If a general election was called, who would you vote for?

I think this might apply to holders of dual Irish UK passports?

Not sure though.

That's a huge amount of people if it does.

The idea that this is what this is a misrepresentation though, given that it only affects people who are involved in quite serious crimes against the state. Unless there was some reason to think it would be used in a wrong or manipulative way to target specific groups, which I can't particularly see.

My own concern with these kinds of laws is how they could affect very young people who immigrated as children, especially if they are still quite young.

'As for spies, are you really suggesting that it's anti-Semitic to suggest that Israel might have spies in other countries? They have a very good intelligence service. '

That is NOT what you said. At all.

Given you can't edit posts, anyone can read what you actually said.

What do you think it achieves by pretending you said something completely different?

LobsterNapkin my bad, as I mentioned above I assumed you were agreeing with her. I do think she's antisemitic and said so above.

One possibility is that, blinded by identity politics, she doesn't see the French as an oppressed group and therefore doesn't think it matters if French terrorists lose British citizenship.

Or, it could be that it was an underhanded way of trying to accuse the Conservatives of Antisemitism.

It's obviously an effective tactic, no one has accused the original poster of being a bigot. It's easy to see why people use id pol as a weapon.

The question is, if people are engaged in these things, and are citizens of another country, should they lose British citizenship.

Yes they should. And everyone I know who's forked out £1300 to become British would agree.

Did you even bother to read the bill?
I did, but I assumed you were agreeing with TooBigForMyBoots. Was I wrong?

It looks very much like it is intended as a way to revoke British citizenship from people who immigrate and then use the UK as a base to engage in terrorist acts, domestic or otherwise. I imagine they are thinking of Syria or the Middle East more generally. As much as it is directed at any specific group, that looks to be the one.

However it could potentially apply to anyone who engages in terrorism, espionage, or acts of war - but only if they have dual citizenship. It cannot be used to make a person stateless.

It was the person who brought up the bill who suggested it would particularly affect Jewish people. So perhaps you could complain that she is being anti-Semitic.

I assumed she was NOT suggesting that Jewish people are more likely than average to be involved in such things. That leaves only the possibility that what she meant was it would be more likely to apply because they are more likely to have access to dual citizenship.

Though the way the post was written did rather gloss over the fact that it would only apply to such people if they were also terrorists, spies, etc.

To suggest that such legislation is intended to be anti-Semitic is quite a stretch. It's not even clearly the case that it would really apply to any actual Jewish people at all.

The question is, if people are engaged in these things, and are citizens of another country, should they lose British citizenship. Whether they are Jewish or Muslim or Communists or something else really doesn't change the answer.

LobsterNapkin honest question, do you not know many foreign people or second generation immigrants? You'd be surprised how many of the former group have UK passports they are very proud of and how many of the latter group have dual nationality that you might not have guessed by their name that they have.

LobsterNapkin so why didn't you focus on the French? There are as many people in the UK who are French as who are Jews. Not all Jews hold Israeli citizenship anyway.
Dual nationality is quite common, and you choose one of the smallest demographic groups to focus on, when talking about government efforts to remove spies and terrorists. It's massively offensive. Stop doubling down.

SNP without hesitation (Scotland)

We have to look after whoever is here already, no matter what colour they are or where their background is from. There's nothing compassionate about turning on the taps so the rich can hire cheaper and cheaper workers. It's just a neoliberal idea, it doesn't help working people at all.

It creates a brain drain in the countries of origin, and often expensively trained staff (especially in medicine) are sorely needed at home. Is it morally sound for us to hoover them all up because we can?

We have hardly any technical training for industrial skills. Apprenticeships were seen by companies as a good way to hire cheap staff, and the training was shite. An apprenticeship at a supermarket is a piss take, especially when most of the supermarket staff have their wages augmented by taxpayers' money because they are too low to live on.

It should be easy to find work that pays enough to live a dignified life on. It should be easy to find somewhere secure and safe to rent. It should be possible to learn new skills and make something of yourself.

