26-Nov 2022 : LAB: 50% / CON: 27% / LDEM: 9% / GRN: 4%

[alec]

Danny - have you found those quotes yet?

Unless you do, everyone will just assume you're a lying blowhard, and will discount everything else you say on the subject.

The alternative is to apologise and accept you made stuff up.

[Danny]

Apr 25, 2023 19:13:48 GMT pjw1961 said:

Firstly, I don't for a moment think that she is personally antisemitic,....

However, the letter is deeply problematic, as she now recognises herself. It argues in effect for a hierarchy of racism - Jews and Travellers suffer "prejudice" but not racism, which is restricted to people of African descent.

Have only read excerpts, but I doubt she either intended or literally said the problem is confined to africans. Racial prejudice is between people of visible physical differences. Which group feels discriminated against is usually determined by it being the minority and obviously this varies place to place.

Abbott seemed to be making a distinction between discrimination based upon attributes other than race. In fact, without looking back again to the quotes I don't recall this being divided into a hierachy. Just differing causes. Unless you understand the causes, then you will not be able to understand the discrimination and maybe neutralise it. For example, the real core of Nazi discrimination against jews was that it argued jews had stolen the nation's wealth. The root of this seems to come from a tendency by Jews to stick together and help each other. And in classic prisoner's dilemma mode, demonstrated that if you do do this, then the whole group benefits more. Racial type was not central to this, it had nothing to do with what Jews look like, which was much the same as Germans. The core was jealousy at the Jew's success, which has indeed from time to time been so great as to threaten the authority of many states. Its not unlike the US victory in the cold war, defeating the USSR economically.

The only sustainable stance to take is that all forms of racism - by any group, against any group - are wrong and equally abhorrent.

Then you have to take the stance that all border controls must be abandoned. The UK education budget should be spent to best effect, which would mean spending most of it abroad in developing countries.  We should send most of the NHS on missions abroad. You could not then accept any 'them' and 'us' distinction, which however is a core consideration for every world government as things stand, and always has been.

Which brings me to the third point. It may be unfair, but people on the (broad) left have to hold themselves to a higher standard.

So will the left espouse extreme communism? I dont think it will, in fact it seems much closer to a typical right wing position on society. So why must it be so extreme about this subset of discrimination?

[Danny]

Apr 25, 2023 20:55:58 GMT Mr Poppy said:

I don't read every post but I will again point out

Under the Equality Act, there are nine protected characteristics:

- age
- disability
...

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/your-rights-under-equality-act-2010

Why is this relevant? Are you arguing this is a matter of lawbreaking? if so, then you need to reflect that many, many laws have existed over time, which banned jews, sent them to death camps, banned catholics, banned irish, enslaved blacks, enslaved whites, sent homosexuals to jail, sent adulterers to jail, sentenced attempted suicides to death, executed witches...and so on. That something happens to be the law is absolutley no guarantee of its moral standing or justifies anyone supporting it.

[Danny]

Apr 25, 2023 21:59:37 GMT pjw1961 said:

Diane Abbot was/is a sharp and clever lady and used to be a very effective television performer, but she has definitely lost something lately and sometimes to preserve a legacy it is best to know when to leave the stage. Churchill for example stayed in parliament at least 1 term too long.

If you ever watched the andrew neil politics show where Michale Portillo and Diane Abbott were regular panelists, you will know that Portillo was always the cleverer of the two. Their knowing each other dated back to schooldays, I think they said. They were chosen as panelists presumably because at the time the show was created they were both sidelined politicians with no hope of political advancement, and therefore willing to speak at least a bit impartially over the doings of their own parties as well as their opponents. Portillo has continued a career outside politics, whereas Abbott actually became more central to labour when Corbyn unexpectedly became leader. She has therefore become a much higher profile target, especially for the labour right.

