Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

So he lied then

432 replies

Metoodear · 13/08/2018 15:23

We’re are the calls for Corbyn and the rest of the any semites to step down

www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/08/13/jeremy-corbyn-admits-present-wreath-laid-munich-massacre-terrorists/

The silence speaks for it self

OP posts:
Thread gallery
15
Puzzledandpissedoff · 14/08/2018 15:31

I'm getting a strong whiff of 'Jews should stop making such a fuss'

You and me both. It's also why I referred last night to Jews' almost unique position of being expected to be told what is and is not discrimination

TornFromTheInside · 14/08/2018 15:35

We asked that Labour put in a fixed timetable to deal with anti-Semitism cases; Corbyn and his team said that would not be possible.
I can see why he couldn't offer a fixed timetable. Pretty difficult to do that I would imagine.

We asked that they should expedite the long-standing cases involving serial offenders Ken Livingstone and Jackie Walker; Corbyn made only vague commitments.
Vague commitments are typical of politics, but yes, I would have expected/wanted something more from that.

We asked that no MP should share a platform with somebody expelled or suspended for anti-Semitism; Corbyn said he could not give us that guarantee.
Hmm, is he saying he can't guarantee it won't happen? in which case, he can't. Is he saying it 'shouldn't happen'? in which case he can certainly back that - but for how long should a conviction stand?

We asked that there be transparent oversight of Labour’s disciplinary process. Corbyn was not forthcoming."
Should be transparency of all their processes. Absolutely. That's not the same as transparency of all the details of an investigation as part of that process - that's a lot more problematic.

It's politics, you're going to get political answers and evasion.

bananafish81 · 14/08/2018 15:47

"It's politics, you're going to get political answers and evasion."

Hang on, when it's challenging questionable behaviour of the Tories, they need to be held to account.

But when it's Corbyn and anti-semitism that can just be shrugged off with: "It's politics, you're going to get political answers and evasion."

Does that apply to other issues? Should we shrug Tory islamophobia off with 'it's politics, meh'? How about universal credit? Brexit?

What is it that people want him to actually do? - you say 'actions' but the Labour Party has processes in place to deal with such prejudices. If those processes aren't working, they need to change until they are.

Another one that has already been mentioned on the thread. Adoption of the international definition of anti semitism.

I am a British Jew and don't consider criticism of Israel as antisemitic. I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with criticism of Israel, I'm a British Jew who is horrified by the actions of the state of Israel. It's abhorrent.

Labour refused to adopt the internationally recognised definition of anti semitism, and defined their own which deliberately omits "comparing Israeli polices to those of the Nazis." as being antisemitic.

I think the Israeli policies and actions are horrific and absolutely should be criticised.

But comparison of Israel to Nazis being deemed as totally OK and not anti semitic doesn't sit well with me

For example, the attached wouldn't be deemed as anti semitic. Which doesn't seem like legitimate criticism of the actions of the state of Israel to me.

Jonathan Freedland recently put forward an interesting analogy, he said imagine the police, post Stephen Lawrence and the charge of institutional racism, had been given guidelines from the leaders of the black community. Then imagine the police rejected these, instead a mostly white group of police officials, without consultation, drew up its own anti-racism guidelines. Imagine these officials then said to the black community 'here are the guidelines we're following', and when that community complained that these did not address their concerns, those police officials responded how dare you complain, you should be grateful.

He used a similar analogy in this Guardian article:

"It’s as if Labour unilaterally decided to rewrite a widely accepted set of guidelines on sexual harassment, in defiance of opposition from every women’s organisation and without consulting them, and delegating the task to a majority male sub-committee, and then expected women to applaud the new document."

But Jews should stop making a fuss.

So he lied then
Bombardier25966 · 14/08/2018 15:51

And it now transpires that not one of the Munich terrorists was buried in the cemetery where the memorial took place. They're buried in Libya, not even the same country!

evolvepolitics.com/there-were-8-munich-terrorists-none-are-buried-at-the-tunis-cemetery-that-jeremy-corbyn-visited/

People need to stop believing everything they read and check the facts for themselves.

Bombardier25966 · 14/08/2018 15:58

But comparison of Israel to Nazis being deemed as totally OK and not anti semitic doesn't sit well with me

It's not being deemed as totally OK at all, but in some circumstances the comparison is justified. The omitted wording stifles legitimate debate. The rest of the policy (which includes the vast majority of the definition) still gives more than ample grounds for unjustified comparisons to be dealt with as a disciplinary issue.

TornFromTheInside · 14/08/2018 15:59

*Hang on, when it's challenging questionable behaviour of the Tories, they need to be held to account.

But when it's Corbyn and anti-semitism that can just be shrugged off with: "It's politics, you're going to get political answers and evasion."

