WARNING!
Right on Labour, Ian Austin, will condemn this as all highly antisemitic. And, this is anti-James O'Brien, although I love both of his books (named as the very last paragraph, below) and, sometimes, half-listen to his show. James is especially brilliant when children phone in - Thursdays, 12 noon - but only in holidays, I think!
LBC, BBC, EHRC to see the light.
I listened, on catch up LBC radio, to the full 3 hrs of the James O'Brien show on Thursday, 29 October 2020. I don't think he gave Corbyn's supporters a fair hearing to get what they wanted to say off their chest over that day's report from the EHRC. James gave them short shrift and said he did not want callers phoning in to say that Corbyn was simply terrific and more sinned against than sinning. James was too doctrinaire and dogmatic, giving me the impression that only his view was the correct one. He was inflexible over insisting that callers defending Corbyn must only answer his, James's narrowly defined questions, eg, over how the caller responded to EHRC's three legal breaches over antisemitism. Or, they could only answer the question, how did the Labour Party "end up in such a deep and ugly hole?" If they were not answering his question, the call was politely and pleasantly terminated as soon as decent, with James saying "I don't want to fall out with you" but ... And, once more his own view was sometimes stated! Or he said, "You know we are going to part company at this point?", as though he had no wish to hear any point of view other than his own. Far too narrow-minded, I thought. He has got to learn to allow less eloquent listeners phoning in to get everything off their chest before interrupting or ending the call. He interrupts too much!
Unlike presenters and journalists on Channel 4 News, James makes no attempt to be neutral and unbiased. He is far too partisan, a black and white man who seems to be unable to see moral greys. But, certainly, entertainingly provocative!
ALL EMBRACING ANTISEMITISM from the IHRA to catch out our enemies like Corbyn.
James failed to understand that people have different views over what antisemitism is. He seemed to think it was obvious and, that there were no differing interpretations over where you draw the line between freedom of thought/speech and, racism. What any Jew claims is antisemitism must be antisemitism might be James' view. I think, freedom of speech, satire and attempts at comedy should be allowed without condemnation and censure. Why can't we poke fun at the ancient Jewish stereotypes in cartoons, murals and parables? Or, allow an innocuous sentence in a 2011 Forward to a reprint of a 100-year-old book? James 'quick to find antisemitism' O'Brien, gleefully fell on Corbyn as an antisemite for this sentence. A rather extreme condemnation of the poor, much-maligned man?
On James's Show there was one caller who mentioned at his Labour Party meeting there were members who were so desperate not to be seen as antisemitic that they were asking what antisemitism is, exactly so they wouldn't be condemned like Corbyn. They were as nonplussed by it all as I was!
PRINCE HARRY
Why can't Livingstone be allowed to mention a book where it was stated that Hitler wanted to get rid of the Jews to Palestine in the 1930s? Or, Prince Harry be allowed to fool around at a fancy dress party in a Nazi uniform? Why can't every aggressive, warmongering nation (even the current occupant of the unholy Holy Land) be reminded of Nazi actions and how that ended so horribly for them in 1945? Why is Israel exempt from having a guilty conscience?
NOT ONLY PRINCE HARRY IN NAZI UNIFORM - but a Jewish Prime Minister, too!
Such was the anger at the possibility of peace between Israel and Palestine in 1995, that our right-wing friends dressed up an image of Prime Minister Rabin in Nazi SS uniform! How's that for antisemitism?!
ANOTHER JC 'pilloried'
What is so wrong with Jesus of Nazareth, in his very likely made-up story of the Good Samaritan, criticising, poking fun at and, putting in a very bad light indeed, his own religious leaders not caring one jot in seeing either a fellow Jew or, one of their traditional enemy beaten up and lying on the road half dead with all his worldly goods stolen? Then, to cap it all, a despised Samaritan being the hero of the story! No wonder the JC of Nazareth was hated and pilloried by the religious establishment of his day. The state of Israel has done much worse over its 72 years since its foundation. Created out of victory in war and, without Arab/Middle East agreement at the time. In 2019, both the Jewish establishment and the Christian establishment had it in for Corbyn, the Arch Antisemite - the former Chief Rabbi, Jonathan Sacks and the Archbishop of Canterbury united in a common bond in condemning Corbyn. This is another antisemitic paragraph from my pen.
TREACHEROUS CORBYN in his contact with our enemies.
Similarly, the JC of Islington North has been pointing out how the Palestinians have lost out, badly, since the foundation of the State of Israel in 1948. Corbyn is seen as a traitor with his contact and talks with the other side - Irish Republicans and Arab Muslims. Hence, he is seen as a threat and a traitor and unfit to be prime minister because he is not on our side; not "one of us" (M Thatcher) in supporting our important post-War wars to reinforce and impose Wealthy White Western democracy and domination in the world.