Incidentally, if you think white discrimination against coloured is bad, then you have not analysed the intense racial hatred between various components of that coloured mix. Or indeed religious hatred. Again this problem based upon past wars, religious differences, which are not simply physical. Physical tends to be highlighted because its immediately visible, but in truth may have nothing to do with the real cassus belli. Nazis might have sent Jews to extermination camps, but they also sent their armies to shoot racially identical French, English, Poles, whichever neighbouring country they just decided to sieze. Russians currently are waging war against ethnically identical Ukrainians. State sponsored discrimination at the max.

[Danny]

Interesting story on R4 about Prince Harry suing the Sun for hacking his phone. His case in part seems to be that the newspaper already made a settlement with Prince William, thereby admitting guilt. Publicly the Sun continues to deny any such thing happened.

The rationale here seems to be that Harry is still motivated by the harm he sees the press inflicted upon him, starting with the death of his mother. (well, actually, well before that, hounding his family his whole life). Whereas while William was on side with this too, as the one expected to inherit the throne in not too long a time, he has to make peace with the media. Whereas Harry has gone the other way and essentially divorced himself from the royal family, so has no reason to protect the newspapers from their own lawbreaking.

This is quite interesting as it does explain the rift between the two brothers. Its not at all odd, David abdicated because he could not accept the limitations of being monarch, Margaret suffered the restrictions upon her to make Elizabeth look better, and now Harry has refused to be silent to boost William. Charles' siblings too have enjoyed very odd lives, while he himself was only allowed to be with camilla pretty much as last couple standing.

[Mr Poppy]

Whilst it is possible that mercian took a night off then given various people decided to 'go after' him in public rather than use the 'report post' function then I'll publicly ask Mark the following:

1/ Has Mercian been "cancelled" (temporarily blocked)?
2/ On what basis?

and most importantly

3/ Given the amount of other clear breaking of the rules being done by various "LoC" folks then why are the rules not being applied to them?

If people are not familiar with ALL the rules then they can be found:
ukpollingreport2.proboards.com/post/5/thread

The one I'm prepared to abandon, given so few other people follow it, being right at the end:
"If you see a comment from someone else that you think crosses over the line please do NOT respond with equally partisan rebuttals... If it is someone who should know better, just ignore them: continuing a partisan argument is just as bad as starting it!"

Taking "partisan" in the context of the LoC v RoC labels that people have decided to assign to other people (although IMO Starmer-LAB is probably to the Right of me on Economic Issues)

If you want to make UKPR2 an "echo chamber" or somewhere LoC's can attack anything and everything they don't like (and make agist and disability prejudice remarks) with impunity then please rewrite the rules to make it clear there is one rule for LoCs and one rule for RoCs (with the label RoC being defined by the sites LoCs as anyone they don't like). 

[steve]

I would be interested in the views of our Scottish contributors on a potential reason for the falling levels of support for the SNP.
Despite being in government for around 15 years in Scotland the SNP has been able to remain in perpetual campaign mode as its core reason for being was to achieve secession or at least to be perceived as wanting it.

This has allowed diminished interest in the electorate in considering its performance as a government, don't get me wrong as I believe they have performed overall creditably but after involvement or outright control for a decade it's routine for the public to consider a change.

The loss of a powerful leader and the realisation that the party isn't immune from corruption has rather focused attention away from the core campaign slogan, snp voters if not their core activists may well be prepared to consider that other centre left alternatives not in perpetual campaign mode might be an improvement.

[Mr Poppy]

I'm obviously not Mark  but I do think a new thread is long overdue and anyone is able to start a new thread. Hence I've set up a new thread using the latest R&W poll.

ukpollingreport2.proboards.com/thread/63/april-2023-lab-con-ldem

I'll make a suggestion to keep the business* of the old thread (ie this thread) on this thread and everyone starts the new thread with a 'clean slate'. I certainly won't be the first to start throwing stones but if this thread descends into the gutter and no one else is bothering to follow the rules then neither shall I.

