#COVID19 | Page 588 | Vital Football

#COVID19

Calvin Plummer said:
Once, properly and unequivocally. Apologies a naughty 10year old gives when they've been caught out but don't really mean it don't count.
Click to expand...

How many apologies do you want?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_UK_Labour_Party

(In April 2018), writing in the Evening Standard, Corbyn said, "We have not done enough fully to get to grips with the problem, and for that the Jewish community and our own Jewish members deserve an apology. My party and I are sorry for the hurt and distress caused".

In August 2018, he said... "People who dish out anti-Semitic poison need to understand: You do not do it in my name. You are not my supporters and have no place in our movement."

In a video release a few days later, Corbyn apologised again, saying, "I acknowledge there is a real problem of antisemitism that Labour is working to overcome. I am sorry for the hurt that has been caused to many Jewish people". In the same month, Corbyn said that the notion that he or Labour posed an "existential threat" to British Jews was "overheated rhetoric", but agreed that factions of the Labour Party had issues with antisemitism and that there was work to be done for Labour to regain the trust of British Jews.

In July 2019, Corbyn said "While other political parties and some of the media exaggerate and distort the scale of the problem in our party, we must face up to the unsettling truth that a small number of Labour members hold anti-Semitic views ... I am sorry for the hurt that has been caused to many Jewish people.

During the 2019 general election, Corbyn apologised on ITV's This Morning programme. A few days before, other members of the shadow cabinet, including Nia Griffith, Richard Burgon and John McDonnell, apologised for antisemitism in their party.
 
pebble said:
How many apologies do you want?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_UK_Labour_Party

(In April 2018), writing in the Evening Standard, Corbyn said, "We have not done enough fully to get to grips with the problem, and for that the Jewish community and our own Jewish members deserve an apology. My party and I are sorry for the hurt and distress caused".

In August 2018, he said... "People who dish out anti-Semitic poison need to understand: You do not do it in my name. You are not my supporters and have no place in our movement."

In a video release a few days later, Corbyn apologised again, saying, "I acknowledge there is a real problem of antisemitism that Labour is working to overcome. I am sorry for the hurt that has been caused to many Jewish people". In the same month, Corbyn said that the notion that he or Labour posed an "existential threat" to British Jews was "overheated rhetoric", but agreed that factions of the Labour Party had issues with antisemitism and that there was work to be done for Labour to regain the trust of British Jews.

In July 2019, Corbyn said "While other political parties and some of the media exaggerate and distort the scale of the problem in our party, we must face up to the unsettling truth that a small number of Labour members hold anti-Semitic views ... I am sorry for the hurt that has been caused to many Jewish people.

During the 2019 general election, Corbyn apologised on ITV's This Morning programme. A few days before, other members of the shadow cabinet, including Nia Griffith, Richard Burgon and John McDonnell, apologised for antisemitism in their party.
Click to expand...

Yeah as usual missing the point. It's an apology for his comments after the report was released
 
So vaccines are being rolled out in Nottm/Notts starting on 9th December, all things being equal.

Having recovered and assuming? I have similar protection as a vaccine would provide, also being super fit and all that; it would seem a 'waste' of a vaccine to give it to me; I'd rather it went to somebody it would benefit more.

Is my logic medical woo, or does a vaccine offer greater protection than a recovered chap?
 
strettea red said:
So vaccines are being rolled out in Nottm/Notts starting on 9th December, all things being equal.

Having recovered and assuming? I have similar protection as a vaccine would provide, also being super fit and all that; it would seem a 'waste' of a vaccine to give it to me; I'd rather it went to somebody it would benefit more.

Is my logic medical woo, or does a vaccine offer greater protection than a recovered chap?
Click to expand...
You probably have quite good immunity. However, I think it is fairly likely to enhance your response.
I think you should take it.
 
in_the_top_one said:
You probably have quite good immunity. However, I think it is fairly likely to enhance your response.
I think you should take it.
Click to expand...

