It’s dirty politics 101. Find something contentious about your opponent, however minor, special interest, or even unfounded. Find a person or group who will make noise about it. Give them a push. Sit back and watch. Your opponent is tarnished, seemingly without your input. Chuck in a few comments now and then about how badly your opponent has handled the issue, thus making yourself look good.

Yes, there are people genuinely aggrieved by the wording of Labour’s antisemitism policy statement. But does anybody really believe that there was malice in Labour’s writing or discussion of it? Does anyone really believe that making a complaint and helping them rewrite it wouldn’t have been enough? And does anyone really believe that amends to the text of a policy guideline document would ever have become such a highly publicised issue if it wasn’t in the Tories favour to see Labour tarnished in any way they can?

stinkin'

So many wankers are into debating.

If someone says they want to debate they are a fucking wanker. The whole thing is disappointing because it implies racists have a premise that’s fightable from and arrogant pricks think they can “win” while somehow innoculated from poisoning.

I'll grant them one thing, it really does seem like their outlook on the world hasn't changed in 175 years.

Opportunism like that of Hodge, whose desire to get rid of Corbyn is longstanding, is certainly a big part of it. It's also true that the Israeli government and its supporters have been using accusations of anti-Semitism for a good while now to try and discredit Palestinian rights groups.

But it's not nothing, and the reason it's an issue with Labour in particular is because of the support for Palestinian rights and criticism of the Israeli government that tends to come more from left-wing politics (i.e. people with a conscience). The truth is that criticism of Israel does sometimes slip into rhetoric about Jewish conspiracies and the like, and that the leadership in some pro-Palestinian causes doesn't clamp down on it quickly enough. I think Corbyn and Labour have been guilty of this.

Even so, I also think that they are now far more aware of it and are taking measures to deal with it. The definition and examples they produced were actually very strong and legally enforceable, unlike the IHRA text, which will in fact make it more difficult to prosecute cases due to its 'woolly' language. The idea that Corbyn is an anti-Semite is absurd, and is contradicted by his record on support for Jewish causes, but he wasn't attentive enough to the concerns of parts of the Jewish community. Recently though, he seems to have been doing what's necessary to satisfy (both Jewish and Palestinian) people who have genuine, well-informed concerns.

If that was how this happened, then sure, but there’s not much evidence of that. The 68 rabbis who signed that open letter don’t appear to have been cajoled into it by a journalist, for instance.

I don’t see the parallel TBH.

The way I understand it … an official Jewish group wrote a definition of antisemitism, in the hopes that public bodies etc would adopt it as part of their own internal policy guides. Lots of places did, because it makes their lives easier. Much simpler than writing their own. Labour, bless ’em, decided it wasn’t fair or thorough or legal enough and wrote their own. Or made some changes. As one of the few organisations to actually take some care over their policy, instead of copy/pasting, they are now getting pelters.

Okay, fair comment. But that’s not actually the way the issue is being communicated. The way it’s being communicated is “CORBYN HATES JEWS”. Which clearly isn’t a fair and proportional response.

Where is it being communicated like that? Pretty much all the takes I’ve read have been far more nuanced than that and most even go out of their way to say that the writer doesn’t believe that Corbyn personally hates Jews.

Again, that’s fair. But it’s the tabloid/Facebook takes that massive swathes of the UK have been reading.

Yossarian wrote:

Where is it being communicated like that? Pretty much all the takes I’ve read have been far more nuanced than that and most even go out of their way to say that the writer doesn’t believe that Corbyn personally hates Jews.

Have you forgotten Margaret Hodge screaming in Corbyns face that hes an anti semetic racist?

So things are only happening if you've personally witnessed them.

That’s quite patently not what I said.

It looks like the suspects involved in the Skipal poisoning have been identified.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-45421445