Why is Starmer Standing by Azhar Ali?

[Dogfisher]

AIBU to think that he should be out on his ear for his blatant anti-Semitism? I actually thought that Starmer was dealing with this in the LP - but this seems to suggest otherwise.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/12/labour-criticised-for-backing-rochdale-candidate-after-offensive-israel-remark

Yes, I don't base my vote on a single issue. Labour are still better than the Tory scum.

I suspect there's more to come from that same meeting.

@TempestTost - it's a ridiculous theory. The Israeli Government doesn't need an excuse. Legally, their position has always been that it is a disputed terrority, and they have always been clear that they would use military force if they wanted. This is obviously greatly at odds with the UN and many other countries politically including the UK, who would not agree with that.

Israel does not need any excuses. What I think people did not expect from them is the use of Russian/Syrian military tactics where you obliterate the infrastructure and people with it.

Labour are still better than the Tory scum

Is that you Angela?

What’s more important - intention or outcome? Is it ok to obliterate a people, as long as that isn’t your primary intention? How much collateral damage is acceptable? Is there no point at which the world will say ‘this far and no further’? I thought there would be, but it seems not…
Genocide or not - just semantics. Look at what’s actually happening to the people.

No, but I wonder if she was at the infamous meeting.

Here you go, here's the definition of antisemitism that the Labour Party have signed up to.

https://holocaustremembrance.com/resources/working-definition-antisemitism

It includes: "

1. Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions."

apple.news/AfTBVpqahSMCnHSigNJmh6g

ITV news. (And I double-checked)

And as stated previously, I don't see that any of these things has happened.

Honestly, I don't think it's possible to cause that much suffering without serious intent.

Yes. However other people do.

Um no, im asking you to answer a question.

You don't think that what Israel is doing is right, though you also don't think they intend to commit genocide?

Is accusing Israel of genocide antisemitism or not.

There has been some tenuous interpretation though

In your opinion.

If you think considering making disparaging comments about "people in the media from certain Jewish quarters" to be anti-Semitic is tenuous then that says far more about you than everyone else.

No.

Some people have interpreted that as an accusation that 'Jews control the media'.
I don't. I interpret it as pointing out that some (emphasis on some) Jewish groups are very vocal about their belief that criticism of Israel is automatically antisemitic and this has been widely reported 'in the media'. As have the views of very vocal opponents of Israel's actions (who Infront believe 'control the media' either.

Is there a reason why you consider your interpretation should be given precedence?

To be fair, if you have been on the receiving end of assumptions based on anti Semitic tropes i can see why you would be more likely to see that in your interpretation, due to your loved experience.

If you are confident your interpretation just explain that, you undermine yourself with comments such as 'says more about you than other people.' similarly phrases such as 'ashamed' and 'disgusted' up thread.

You will notice that I am explaining my viewpoint without lowering myself to commenting on what your opinion 'says about you'. It says you have a different opinion. No more, no less. I suspect that you mainly discuss this issue with people who share your viewpoint entirely in something of an echo chamber, hence your absolute outrage that other people don't see things exactly as you do, and this could only be explained by them being morally inferior.

All your waffle aside HelloWorld it is very clear what this man meant and you are pretending not to see it. You do you.

"The media, and some of the people in the media from certain Jewish... er... quarters were giving him shit about what he said".

TBH I'm not sure how the fuck you twisted that into to "the media have reported on some Jewish groups being vocal about their belief that criticism of Israel is automatically anti-Semitic".
"The media, and some of the people in the media from certain Jewish... er... quarters were giving him shit about what he said".

He's clearly saying that Jewish people in the media are giving Andy McDonald crap. I mean you have to be really willfully blind to interpret "Jewish people in the media" as "the media reporting on Jewish people".

To be fair, if you have been on the receiving end of assumptions based on anti Semitic tropes i can see why you would be more likely to see that in your interpretation, due to your loved experience.

You don't have to be Jewish to know that the idea of Jewish people controlling the media is widespread and goes back decades if not centuries. Don't pretend you're not aware of this.