Does that apply to other issues? Should we shrug Tory islamophobia off with 'it's politics, meh'? How about universal credit? Brexit?*

Nobody said it was ok! - but it's no surprise that those sort of questions get vague answers.
More specific questions are better.

If you ask 'can we expedite a long standing case?' then you've left a door wide open for a timescale on it.
Why not ask 'When can we expect a decision on Ken Livingstone'?

If you ask that no MP should share a platform with another expelled for suspended for anti-semitism'... what platforms? socialmedia? impossible to stop. Radio? impossible to stop. What do you mean by a platform?

You're looking for very concrete answers, but they cannot be given to such wide-open questions.

We absolutely should keep asking questions, but they need to be far more specific and hard hitting. I suspect you'll still get evasion though.

It's not ok to be evasive, but no politician will tie themselves down if they can help it. Questions need to get more and more speficic like Paxman used to be - but for the large part political interviews are now media entertainment, not actually probing journalism.

Justanotherlurker · 14/08/2018 16:04

And it now transpires that not one of the Munich terrorists was buried in the cemetery where the memorial took place. They're buried in Libya, not even the same country!

Anyone arguing in good faith is well aware of that fact.

Trying to backtrack and muddy the waters is beginning to look desperate.

Jeremy Corbyn has admitted for the first time being present as a wreath was laid for members of the terrorist group who carried out the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre.

The Labour leader said yesterday that he watched the wreath being placed to honour members of the Black September group, which killed 11 Israeli athletes, but did not “think” he was involved.

TornFromTheInside · 14/08/2018 16:06

I've already named all 8 DIRECTLY involved in the Munich incident.

The one being discussed in the media was alleged to be part of the same organisation, but yes, people are making them out to be the actual killers.

There's a legitimate claim that being part of the same organisation that sanctioned it effectively makes them killers too - that's a very valid argument. I'm ok with that view. I think it's a grey area and needs a lot more understanding of the organisation to be sure.

I just object to how things are being portrayed as 'Paid tribute to Munich terrorist'. Based on the evidence so far, that's a very misleading (to my eyes).

TornFromTheInside · 14/08/2018 16:10

The Labour leader said yesterday that he watched the wreath being placed to honour members of the Black September group,

Again this is very misleading.
He said we watched the wreath being laid to what he believed were victims on terrorism - in this case Palestinians, although one man in particular was assassinated in Paris (the PLO Intelligence man alleged to have been part of Black September, but not one of the Munich 8).

He did not admit to the ceremony as being in honour of Black September - which is how that post reads. That was never said or admitted to.

Justanotherlurker · 14/08/2018 16:11

The one being discussed in the media was alleged to be part of the same organisation, but yes, people are making them out to be the actual killers.

No, the article that Labour and Evolve are relating to specifically said members of the same organisation.

DaisyTwirl · 14/08/2018 16:21

In response to Jeremy's latest (today) version of events:

(Screenshots from twitter as can't do link)

(1)

So he lied then
So he lied then
So he lied then
DaisyTwirl · 14/08/2018 16:22

In response to Jeremy's latest (today) version of events:

(Screenshots from twitter as can't do link)

(2)

So he lied then
So he lied then
DaisyTwirl · 14/08/2018 16:26

So the memorial to the '85 bombing is the one that he claims he was involved in (yet pictures show him at the back).

The graves of the others which he said he 'doesn't think he was involved with' are in a different location, and the pictures show him being front & centre for the wreath laying, and even holding the thing.

The man is a liar.

SillySallySingsSongs · 14/08/2018 16:28

People need to stop believing everything they read and check the facts for themselves.

Well that goes for everyone including those that believe he won the Nobel peace prize.

Squawkbox deleted articles yesterday as they had been proven to be wrong. No corrections, no we made a mistake, just deleted them.

SillySallySingsSongs · 14/08/2018 16:28

So the memorial to the '85 bombing is the one that he claims he was involved in (yet pictures show him at the back).

The graves of the others which he said he 'doesn't think he was involved with' are in a different location, and the pictures show him being front & centre for the wreath laying, and even holding the thing.

Yep.

TornFromTheInside · 14/08/2018 16:32

Erm 'part of the same organisation' and 'members' are pretty synonymous.

But they weren't any of the 8 who actually carried out the Munich murders.

Atef Bseiso was the man who Corbyn alluded to in his Morning Star post - at the time he attended the ceremony. He didn't name him, but alluded to him. He was a PLO intelligence officer and close to Arafat.
He was allegedly killed by Mossat, but they deny it. Mossat say he was killed by his own (factions). That's Middle East intelligence for you - they didn't carry out the killing but know who did! We will never know the truth.