Agreed; I'm unsure if there is a pathway for tracking the recovered/asymptomatic population, either.

The cost of administrating that would probably outweigh the cost of producing sufficient vaccines for all, so forget I asked.
 
in_the_top_one said:
You probably have quite good immunity. However, I think it is fairly likely to enhance your response.
I think you should take it.
Click to expand...

Immunity and reactions are strange things. My daughters other half was quite ill for three weeks back in March/April time before there were any tests. My daughter is deemed high risk, yet when they managed to get antibody tests a month or two later, they had both had it even though my daughter had no symptoms whatsoever. Guess it's the luck of the draw, though doing dental work she's in a high risk job too. Now they're just left to argue about which one of them gave it to the other one !
 
Calvin Plummer said:
Yeah as usual missing the point. It's an apology for his comments after the report was released
Click to expand...

Why should he apologise for telling the truth?

Forest-England's clip shows Starmer agreeing that Corbyn had been deliberately, systematically vilified. That's when he was standing as a leadership candidate.

Now that he's leader, Starmer starts making up his own rules - it's a disciplinary offence for anyone to claim that the scale of the problem within the party was exaggerated.

But that was the main point of the campaign against 'anti-semitic' Corbyn: a lie that Labour is full of anti-Jewish racism, repeated again and again, when in reality you'd find far more in the Tory party.

Unless you see that people were grossly exaggerating the scale of the problem for political reasons, there's no way forward. The minute Labour looks like gaining power and being a tad critical of Israeli government policies, the same lie will emerge again.
 
pebble said:
Why should he apologise for telling the truth?

Forest-England's clip shows Starmer agreeing that Corbyn had been deliberately, systematically vilified. That's when he was standing as a leadership candidate.

Now that he's leader, Starmer starts making up his own rules - it's a disciplinary offence for anyone to claim that the scale of the problem within the party was exaggerated.

But that was the main point of the campaign against 'anti-semitic' Corbyn: a lie that Labour is full of anti-Jewish racism, repeated again and again, when in reality you'd find far more in the Tory party.

Unless you see that people were grossly exaggerating the scale of the problem for political reasons, there's no way forward. The minute Labour looks like gaining power and being a tad critical of Israeli government policies, the same lie will emerge again.
Click to expand...

Pebble we will never agree, you'll always excuse anti-semitism and say ludicrous bigoted things like Palestinians should be remembered on Holocaust Memorial Day. There's really little point us interacting on this subject.

Just keep copy and pasting from people Corbyn kicked out of the party for anti-semitism to prove there is no anti-semitism and I'll keep treating you with disdain.
 
Calvin Plummer said:
Let's say the chief of police isn't racist but he allows racist police to operate with relative impunity and constantly downplays the racism in his police force. Does he have anything to apologise for?
Click to expand...
Yes, clearly.

But all Corbyn was accused of by the EHRC was failing to mend an inefficient complaints system quickly enough - when he was strictly forbidden to intervene personally, and had to rely on a General Secretary who was anti-Corbyn. Strange how the campaign against him was stepped up as soon as he had a sympathetic GS who got things moving.

So I don't see the analogy.

Racist police can harm and even kill people. LP members sharing FB posts among themselves (with no hint of antisemitic rhetoric!) is not such a problem in the first place.
 
Calvin Plummer said:
Let's say the chief of police isn't racist but he allows racist police to operate with relative impunity and constantly downplays the racism in his police force. Does he have anything to apologise for?
Click to expand...

In one breath you imply (with your police analogy) that Corbyn allowed anti-Semitism with 'relative impunity' and the next you talk about him kicking very close allies out of the LP for it.
 
pebble said:
Yes, clearly.

But all Corbyn was accused of by the EHRC was failing to mend an inefficient complaints system quickly enough - when he was strictly forbidden to intervene personally, and had to rely on a General Secretary who was anti-Corbyn. Strange how the campaign against him was stepped up as soon as he had a sympathetic GS who got things moving.

