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

But this article contradicts the ' factual basis' for the (anti-Semitic) views espoused by the MP! This article presents Oct 7th as an intelligence failure. Of a wrong decision being made that the reports did not indicate a credible attack.

Its not anti- Semitic to say there was an intelligence failing in Israel.

It is anti-Semitic to say Israel definitely knew an attack was coming and connived to allow it for their own desire to destroy Gaza/ Palestine.

Thanks for the Guardian link. From it

Israel’s military and intelligence officials were given a highly detailed warning that Hamas was actively training to take over kibbutzim on the Gaza border and overrun military posts with the aim of inflicting substantial fatalities, according to reports in the Israeli media.
The claim made by Israel’s Channel 12 on Monday evening was based on leaked emails from the Israeli military’s 8200 cyber-intelligence unit discussing the warnings.

So the Israeli media have itself been antisemitic according to many on this thread?!!!
Can any of you explain now why it’s antisemitic??

Read the full article instead of cherry picking quotes out of context which support your prejudice, and then read my post above yours, and all will become clear.

So why apologise then?

Yet another thread derailed.

The Guardian link backs up exactly what I've been hearing from my daughter and her Palestinian husband since 7 October. Now that this has emerged in a credible newspaper, I suspect that far more will follow. The Labour Party candidate only voiced what many people have known for the last four months. I don't think he should have apologised. But if it's the case as another poster suggested that the labour vote is all going to George Galloway, then I would be delighted. He's been out of parliament for too long.

It is the the maths. In the 2019 election 5.0% ( +/- 0.5 %) of the labour vote came from Muslim voters. The Jewish vote counted for less than 0.5% of Labour's vote.
If there's a choice that has to be made, it's pretty obvious who he needs to keep onside.

The difference is that the conspiracy theorists are saying that Israel let the attack happen on purpose. Not that there were errors in acting on intelligence.

I could explain it for you in shorter words, if that would help?

It's a standard tactic on here. Deride your decision not to vote Labour and assume that means you'll vote Tory.

The next tactic when you say you're not voting Tory, is to then blame you for the Tories potentially getting in again, because of your one missing vote!

Labour needs to make itself electable. The electorate aren't responsible for Labour failing to do that for some voters.

Galloway is a ghastly thug. That you have a positive view of him says a lot about you.

Are people not getting this?

@EasternStandard they don’t want to get it.

Indeed they don't. They are antisemitic conspiracists.

Unless your daughter and her DH have been saying, ' There was an unfortunate intelligence failing in Israel that led to a tragic massacre', then the article really does not back up what they have been saying.

Its always remarkable to see people victoriously waving evidence that contradicts rather than supports their position, and apparently being completely unaware of this.

That's the only explanation that I can think of. They are desperate to throw mud. So desperate they don't even read what they are throwing.

My position too. I don't understand how criticising a government must be banned because of historic tropes. Israel is as Israel does, tropes have nothing to do with it.

So, once again, we are blaming jews worldwide for the actions of Israel?

You know what that is, don't you...

Criticising a government based on stuff it actually is doing = probably not anti-Semitic.

Fabricating stuff about a government based on long-standing racist tropes = anti-Semitic.

Body swerving in a debate by swivelling onto a different area when you can't defend your position anymore = not terribly honest debating technique.

Yes and I’m sorry people have to read it and see it supported politically

That you are a fan of Galloway speaks volumes about you, none of it good.

Agreed. I will judge Israel on their actions, and yeah bloodthirsty does seem to fit the bill at the moment!
The Israeli government does not get a free pass from criticism. And criticising them doesn’t make anyone anti semitic. I will defend my right to criticise any government until I’m blue in the face. Christ knows I criticise the Tories enough!

Incredible isn't it?

But not only that, that poster is blaming Jews for the anti-Semitism they are facing. Anti-Semites aren't even responsible for their own racism, Jewish people are.

How can these people not hear themselves?

Does your criticism of the Conservative party involve making up lies about Tories based on racist tropes? If not, its not really comparable to what is being discussed on this thread.

I have never in my life considered Jewish people to have shared character traits, and the idea that I might consider them 'blood thirsty' is laughable. However, in this conflict Israel has murdered thousands of innocent adults and children, so I do consider the current government of Israel to be blood thirsty. They are demonstrating this through their internationally verified actions. Are we supposed to pretend it isn't happening because of historical tropes?

You’re right. Criticism of Israel is not, as many seem that believe, automatically antisemitic. He put it clumsily but it isn’t beyond the realms of possibility that Netanyahu would do it to cling onto power.