Identity politics turns people off. Labour need to ditch it, fast. Otherwise they'll never get a chance to deliver a fairer society.

Also, Labour need to remember that a lot of people, of whatever colour or background, are patriotic too. They don't find flags cringey, they think parades and remembrance services are worthy of respect, and they don't like hearing the country they were born in, or chose to move to, constantly mocked and belittled. That kind of thing costs votes and turns former supporters into antagonists.

For me personally the final straw was ditching women as a legal entity. I can't forgive that. If other posters want to make out that makes me a Thatcherite, I don't give a fuck. I know what I believe in and it's not my fault Labour decided to tell me to fuck off.

But it also only applies to people who are involved in what are essentially crimes against the state. So it's not like the intent is to just be able to remove citizenship from people who have other citizenship, dual or not.

As for spies, are you really suggesting that it's anti-Semitic to suggest that Israel might have spies in other countries? They have a very good intelligence service. As does the UK, who I have no doubt has spies in Israel.

They talk about offering more supports for those in need, and more high level state programs. Some of the ideas are good, but they don't really touch the real issue for most which is people having good jobs in their own strong viable communities.

I don't think anyone can talk about Labour being about the interests of workers and their communities when they consistently say things like people with concerns about movement of labour are racists, or people who don't like global trading blocks and their political mechanisms are xenophobic.

Agreed. Lots of non-EU immigrants found the EU migration rules discriminatory, too. And the people most affected by unchecked immigration include the most recent previous immigrants, who have the least assets, the most precarious housing, and the worst jobs.

People need their basic needs met before they can begin to give a fuck about the wider society. We see poor Londoners renting a shared room now, they can't even afford a room without a stranger already in it. Do you think you'd be off volunteering as a primary school governor or a local councillor in that situation? Or organising a clean up of the local park, or a themed day at the library? It's just not going to happen. You're struggling to stay decent.

Wtf weed out Jewish spies?!!! And the rest of that list of crimes?

Agree with oink WTAF.

15-

The POINT was to give some examples of why labour have lost are losing support.

There are plenty. The anti-semetism situation is one.

You are determined to get into discussing the situation itself, rather than anything to do with reasons they have lost support. Which is what you were asking about earlier.

Instead you insist on focusing on your personal and very strong opinion that the whole issue arose because of lies, unreasonable demands from Jewish groups/ media, that it was a totally manufactured situation with zero truth to it, that it was all about certain

Jews in labour forcing the party to do xyz. Even if it meant undermining massively the party's reputation across the population as a whole and especially amongst loads of Jewish labour supporters.

The whole thing was completely fabricated by Jews who wanted their own way and would go that far to get it.

That viewpoint. That it's Jewish people with essentially no ethics, morals, no interest in leveraging anti-Semitism for no reason, no interest in anything except their own interests.

Is something that has been commonly asserted for.. centuries? About all sorts of things.

When disputing that there has been or is any issue with anti-semetism in labour. That approach is let's say. Counter productive.

You muppet.

Well that's not quite what it says. It says if an individual is committing war crimes, spying for another country, or inflicting terrorism on the country, and they also have citizenship elsewhere, they may lose their British citizenship. There is a right of appeal.

Given Jews have the possibility of citizenship in Israel, potentially it could apply to more than the average population. Though presumably only if they are doing things like spying for said state.

Are you suggesting British Jews spy for Israel? That's massively antisemitic. Really disgusting.

Why does it make you think of Jews at all? Fucks sake. There was plenty of coverage about how difficult it was to revoke citizenship from dual nationals in Syria. You think the government is going to fit some people up as terrorists to boot them out? You need to stop smoking crack.

This is aimed at dual nationals who went off to fight for Isis in Syria, why do you think it it aimed at Jews?

It applies to British Jews. Black and brown British citizens, British Asians, British people of Irish or any other foreign descent. It also applies to everyone in Northern Ireland. British citizens born to British parents.

