Jeremy Corbyn speech at Pro-Israel event

[Guest]

The event was by Labour Friends of Israel. the organizers invited palestinians and their supporters too. the atmosphere was wonderful and Pro-Palestinians and Pro-Israel people were chatting.



Now let that be an end to it!

[Guest]

Hamas call for the destruction of Israel in their charter.

[McAz]

Hamas drops call for destruction of Israel

Hamas, the militant Islamist group, on Monday dropped a call for Israel’s destruction and endorsed the creation of a Palestinian state inside 1967 borders, in a rhetorical shift that analysts said reflected the group’s political ambitions and changing priorities in a new Middle East.

The Hamas policy paper continued to brand Israel, with which it has fought during three military operations since 2009, “a racist, anti-human and colonial Zionist project”

https://www.ft.com/content/26e36354-2ea4-11e7-9555-23ef563ecf9a

Well, you cant blame them for that.

[Guest]

The event was by Labour Friends of Israel. the organizers invited palestinians and their supporters too. the atmosphere was wonderful and Pro-Palestinians and Pro-Israel people were chatting.



Now let that be an end to it!

The Tory smear bots won;t but then at the same rime Corbyn gains more support from decent people who can see through the smears.

[Cannydc]

More than forty senior academics write to condemn what they see as an anti-Corbyn bias in media coverage of the antisemitism debate...

Parts of the letter;

On Sunday, three national titles led with the story while news bulletins focused on the allegations all last week. Dominant sections of the media have framed the story in such a way as to suggest that antisemitism is a problem mostly to do with Labour and that Corbyn is personally responsible for failing to deal with it. The coverage has relied on a handful of sources such as the Board of Deputies, the Jewish Leadership Council and well-known political opponents of Corbyn himself.

Yet where are the Jewish voices who support Corbyn and who welcome his long-established anti-racist record? Where are the pieces that look at the political motivations of some of Corbyn’s most vocal critics?

Where are the columns condemning the links between Conservative MEPs and rightwing parties across Europe in the European Conservatives and Reformists Group which trade on antisemitism?

We condemn antisemitism wherever it exists. We also condemn journalism that so blatantly lacks context, perspective and a meaningful range of voices in its determination to condemn Jeremy Corbyn.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... tisemitism

[Guest]

More than forty senior academics write to condemn what they see as an anti-Corbyn bias in media coverage of the antisemitism debate...

Parts of the letter;

On Sunday, three national titles led with the story while news bulletins focused on the allegations all last week. Dominant sections of the media have framed the story in such a way as to suggest that antisemitism is a problem mostly to do with Labour and that Corbyn is personally responsible for failing to deal with it. The coverage has relied on a handful of sources such as the Board of Deputies, the Jewish Leadership Council and well-known political opponents of Corbyn himself.

Yet where are the Jewish voices who support Corbyn and who welcome his long-established anti-racist record? Where are the pieces that look at the political motivations of some of Corbyn’s most vocal critics?

Where are the columns condemning the links between Conservative MEPs and rightwing parties across Europe in the European Conservatives and Reformists Group which trade on antisemitism?

We condemn antisemitism wherever it exists. We also condemn journalism that so blatantly lacks context, perspective and a meaningful range of voices in its determination to condemn Jeremy Corbyn.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... tisemitism

oh dear..

'The Guardian has published a letter headlined ‘Stop Jeremy Corbyn’s trial by media over antisemitism.’

The paper explains:

‘More than forty senior academics write to condemn what they see as an anti-Corbyn bias in media coverage of the antisemitism debate.’

Mark. Not just forty academics, but forty senior academics. Why this quantity of Regius professors should be writing to the Grauniad about Jeremy Corbyn’s treatment in the media I have no idea. But I read on, and wade my way through the sixth-form politics letter to see who has signed.

Scanning the list I cannot recognise one name. Well, I think, perhaps they are not in fields I am acquainted with. Yet it is not just that. Many of them are from institutions that I have never heard of. A number are from institutions that almost nobody not actually on the payrolls of these universities could have heard of.

Not one of these ‘senior academics’ is at Oxford or Cambridge. Only two signatories are even from one of the UK’s top 10 universities, one of whom, ‘Bart Cammaerts’, is listed as being from the London School of Economics. I see from looking at the LSE’s website that this ‘Senior academic’ is in fact an associate professor in the ‘department of media and communications’ who is currently taking a sabbatical away from the rigorous demands of that role.

A whole glut of the signatories come from Goldsmiths, University of London – a college famous for making its graduates unemployable. But otherwise the signatories are from institutions such as the following:

The University of Brighton

The University of Winchester

Aston University

The University of Lincoln

I hope I am not insulting any readers who have graduated from these institutions if I point out that none could really be considered ‘leading universities’ and that it is therefore at least contestable whether anyone at such institutions could be accurately described as a ‘senior academic’.

But being charitable I look into some of the signatories. I pluck one at random. William Proctor is listed as being at the ‘University of Bournemouth’. His staff page there describes him as a ‘Senior lecturer in journalism, English and communication.’ Here, without editing, is his own university’s description of his ‘work’:

‘He has published on a variety of topics including Batman, James Bond, Spider-Man, The Walking Dead, One Direction fandom, and the reboot phenomenon in popular culture. William is Director of The World Star Wars Project, a five-year study of the franchise from multiple perspectives which will culminate in 2020 with a multilingual, mixed methods global online questionnaire. The first phase of the project, ‘The Force Re-Awakens,’ attracted over 1800 responses in December 2015 prior to the release of Star Wars Episode VII.’

Others on the list are not so august. For example, one ‘Margaret Gallagher’ is not even listed as being at a university. She is merely given as being a ‘senior research consultant’. Where? We wonder. Surely if Margaret was a ‘senior research consultant’ at Cambridge University she would have said so, wouldn’t she? I hereby offer a box of Roses chocolates to the first reader who can find out where Margaret does her ‘senior research consulting’. Who knows, if William Proctor can wrench his head out of his comic books perhaps he could find out?

Of course it is understandable that these people might be die-hard supporters of Jeremy Corbyn. And it might even be understandable that they should wish to excuse the anti-Semitism that Corbyn has encouraged in the Labour party. But why would the Guardian choose to misrepresent their status? In an era in which we are all so exercised about the propagation of ‘fake news’, why should the left’s in-house paper describe someone in Bournemouth who writes about ‘One Direction’ as a ‘senior academic’. One wonders.,

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/the-truth-about-the-senior-academics-defending-corbyn/

[Cannydc]

Oh dear

The Spectator is a weekly British magazine on politics, culture, and current affairs. It is currently owned by David and Frederick Barclay who also own The Daily Telegraph newspaper, via Press Holdings. Its principal subject areas are politics and culture. Its editorial outlook is generally supportive of the Conservative Party....

Past editors include Boris Johnson (1999–2005)

Anyone else surprised that they would do a nasty little ad-hom piece against the letter printed in the Guardian (above) complaining of bias IN THEIR OWN RAG against Corbyn ???

[Cannydc]

Just in case you didn't know that The Spectator has form for ad-homs...

"In August 2015, The Spectator received media attention and criticism after publishing an article by Charles Moore regarding the 2015 Labour Party leadership election titled "Have Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall got the looks for a leadership contest?", in which he wrote "there is an understanding that no leader - especially, despite the age of equality, a woman - can look grotesque on television and win a general election" and discussed the looks of the two female candidates in detail. "

Nice.

[Guest]

Lol. PhD in James bond films.

Ffs you cant make this stuff up.

[Cannydc]

Lol. PhD in James bond films.

Ffs you cant make this stuff up.

Why not?

The Spectator does it regularly.