* EG The 'Free the mercian 1' campaign being led by your friendly neighbourhood capybara is something for this thread. Assuming of course than he didn't just take a night off 

[pete]

8,000 jobs at risk as Oxford based company
@unipartgroup
considers leaving as #Brexit leaves Britain powerless and dithering in no man’s land between USA and the EU.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65393337

[pete]

Mercian-I don't think he should be kicked off the site. He pushes boundaries, sometimes stupidly in an often failed attempt to make a joke but I don't see him as a racist.

Not sure if I've read Trev correctly, not see loC posters attack disabilities? But then I don't read all posts.

[Mr Poppy]

Apr 24, 2023 22:48:50 GMT mercian said:

Apr 24, 2023 15:24:37 GMT steve said:

Minor incidents of discrimination against the traveller community can be seen on a daily basis.
...
This kind of casual racism against a maligned community probably explains why many travellers think us gorgers are dicks.

Gyppos (hope that's still an acceptable term) aren't liked because most if not all are criminals. A few years ago a group moved near to where my daughter used to live.  The next day every car in the neighbourhood had it's tyres slashed. By an amazing coincidence the local car spares shop had a large stock of inner tyres.  This being the Black Country, the locals took action and the travellers moved on, presumably having been paid by the car shop's owner. 

I assume this might be the post that a number of people decided amongst themselves broke the rules?

Firstly, in case anyone doesn't know how to do it, then you can 'Report Post' if you think the post needs to be reported. Click on the drop down area by the 'wheel' next to the 'thumbs up' (like) function and select 'Report Post'. Then give a reason for why you think the post needed to be reported.

The reason I sometimes ask for a 'Woke-pedia' is shown by mercian when he uses a term that I wouldn't use* but he did state ("hope that's still an acceptable term")

I'll use an example for why some folks request to know what is acceptable and what is not, using something that I'm 99.9% that 99.9% of people would know is unacceptable.

Acceptable:
Someone from Australia being called an Aussie

Unacceptable:
A similar shortening of a country name being applied to some from Pakistan. 

* Whilst there is clearly a hierarchy of discrimination within LAB (Abbott seeing it in the opposite direction to Starmer) and historic examples of discrimination vary in such areas of 'length' (eg Slavery) and 'severity' (eg The Holocaust) then discrimination is discrimination (although apparently not if it is 'positive discrimination').

I'm not sure if an acceptable short-hand word exists but I'll quote from the page on "Race discrimination":

"A racial group can be made up of two or more distinct racial groups, for example black Britons, British Asians, British Sikhs, British Jews, Romany Gypsies and Irish Travellers"

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/race-discrimination

If someone wants to reply to mercian with an acceptable term to use then please do so. I will highlight that mercian has been 'guilty' of stereotyping which is a form of discrimination and suggest he is given the opportunity to make a public apology.

PS I'm sure Mark doesn't want to spend his time 'moderating' this forum, so in cases where someone just doesn't like the partisan views of someone else then I'd suggest people use the 'rule' that states:

"If you see a comment from someone else that you think crosses over the line please do NOT respond with equally partisan rebuttals. If it is a new poster then please do welcome them, explain we don’t really do things that way round here. If it is someone who should know better, just ignore them: continuing a partisan argument is just as bad as starting it!"

Something that the Remain fanatics should note is the reason I ignore them.

[pjw1961]

Apr 26, 2023 7:51:11 GMT pete said:

Mercian-I don't think he should be kicked off the site. He pushes boundaries, sometimes stupidly in an often failed attempt to make a joke but I don't see him as a racist.

Not sure if I've read Trev correctly, not see loC posters attack disabilities? But then I don't read all posts.

Just to explain the latter. Trevor is trying to pretend that because I have mentioned Diane Abbott's age and health status in posts I am guilty of ageism and/or disability discrimination. All he is actually doing is demonstrating that he doesn't understand the legislation he is quoting. It is similar to Danny saying if you are anti-racist you can't have any border controls. Sometimes it is best to let people's lack of knowledge speak for itself. 