@TooBigForMyBoots

If JC said he would pass a bill making it easier to strip British Jews of their citizenship without the need to inform them, there would quite rightly be an uproar.

The Conservatives have actually done this.

Given Jews have the possibility of citizenship in Israel, potentially it could apply to more than the average population. Though presumably only if they are doing things like spying for said state.

I would be concerned about the potential abuses of this and the details of how it would work to prevent that, but it precludes people being made stateless which is what I'd have been most concerned about.

The thing about too much compromise/not enough purity is an interesting conundrum.

My own view is that they've kind of screwed up in both directions at the same time.

They talk about offering more supports for those in need, and more high level state programs. Some of the ideas are good, but they don't really touch the real issue for most which is people having good jobs in their own strong viable communities.

I don't think anyone can talk about Labour being about the interests of workers and their communities when they consistently say things like people with concerns about movement of labour are racists, or people who don't like global trading blocks and their political mechanisms are xenophobic.

Identity politics too seems o be the only option with them. It's not even that they will allow it among other things, they allow nothing else. It isn't just on gender, this is the party who ditched Trevor Phillips. And it is a vote loser, not popular with people especially the working classes, so yes, clearly they are willing to put it before the policies they believe will help people.

Probably Green.

I mean for crying out loud-

'I can't remember ever hearing him say anything I considered antisemitic. If you give me a quote with context, then I'm happy to oblige.'

You considered anti Semitic.
You are the arbiter?
You can't see that is just not a reasonable response?

The fact is that lots of Jewish people DID. Not all, in case I need to reiterate that.

You feel I should go and Google and find and copy and paste so YOU can judge if others being pissed off was reasonable?

I feel that if he really had said such terrible things, it would have been quicker for you to copy and paste them from Google than it was to type that response.

I didn't actually ask to be the arbiter, I only asked you to clarify for me what it was he said that is so problematic. You talk about what's reasonable, but making statements without evidence, refusing to supply evidence when challenged and then attacking others' insistance on evidence instead, is the epitome of unreasonable.

There are plenty of other Jewish Labour members who disagree vehemently with the dominant narrative about antisemitism, and there are organisations that represent those members but have been either ignored or actively fought against by the party. Many of those members have been suspended or expelled - in some cases because they were CLP chairs or secretaries who allowed their branches to discuss issues of antisemitism (such as the statement that got the whip removed from Jeremy Corbyn) against the diktat of the party bureaucracy. This is what I meant by "the wrong kind of jew": the party is heavily invested in promoting the narrative that "the jewish community" as whole is fully behind their attack on the left. The reality is more complex.

For example, all the candidates for the 2020 leadership contest were pressured to sign up to a set of demands by the British Board of Jewish Deputies, setting out how to move the party on from the antisemitism issue. One of those demands was that the Jewish Labour Movement be recognised as the sole representative of the jewish community within the party, have a monopoly over all antisemitism training, etc.

Jeremy Corbyn was a committed anti-racist with a lifelong commitment to campaigning for disadvantaged and oppressed peoples. He believed passionately that the situation in Palestine was wrong and that we should be working to stand up for Palestinians' human rights. It doesn't take a rabid conspiracy theorist to work out that the Israeli state, and certain powerful lobby groups and interests connected to them, are not going to like that very much.

Or that the British establishment and right wing media, who were also crapping themselves over the prospect of an actual left wing political movement in Britain with power, saw an opportunity to use the situation as part of their brutal and ruthless character assasination of Corbyn. Again, almost entirely on the basis of suggestion and assumption. That's all they needed.

But hey, they got rid of all the momentum loonies, right? So now Labour can go back to being respectable, waving flags and opposing corporation tax rises. And everyone here can complain about how it doesn't have any proper left wing policies. Hoorah.

While, as @TooBigForMyBoots points out, the Tories bring in laws that actually discriminate against the citizenship status of ethnic minorities, including jews, and armies of angry bigots try to stop the Lifeboat Association from saving refugees' lives when they drown in the English channel.