One JC was "the friend of tax collectors and sinners". The other JC was a friend of terrorists and antisemites. Both as wicked and as bad as each other! One, a self-hating Jew, as some of today's Jews might claim; the other JC a hater of Jews. Such is the glorious mixed up and diverse world in which we all have to get on with each other - or, perish as fools. Exactly as we are doing. Shockingly. Ecocide.
CONDEMNING A LITTLE LESS AND UNDERSTANDING A LOT MORE (not how John Major put it!)
Can we not have irony, satire, tongue in cheek cartoons, murals, other images and parables put about without being afraid of the label 'antisemitism' being pasted on one? Clearly, not. As with Muslim sensitivities over images of the Prophet, so with Jewish sensitivities, we must hold back, zip the lip and do nothing to upset either faith/culture. Multi-cultural, multi-beliefs, means multi-understanding and multi-restraint. But tolerance and peaceful co-existence must work both ways. We all have to accept, to give, over both Jewish and Muslim sensitivities to stop violence and abuse. But, perhaps, both lots of adherents might like to give, to concede, too - would they, please?
THE 0.3% OF LABOUR MEMBERS who drew in the EHRC investigation and their two proven cases.
The old antisemitism is hatred, showing discrimination, prejudice and being hostile to Jews. The new antisemitism seems to be of two kinds. The first kind is the outrageous threats of violence, actual abuse and disgusting name-calling towards Jewish Labour MPs from members of the public that should be a matter for the Police. Members of the party should have been expelled once the evidence against them was obvious and irrefutable or, a guilty conviction in court. Yet, only 0.3% of the membership had a case against them for possible antisemitism, it seems. Yet, we had an 18-month major EHRC investigation into the Labour Party. No doubt, James would call 0.3% as trivialising "the deep and ugly" problem at the heart of the Labour party. (He didn't do so on air, from what I heard.)
Next, you have the banter of the office where, if offence is taken, then displeasure is made crystal clear to the perpetrator by the victim. If it happens again, you take it up with your line manager for something to be said to stop that kind of talk. If it happens for the third time, then the perpetrator is taken to a disciplinary hearing.
THE ULTIMATE ANTISEMITISM was seen ...
... in the right-wing Jews who wanted the assassination of their very own Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin, 25 years ago this week - and actually carried out, too. Astonishing! Yet, it is these very same people who are most accusatorial and condemnatory of the antisemitic Labour Party and the lovely, empathetic, compassionate man who accidentally became the leader in 2015. The man was noted for opposing every UK war the nation indulged in during his lifetime. An allotment holder and vegetarian, I believe! No wonder, like me, he did not exactly scream in delight at all the wars and killings in the Holy Land. No wonder we are both antisemites. We could be nothing less!
ALL QUIET ON THE ANTISEMITISM FRONT EITHER SIDE OF CORBYN'S LEADERSHIP
How was it that within weeks (or was it days?) of lifetime pro-Palestinian, Corbyn becoming leader - inheriting the top job from a Jew, Ed Milliband - there were heard complaints of antisemitism by the new leader when he had been around in the party for fifty years? Had a significant number of the HQ staff been changed from Milliban pro-Jewish staff to Corbyn pro Palestinian staff members? I think that is unlikely. So how was it that Milliband never had antisemitism problems but within weeks/days of Corbyn becoming leader, the Party was embroiled in antisemitism and racism for over four years? Did the EHRC find it proved that Corbyn was an antisemite? I don't think it did.
Who were the Jewish Labour MPs who did not suffer threats, abuse and, name-calling? Was it only Ed Milliband? And why did Ed escape the antisemites? However, in November 2014, he was losing funding from supporters of Israel who thought this Jew was not sufficiently pro Israel. He was toxic enough but Corbyn was the last straw. He was going to be taken to the cleaners, good and proper. And he certainly was!
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-funding-crisis-jewish-donors-drop-toxic-ed-miliband-9849299.html
https://www.channel4.com/news/i-have-never-seen-any-evidence-of-racism-of-antisemitism-or-anything-closely-related-to-jewish-labour-member-andrew-feinstein-on-corbyn
'How To Be Right'; 'How Not To Be Wrong'; how did I do? Right or wrong? Or, just … ?
Tim Weller
On the Labour Party current furore; as someone who left them well over 20 years ago, I cannot claim to be an expert on their internal affairs. However, the EHRC report only lists 2 claims/instances of antisemitic impropriety; JUST TWO! One refers to a statement by Ken Livingstone, which for the life of me I cannot see as antisemitic, and the other was about some obscure councillor who was dealt with by expulsion, and the matter thereby resolved, some time ago. How on earth this justifies the endless accusations of antisemitism and the suspension of Jeremy Corbyn is beyond me. (By the way, the EHRC report does not claim that the LP is institutionally antisemitic).
I see the whole saga as a Zionist offensive to prevent a pro-Palestinian politician ending up as the PM. It should have been seen as such and fought resolutely right from the outset but it was not; appeasement was always the order of the day. JC and his movement have now paid the price.
Bob
No comments:
Post a Comment