[Deleted]

Apr 25, 2023 20:24:52 GMT Mr Poppy said:

Apr 25, 2023 18:55:03 GMT leftieliberal said:

I'm just quoting the rules that Mark set up at the beginning of this board. If you don't like them, you and mercian can always set up another board with your own rules. 

You decided to interpret the rules to declare mercian was "2 x yellow = red"

I can't speak for anyone else but I'm quite happy with the rules, why should it be me that needs to leave? It seems that some people want to get rid of people who have different views to them.

UKPR2 isn't even a workplace. If people don't want to read the comments from someone else then don't read them - simples. If anyone wants to voluntarily leave the site then the decision should be for them - or Mark (and only Mark ) has the power to kick someone off. 

Perhaps he has had enough hypocrisy for a while ?

Apr 25, 2023 20:27:13 GMT Mr Poppy said:

mercian Out of curiosity then are you still with us?

[Deleted]

Apr 26, 2023 6:54:22 GMT Mr Poppy said:

Whilst it is possible that mercian took a night off then given various people decided to 'go after' him in public rather than use the 'report post' function then I'll publicly ask Mark the following:

1/ Has Mercian been "cancelled" (temporarily blocked)?
2/ On what basis?

and most importantly

3/ Given the amount of other clear breaking of the rules being done by various "LoC" folks then why are the rules not being applied to them?

If people are not familiar with ALL the rules then they can be found:
ukpollingreport2.proboards.com/post/5/thread

The one I'm prepared to abandon, given so few other people follow it, being right at the end:
"If you see a comment from someone else that you think crosses over the line please do NOT respond with equally partisan rebuttals... If it is someone who should know better, just ignore them: continuing a partisan argument is just as bad as starting it!"

Taking "partisan" in the context of the LoC v RoC labels that people have decided to assign to other people (although IMO Starmer-LAB is probably to the Right of me on Economic Issues)

If you want to make UKPR2 an "echo chamber" or somewhere LoC's can attack anything and everything they don't like (and make agist and disability prejudice remarks) with impunity then please rewrite the rules to make it clear there is one rule for LoCs and one rule for RoCs (with the label RoC being defined by the sites LoCs as anyone they don't like). 

If he has been banned that's the end of this place for me.

[shevii]

Apr 25, 2023 21:59:37 GMT pjw1961 said:

Apr 25, 2023 20:35:59 GMT shevii said:

I'm actually trying to be a bit protective of her. Diane Abbot was/is a sharp and clever lady and used to be a very effective television performer, but she has definitely lost something lately and sometimes to preserve a legacy it is best to know when to leave the stage. Churchill for example stayed in parliament at least 1 term too long.

I appreciate you are (or think you are at least) and that you harbour no ill feelings towards Abbott and indeed have a lot of respect for what she has done in her life. But unless Labour returns the whip, which they have done with others under similar circumstances (or in the case of Sheerman not even suspend him I believe for a more obvious offence) then her legacy is that she was kicked out of her job for being "antisemitic" and with the same legacy as Corbyn who has equally been piled on beyond any valid criticism of his leadership.  Reeves has said just this morning that what Abbott said was "antisemitic" which is really pushing the definition to its limits and not at all helpful especially when Reeves doesn't offer up any mitigating circumstances or balance- simply "antisemitic" end of story.  Also why does Reeves choose antisemitic when she could equally have said anti traveller? Another "hierarchy of racism" right there.

Plenty of people for sure have gone on beyond their sell by date both in politics and elsewhere.  Livingstone would be one I think and you're right that legacies can be ruined but as it stands with the suspension it's Labour who are ruining her legacy.

[Deleted]

Apr 26, 2023 7:51:11 GMT pete said:

Mercian-I don't think he should be kicked off the site. He pushes boundaries, sometimes stupidly in an often failed attempt to make a joke but I don't see him as a racist.

How many racist things do you have to say or do to convince you that you are a racist?

