've done being recorded forever and searched by people who want to damage them?
Whether I disagree with it or not is neither here nor there - though I've regularly said I think it's a fairly poisonous way to conduct politics. But this is the world we're in. I don't know what the answer is.
 
I went and had a look at Nadia Whittome's twitter, and she gave a different account of the meeting to this. Who should I believe, her or this random dude?
She doesn’t really give an account though, just says the bloke was made to feel unwelcome. Whittome is generally pretty sound but seems to be being very conservative in her response
 
Whether I disagree with it or not is neither here nor there - though I've regularly said I think it's a fairly poisonous way to conduct politics. But this is the world we're in. I don't know what the answer is.

Although you said the EHRC report was broadly correct - surely that's not right if the stories were right about the anti-corbyn faction actively obstructing the investigations before Corbyn appointed Formby. That would make a large part of the responsibility theirs wouldn't it, yet their evidence seems to have been accepted in the report uncritically?

And it does seem a strange decision to censure Corbyn for speeding up the Livingstone inquiry as interfering with the investigation process? (Isn't that what happened?)
 
Although you said the EHRC report was broadly correct - surely that's not right if the stories were right about the anti-corbyn faction actively obstructing the investigations before Corbyn appointed Formby. That would make a large part of the responsibility theirs wouldn't it, yet their evidence seems to have been accepted in the report uncritically?

And it does seem a strange decision to censure Corbyn for speeding up the Livingstone inquiry as interfering with the investigation process? (Isn't that what happened?)
I'm not very interested in arguing about this stuff sorry.
 
The loon stuff isn’t literal anyway - the use of words like ‘sleeper’ are intended to trigger a psychological reaction
 
I suspect bimble was finding amusement in KAM’s comment
Perhaps, but I see this kind of stuff too much - red roar types with their collections of screenshots with actual undeniable antisemitism and borderline stuff padded out with vague allegations of dodginess being evidence of antisemitism. It might not have been her intention to link these two things, but that's what it does.
 
Back
Top Bottom