Getting angry isn't helping you.
There are indeed vocal groups who label any criticism of Israel as antisemitic and this perspective is propagated by large sections of the media. You are interpreting what he said as controlling the media.
I disagree.
Getting agitated isn't going to change that.
Listen to the venom in your post 'how the fuck'...'twisted'...'wilfully blind'.
I am not blind to those tropes but I don't believe that is what is happening here.

People should not be accused of something because of a trope related to their protected characteristics.
However if someone's actions indicate they might be guilty of something it is ok to say that.

I'm from a city where there are lots of tropes about gangs and crime. Would it be wrong to label me a criminal because of the city I'm from. Of course not.
Would it be ok to call me a criminal if I were caught climbing out of someone's window with a bag of nicked goods. Absolutely, that's not discrimination.

No group religiously, ethnically, culturally or otherwise is beyond reproach for their actions.

I feel very angry that for a long time, those opposed to Israel's atrocities in Gaza have been labelled antisemitic. I am angry that that accusation is still coming loudly through the media. That does not mean I think someone is controlling the media.

And let's not forget we had a prime minister who referred to islamic women in hijab as letterboxes, black people as having watermelon smiles etc ... I hope you were suitably vocal when faced undisputable blatant racism as when someone says something which, some people are interpreting as antisemitic.

I'm not angry, or agitated. If anything I'm sad. Sad that people like you still exist, you go out of your way to claim that what any reasonable person can see is anti-Semitism isn't. Who dedicates their time into gaslighting people I to believing that saying "Jewish people in the media" doesn't mean "Jewish people in the media".

And let's not forget we had a prime minister who referred to islamic women in hijab as letterboxes, black people as having watermelon smiles etc ... I hope you were suitably vocal when faced undisputable blatant racism as when someone says something which, some people are interpreting as antisemitic.

Well that says it all doesn't it? If it's against Jewish people it's not blatant racism, it's a thing which some people interpret as anti-Semitic.

What is interesting is that you accept that some people who have been on the receiving end of antisemitism have a different lived experience of antisemitism to you and therefore might interpret things in a different way while completely ignoring that their lived experience of antisemitism might be exactly the reason why you should shut up and listen to them instead of telling them that they're wrong.

Different peoples perspectives are relevant. They can make us over or under sensitive to things.
The problem is that when someone has a negative lived experience it can make them more likely to a particular interpretation, which is not necessarily more accurate.
The issues being discussed affect everyone because our government are taking a stance and decisions around the conflict.
Nobody affected by the issues needs to shut up. Everyone needs to listen to each other.
My lived experience is of being outraged at death and injury in Gaza and vocally calling for a peaceful way forward and having people attempt to gaslight me into believing this is antisemitic.
This is nothing at all to the horrific lived experiences of those in Gaza.
If you want to share your lived experience please do, it would more useful to shared understanding of those issues than telling people to shut up.

Thanks to the UK government insisting on standing by and allowing genocide, and actively attacking those who stand against it, I have teenagers who are genuinely worried that the will be conscripted into the army or that there will be some sort of terrorist attack in the UK triggered by this.

I have seen a comment up thread saying 'its ok to be antisemitic but not anti-Islamic,' showing that the dialogue of not being able to criticise Israel and their allies, for fear of accusations of anti-semitism are emboldening those who clearly harbour anti-Islamic' sentiment.

I am going to leave this thread. There are several posters who are clearly.only used to hearing discussions in an echo chamber and refuse to see that other perspectives may be relevant.

Different peoples perspectives are relevant. They can make us over or under sensitive to things.

AND it can make people know more about things than other people.

People who have experience of things know more about it than other people.

My lived experience is of being outraged at death and injury in Gaza and vocally calling for a peaceful way forward and having people attempt to gaslight me into believing this is antisemitic.

This dude was complaining about the actions of Jews in the media. It doesn't take much experience of antisemitism to know that this is a thing.

If you don't know that this is a thing then you perhaps should do more research into antisemitism.

I ve no idea how the DM got hold of the speech.

Its not unknown for reporters to pretend they are someone who they are not or to pay someone to do this sort of stuff, clearly it was felt though that last October was not the right time to release...

Not criticising the DM by the way, its important these people are driven out of all parties, as the Tories have just down with their council leader in Salisbury who has abhorrent views too.