[Mr Poppy]

Apr 26, 2023 8:13:29 GMT shevii said:

Apr 25, 2023 21:59:37 GMT pjw1961 said:

I'm actually trying to be a bit protective of her. Diane Abbot was/is a sharp and clever lady and used to be a very effective television performer, but she has definitely lost something lately and sometimes to preserve a legacy it is best to know when to leave the stage. Churchill for example stayed in parliament at least 1 term too long.

I appreciate you are (or think you are at least) and that you harbour no ill feelings towards Abbott and indeed have a lot of respect for what she has done in her life. But unless Labour returns the whip, which they have done with others under similar circumstances (or in the case of Sheerman not even suspend him I believe for a more obvious offence) then her legacy is that she was kicked out of her job for being "antisemitic" and with the same legacy as Corbyn who has equally been piled on beyond any valid criticism of his leadership.  Reeves has said just this morning that what Abbott said was "antisemitic" which is really pushing the definition to its limits and not at all helpful especially when Reeves doesn't offer up any mitigating circumstances or balance- simply "antisemitic" end of story.  Also why does Reeves choose antisemitic when she could equally have said anti traveller? Another "hierarchy of racism" right there.

Plenty of people for sure have gone on beyond their sell by date both in politics and elsewhere.  Livingstone would be one I think and you're right that legacies can be ruined but as it stands with the suspension it's Labour who are ruining her legacy.

Boris certainly went on as PM beyond his "sell by date" but he was PM, not just a backbench MP (and in opposition is the case with Corbyn and now Abbott). I certainly wanted to 'Get Boris Gone' but that was based on performance (or lack thereof) in the job he was doing. However, it should be for his constituents to decide if Boris should no longer even be an MP - possibly by a recall vote and then by-election later this year, otherwise in GE'24 (assuming Boris stands)

A party leader is elected (and removed) by their MPs (+others in the case of some ABCON parties) where as an MP is elected (and removed) by their constituents. 

There is a "conspiracy theory" doing the rounds that Abbott deliberately wanted to push the boundaries to see if she would also be denied the opportunity to stand for LAB in GE'24. Her prompt 'apology' being what I expect is the tricky issue for Starmer to decide upon WRT to a 'temporary' v 'permanent' ban. 

PS I thought Corbyn has actually apologised as well, although it was 'late' and he attached a load of caveats about the whole case against him being overblown? LAB is not my party and North Islington is not my constituency of course but like Corbyn, then Abbott can stand in the next GE if she wants to - either as the LAB candidate or as an Ind (or as a party that has 2 current MPs, possibly more before GE'24?)

[Deleted]

Apr 26, 2023 8:23:23 GMT nickp said:

Apr 26, 2023 7:51:11 GMT pete said:

Mercian-I don't think he should be kicked off the site. He pushes boundaries, sometimes stupidly in an often failed attempt to make a joke but I don't see him as a racist.

How many racist things do you have to say or do to convince you that you are a racist?

I see that your habit of infrequency  is overcome by the opportunity for a bit of self important sanctimony .

[Danny]

Apr 26, 2023 8:08:13 GMT pjw1961 said:

All he is actually doing is demonstrating that he doesn't understand the legislation he is quoting. It is similar to Danny saying if you are anti-racist you can't have any border controls. Sometimes it is best to let people's lack of knowledge speak for itself. 

I reiterate, are you making the standard for acceptable behaviour being obedience of the current law? if so its a very dubious standard.

In terms of real discrimination, some of the very greatest is in the form of immigration law. All those people who are very unfairly worse off than practically everyone who lives in the Uk who we refuse to allow to come here. If people do not accept that we quite deliberately engage in this discrimination then the debate about discrimination becomes meaningless. What we are doing to the boat people, what the government is seeking to do to them, is far far worse than anything Abbott has said.

[steve]

Braverman says illegal migrants have ‘values at odds with our country’ as MPs prepare to debate illegal migration bill.


Bollocks they do, they do however have values at odds with crypto fascist Braverman.
For which we should all be grateful.