That guy was alleged to have been part of the Black September planning or sanctioning. Precisely what his role was, or was not it very speculative, and again, the subject of lots of propaganda from various quarters.

Now there seems to be other accusations about graves in the same location of the wreath laying. Precisely WHO was being 'honoured' is vague and it's hard to know if he merely helped place a wreath close to others, or unwittingly laid it directly for them etc. But, none of the graves or monuments are of the actual 8 who committed the Munich atrocities. They are 'associated' with - but to what extent remains to be seen.

The best I can liken it to is the IRA and Sinn Fein, where it's so difficult to fully know what levels of association are really going on. If you're part of Sinn Fein, are you backing the IRA? not necessarily. But you probably have a heck of a lot of sympathy for their cause!

But there are two tracks going on here:

  1. Precisely how close / involved where these people with the actual Munich events
  2. Regardless of the above, how aware was Corbyn? if it's taking our press so long to work out the precise nature of the links, then it's likely Corbyn may not have appreciated the full picture too.
TornFromTheInside · 14/08/2018 16:38

Sorry, but people can't take two stills from ceremonies and cherry pick an interpretation of them. That's ludicrous. Being at the front of one shot and being at the back of another gives no real indication of anything.

He should be criticised on his words and his proveable actions, but not fairly isolated photographs that omit so much context.

DaisyTwirl · 14/08/2018 16:39

There's a very good, comprehensive thread on twitter - it's too long to screenshot (52 posts) & I can't figure out how to paste a link unfortunately.

The poster is @njstone9 & it was started at 06:15 today.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 14/08/2018 16:40

Labour refused to adopt the internationally recognised definition of anti semitism

Since this has been raised, please can anyone tell me if there's any evidence of the jewish community being consulted over it? I'm aware there are claims that they weren't, but it's getting to the point where it's hard to know what to believe any more

I'll be clear in saying it would be almost inconceivable, like deciding policies on women without consulting the relevant folk, but I'd just like to know (and google's too infested with this latest row to be any help)

BTW, please don't anyone tell me we don't know where he's been or what he's done; this issue is very recent so I'd think there'd be something on record somewhere?

DaisyTwirl · 14/08/2018 16:41

Don't know if this will work...

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1029235068336726016.html

DaisyTwirl · 14/08/2018 16:50

Puzzledandpissedoff - from what I can gather it was members of the NEC only who formulated the code.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jewish-labour-party-antisemitism-row-jeremy-corbyn-munich-movement-ihra-a8491376.html%3famp

bananafish81 · 14/08/2018 16:54

Since this has been raised, please can anyone tell me if there's any evidence of the jewish community being consulted over it? I'm aware there are claims that they weren't, but it's getting to the point where it's hard to know what to believe any more

As I understand it, from what the NEC have disclosed

The NEC discussed it and agreed it behind closed doors

And then decided once there was uproar to reopen the discussion about the definition, but this time with consultation with the Jewish community.

A Labour party spokesperson said: “The NEC upheld the adoption of the code of conduct on antisemitism but, in recognition of the serious concerns expressed, agreed to reopen the development of the code, in consultation with Jewish community organisations and groups, in order to better reflect their views.”

The consultation is happening now, after the decision was made, only because there was uproar.

Source: www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/17/labour-agrees-to-fresh-antisemitism-consultation-after-stormy-debate

Puzzledandpissedoff · 14/08/2018 17:07

Thank you, daisy and bananafish - so if this (and especially their own spokeman's remarks) are right, it appears that a pretty major decision was reached and the community's views not invited until after the outcry

I wonder if this has happened with any other ethnic minority? Hmm

SillySallySingsSongs · 14/08/2018 17:16

it appears that a pretty major decision was reached and the community's views not invited until after the outcry

That's it. How many other minorities aren't allowed to decide what is racism against them?

TornFromTheInside · 14/08/2018 17:16

I read the njstone9 page - there is a lot of sleuthing and supposition in it.
It's a good read, but it doesn't prove much either way. He makes a few assumptions and asserts that Corbyn as adopting passive tones in his voice - thus nervous etc. These are assumptions not fact.
He's made assumptions about not laying a wreath in one place because he cannot find a photo of that.

If I had to take a guess - and it's purely a guess, I'd say Corbyn's done his 'I'm friends with all, Mr Peaceful' routine and ended up laying a wreath marking some highly controversial Palestinian figures. I doubt he would do the same again knowing what he now knows. But that's entirely supposition on my part. It's the gut feeling I get from all this - he's naively tried to be respectful and hasn't grasped the significance.

Others might take a more cynical view - as is their right, but I don't think njstone's blog offers conclusive evidence either way.