So I don't see the analogy.

Racist police can harm and even kill people. LP members sharing FB posts among themselves (with no hint of antisemitic rhetoric!) is not such a problem in the first place.
Click to expand...

So your cool if the police are racist, just as long as they only share those racist views amongst themselves? Lol ho hum.

Why did Corbyn have them locked out? The fact you can't see posts like "Jews control everything” and “corrupt Jewish puppet bankers” as anti-semitism is deeply concerning How about sharing conspiracy videos that the Jews created Covid? Also not anti-semitism to you?

If you don't think hate speech leads to violence then you're even more nuts than I thought.
 
JC21 said:
In one breath you imply (with your police analogy) that Corbyn allowed anti-Semitism with 'relative impunity' and the next you talk about him kicking very close allies out of the LP for it.
Click to expand...

I do. Yes. There was action after huge pressure was placed upon him and rather reluctantly they kicked out a few members. However the minimisation continued and still does today.
 
Calvin Plummer said:
Pebble we will never agree, you'll always excuse anti-semitism and say ludicrous bigoted things like Palestinians should be remembered on Holocaust Memorial Day. There's really little point us interacting on this subject.

Just keep copy and pasting from people Corbyn kicked out of the party for anti-semitism to prove there is no anti-semitism and I'll keep treating you with disdain.
Click to expand...

Putting words in my mouth again.

I gave a link to a page which showed a couple of FB posts from LP members which allegedly got them suspended or kicked out. All they did was share a wish that Palestinian victims of Israeli oppression were remembered on Holocaust Day.

Not something I'd do myself, so don't make false claims.

But I tried to point out that feelings run deep on both sides of that dispute. Unless they're sending that to a Jewish colleague with bad intent, I don't see any racism there.

Another apparently 'bad' post shared a quote from Michael Rosen - you know, the Jewish guy who used to be children's laureate and who nearly died of covid. Not sure how even you could object to that or call it anti-semitic.

Try reading that Wikipedia article - it might take 30 minutes, but it seems pretty balanced to me. It's the IHRA working definition of antisemitism, eventually adopted by the LP, which is the real problem as it allows any criticism of Israel to be stifled and punished.
 
Calvin Plummer said:
I do. Yes. There was action after huge pressure was placed upon him and rather reluctantly they kicked out a few members. However the minimisation continued and still does today.
Click to expand...

So what do you think went through Corbyn's head. I'll kick my allies out and just let everyone else get on with anti-Semitism?
 
Despite this concern and an internal inquiry led by Baroness Chakrabarti in 2016, our investigation found significant failings in the way the Labour Party has handled antisemitism complaints over the last four years. We found specific examples of harassment, discrimination and political interference in our evidence, but equally of concern was a lack of leadership within the Labour Party on these issues, which is hard to reconcile with its stated commitment to a zero-tolerance approach to antisemitism. The Labour Party must live up to this commitment and acknowledge the impact that multiple investigations and years of failing to tackle antisemitism has had on Jewish people. Rebuilding trust and confidence with its members, the Jewish community and the wider public will be crucial for the future. A transparent and independent antisemitism complaints process, which ensures that all cases of alleged discrimination, harassment or victimisation are investigated promptly, rigorously and without political interference, must sit at the heart of this. However, tackling antisemitism isn’t just about procedures. It is also about making sure that the Labour Party has a culture that clearly reflects its zero tolerance of antisemitism and indeed of all forms of discrimination.


Who was the leader Pebble?
 
Ken Livingstone repeatedly denied that these posts were antisemitic and Investigation into antisemitism in the Labour Party 29 sought to minimise their offensive nature. In his denial, Ken Livingstone alleged that scrutiny of Naz Shah’s conduct was part of a smear campaign by ‘the Israel lobby’ to stigmatise critics of Israel as antisemitic, and was intended to undermine and disrupt the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn MP


Substitute Livingstone with either one of you antisemite apologists
 
You must log in or register to reply here.