[Mr Poppy]

Apr 26, 2023 8:13:22 GMT colin said:

Apr 26, 2023 6:54:22 GMT Mr Poppy said:

Whilst it is possible that mercian took a night off then given various people decided to 'go after' him in public rather than use the 'report post' function then I'll publicly ask Mark the following:

1/ Has Mercian been "cancelled" (temporarily blocked)?
2/ On what basis?

and most importantly

3/ Given the amount of other clear breaking of the rules being done by various "LoC" folks then why are the rules not being applied to them?

If people are not familiar with ALL the rules then they can be found:
ukpollingreport2.proboards.com/post/5/thread

The one I'm prepared to abandon, given so few other people follow it, being right at the end:
"If you see a comment from someone else that you think crosses over the line please do NOT respond with equally partisan rebuttals... If it is someone who should know better, just ignore them: continuing a partisan argument is just as bad as starting it!"

Taking "partisan" in the context of the LoC v RoC labels that people have decided to assign to other people (although IMO Starmer-LAB is probably to the Right of me on Economic Issues)

If you want to make UKPR2 an "echo chamber" or somewhere LoC's can attack anything and everything they don't like (and make agist and disability prejudice remarks) with impunity then please rewrite the rules to make it clear there is one rule for LoCs and one rule for RoCs (with the label RoC being defined by the sites LoCs as anyone they don't like). 

If he has been banned that's the end of this place for me.

Each person's choice is obviously their own but I won't be engaging in the "If he is/isn't banned I'll leave" stuff.

My interest is in #3. It does seem within LAB (and possibly the broader LoC community) that a "hierarchy" is used when implementing rules (as Abbott has found out). 

If different rules are used for different groups of people, depending on their political views, then whilst technically that might not be "discrimination" then the site will likely just become an "echo chamber" - which is perhaps the desire of the people who launched the "Cancel mercian" campaign? 

[neilj]

Not looking god for voter ID registration

[pjw1961]

Apr 26, 2023 8:37:32 GMT Danny said:

Apr 26, 2023 8:08:13 GMT pjw1961 said:

All he is actually doing is demonstrating that he doesn't understand the legislation he is quoting. It is similar to Danny saying if you are anti-racist you can't have any border controls. Sometimes it is best to let people's lack of knowledge speak for itself. 

I reiterate, are you making the standard for acceptable behaviour being obedience of the current law? if so its a very dubious standard.

In terms of real discrimination, some of the very greatest is in the form of immigration law. All those people who are very unfairly worse off than practically everyone who lives in the Uk who we refuse to allow to come here. If people do not accept that we quite deliberately engage in this discrimination then the debate about discrimination becomes meaningless. What we are doing to the boat people, what the government is seeking to do to them, is far far worse than anything Abbott has said.

Border controls (or immigration policy) based on race as the entry criteria would be racist. Border controls based on other criteria which define a legal right to enter a particular country are not inherently racist. It is possible to be anti-racism and have border controls. 

[neilj]

Mmmmm

[Danny]

Apr 26, 2023 8:13:29 GMT shevii said:

Plenty of people for sure have gone on beyond their sell by date both in politics and elsewhere.  Livingstone would be one I think and you're right that legacies can be ruined but as it stands with the suspension it's Labour who are ruining her legacy.

I suggest labour are ruining their own legacy.

Its funny how they have moved far to the right in terms of taxation, benefits, labour rights and the economy, but seem to have got stuck on discrimination. Its OK to refuse to help disadvantaged people financially, but not OK to speak badly about them. Labour has become the party for mouthing off about discrimination, but actually doing nothing?

Most people discriminated against in the UK are not jewish and not coloured. Financially its probably still true that jews do above average, while effects of poverty are widely spread amongst an underclass comprised from all races. Some of the other minorities also stick together more, and likely engage in self help, although there is a problem in terms of judging many immigrant nationalities that they were already self selected for motivation and determination to advance, or they would not have arrived here at all. We had a recent intake of Russian millionairs- as a race are we discriminating for or against them?

[neilj]

Who could have known...if only someone had warned us 😉
www.politico.eu/article/uk-business-fear-brexit-checks-food-price-inflation/
Brexit red tape to send UK food prices soaring even higher
Britain’s food inflation is already at a 45-year high and businesses worry new red tape will make matters worse.

[pjw1961]

Apr 26, 2023 8:13:29 GMT shevii said:

Apr 25, 2023 21:59:37 GMT pjw1961 said:

I'm actually trying to be a bit protective of her. Diane Abbot was/is a sharp and clever lady and used to be a very effective television performer, but she has definitely lost something lately and sometimes to preserve a legacy it is best to know when to leave the stage. Churchill for example stayed in parliament at least 1 term too long.

I appreciate you are (or think you are at least) and that you harbour no ill feelings towards Abbott and indeed have a lot of respect for what she has done in her life. But unless Labour returns the whip, which they have done with others under similar circumstances (or in the case of Sheerman not even suspend him I believe for a more obvious offence) then her legacy is that she was kicked out of her job for being "antisemitic" and with the same legacy as Corbyn who has equally been piled on beyond any valid criticism of his leadership.  Reeves has said just this morning that what Abbott said was "antisemitic" which is really pushing the definition to its limits and not at all helpful especially when Reeves doesn't offer up any mitigating circumstances or balance- simply "antisemitic" end of story.  Also why does Reeves choose antisemitic when she could equally have said anti traveller? Another "hierarchy of racism" right there.

Plenty of people for sure have gone on beyond their sell by date both in politics and elsewhere.  Livingstone would be one I think and you're right that legacies can be ruined but as it stands with the suspension it's Labour who are ruining her legacy.

I have the same suspicion as you that the right of the party will drag out the investigation process to ensure that the whip is not restored prior to the election. I hope not, but it wouldn't surprise me. 

For what it is worth, which is nothing since I have zero control over Labour disciplinary procedures, I don't think Diane Abbott is antisemitic and in my opinion her letter is not specifically antisemitic either (others may disagree), but it is racist for the reasons I have already set out. Again I am sure that was not Abbott's intention and she has apologised, but it was a major error by any standards. 

Since various people are saying they haven't seen the letter, it is here: www.theguardian.com/theobserver/commentisfree/2023/apr/23/success-for-women-not-same-as-for-men-letters

Probably also useful to have a definition of antisemitism. IMO this is the best: 
jerusalemdeclaration.org/

[Deleted]

Apr 26, 2023 8:44:13 GMT Mr Poppy said:

Apr 26, 2023 8:13:22 GMT colin said:

If he has been banned that's the end of this place for me.

Each person's choice is obviously their own but I won't be engaging in the "If he is/isn't banned I'll leave" stuff.

My interest is in #3. It does seem within LAB (and possibly the broader LoC community) that a "hierarchy" is used when implementing rules (as Abbott has found out). 

If different rules are used for different groups of people, depending on their political views, then whilst technically that might not be "discrimination" then the site will likely just become an "echo chamber" - which is perhaps the desire of the people who launched the "Cancel mercian " campaign? 

But you know the answer to 3 !

Different rules are applied.

Look at the pearl clutching agonised hand wringing over Abbott.

This is a club you & I & Mercian will never be a member of, which has no interest in our opinions. You can waste hours on end trying to influence its "rules" -or pop in occasionally to get something off your chest- or just read the polling stuff.

Trying to persuade them of  your opinion on anything-let alone their rules-is pointless. 

[Deleted]

Interest on UK Government Debt -2022/23 :-

£106.6 billion – 47% higher than the previous year

[Deleted]

Tuesday Trev: Mark is responsible for enforcing the site rules - not you or anyone else.
Wednesday Trev: I'm setting up a new thread. I intend to operate according to these rules (but not these ones) etc etc etc etc on and on and on for pages and pages...

Who on earth does he think cares?