FlyTheNest

(With chips)

One advantage of constant avoiding work movement,you burn it off.

14.03
(The PF countdown)

frog222 wrote:Today's Gdn antisemitism-ihra-definition-jewish-writers

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... sh-writers" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Apparently 44 countries 'accept' the IHRA definition , but it all looks like a can of worms ! And is it really part of UK Law, please ?

Reading the G about a week ago, the three or four 'examples' which the LP committee were not sure about /were excluding seemed dodgy to me too.

The Spectator article shows how very deeply all this is entwined with Israel. Inevitably so!

As an aside, was the Zionist Bitch insult to Margaret Hodge definitely sent by a labour member, or for example a Russian bot ?

If Labour were unhappy with the IHRA code & the examples provided to aid application of the code, maybe they shouldn't have adopted it?

Given the intense scrutiny Labour have been under over all of this, did no one on the NEC really not stop and think hang on a minute, adopting an internationally accepted code and then appearing to rewrite parts of it might come across as just a bit arrogant and disrespectful?

"We've made it better" - seriously, think about how that comes across.

The choice was to adopt it as it is, or, if there were doubts about it, not adopt it at all and take another approach to addressing the issue. Too late now, of course, so Labour are stuck with trying to defend their position and hope they can get all the nuances of what they have done and why across to those voters they have potentially lost over this and win them back, but I don't like their chances, tbh.

Pretty obvious they would have been lambasted,regardless IMHO.Even if as is would have been portrayed as hypocritical etc.A driven agenda doesn't care much about such things,it merely adapts to suit.As previously stated the fervent anti Corbynists are exhibiting the very characteristics they bemoan/shake their head at in horror in others.We're at the combatting myth only adds to it stage.

Not a Corbyn supporter,beyond much preferring a Labour Government to constantly tut at,I attempt to be neutral.

HindleA wrote:Pretty obvious they would have been lambasted,regardless IMHO.Even if as is would have been portrayed as hypocritical etc.A driven agenda doesn't care much about such things,it merely adapts to suit.As previously stated the fervent anti Corbynists are exhibiting the very characteristics they bemoan/shake their head at in horror in others.We're at the combatting myth only adds to it stage.

No doubt. But at least if they had been lambasted for something else - like not consulting this or that Jewish group when drawing up their own code - I personally wouldn't have ended up thinking the NEC is a bunch of useless muppets for not realising how bad this was going to look. I need to have faith that people who run the party I belong to have some kind of clue. This incident has not helped.

Willow 1.14 " ... adopting an internationally accepted code and then appearing to rewrite parts of it might come across as just a bit arrogant and disrespectful? "

Well, the IHRA is not the UN, it's IMO/impression a lobbying group exerting pressure more on behalf of Israel than the human rights of jewish people everywhere ?

There are laws against incitement to violence etc which apply to everybody .

Must go, urgent removal of firewood ib a field being sold !

Salad is now well refreshed.

Bit of a dribble of rain here.

Finished dribbling.

To repeat, Labour *have* adopted the IHRA definitions - in full. Its some of the supporting "examples" they have issue with (and no, they are not alone there)

frog222 wrote:

Willow 1.14 " ... adopting an internationally accepted code and then appearing to rewrite parts of it might come across as just a bit arrogant and disrespectful? "

Well, the IHRA is not the UN, it's IMO/impression a lobbying group exerting pressure more on behalf of Israel than the human rights of jewish people everywhere ?

There are laws against incitement to violence etc which apply to everybody .

Must go, urgent removal of firewood ib a field being sold !

Absolutely, but the option was to not adopt the IHRA definition at all. To unilaterally re-write a code so many other official bodies are already using is bound to draw unfavourable attention.

Scroll Free September aims to wean us off social media (Guardian)

I didn't realise that scrolls were still a "thing". And there was me thinking that I was a bit behind the times.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/ ... dia-health

The guardian is running two opinion pieces today both saying that the EU really need to start being more reasonable or they'll suffer terrible damage if they make us leave with no deal one by Timothy Garton Ash and one by Henry Newman. Both come with thousands of 'you are delusional' comments before comments were closed. Garton Ash's one actually manages to get through the whole thing without mentioning that we have chosen this situation for ourselves.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:To repeat, Labour *have* adopted the IHRA definitions - in full. Its some of the supporting "examples" they have issue with (and no, they are not alone there)

I do understand.

There is a good thread here that covers the topic well, I think.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The end result of what Labour have is ok. The way they've got there is less ok. As summed up here:
And this is also worth considering:
By changing the IHRAs original examples, there is an implied criticism of the code as it is currently presented. If Labour didn't intend to criticise the code and (inadvertently) lead people to believe the code is trying to inhibit fair criticism of Israel they now have a lot of work to do to explain that and convince people of it, than if they had simply included the original rider that makes this clear. The twitter thread I have linked is pretty fair, I think, and recognises Labour's genuine attempt to create a model that helps tackle anti-semitism within the party whilst not laying them open to accusations of suppressing free speech. I think, in return, it is important to recognise that some genuine offence may have been caused by this and why.

adam wrote:The guardian is running two opinion pieces today both saying that the EU really need to start being more reasonable or they'll suffer terrible damage if they make us leave with no deal one by Timothy Garton Ash and one by Henry Newman. Both come with thousands of 'you are delusional' comments before comments were closed. Garton Ash's one actually manages to get through the whole thing without mentioning that we have chosen this situation for ourselves.

Genuinely surprised TGA would opt for that take given his previous positions.

adam wrote:The guardian is running two opinion pieces today both saying that the EU really need to start being more reasonable or they'll suffer terrible damage if they make us leave with no deal one by Timothy Garton Ash and one by Henry Newman. Both come with thousands of 'you are delusional' comments before comments were closed. Garton Ash's one actually manages to get through the whole thing without mentioning that we have chosen this situation for ourselves.

Tmothy Gardon Ash wrote:"...it’s surely better to overdramatise the risk, to get everyone to wake up to it, rather than do what most of our continental partners have done for the last two years, which is consistently to underestimate the dangers for the whole of Europe that flow from Brexit – especially a mishandled Brexit."

that's completely inaccurate
What is Ash thinking?

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

adam wrote:The guardian is running two opinion pieces today both saying that the EU really need to start being more reasonable or they'll suffer terrible damage if they make us leave with no deal one by Timothy Garton Ash and one by Henry Newman. Both come with thousands of 'you are delusional' comments before comments were closed. Garton Ash's one actually manages to get through the whole thing without mentioning that we have chosen this situation for ourselves.

Genuinely surprised TGA would opt for that take given his previous positions.

Hear, hear
It's absurd

Timothy Garton Ash wrote:"Right now, the ball is in the EU’s court. Amazingly, the 27 leaders have not had a major strategic discussion of Brexit since spring 2017. Since then, the negotiation has been left to the European commission team led by Michel Barnier, national officials, lawyers and Brussels theologians."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ar-britain" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That entire section is baffling
'Brussels theologians'?

I'll not post any more of the article here; let me know if I've posted too much already.
I'm baffled by his entire article and want your feedback on what you all think.
Please do read it if you have time.

I don't think it's unreasonable to point out a failed state off the coast of EU nations isn't good for anyone

Ash made that point clear but he's wrong about the 'ball being in the EU's court', he's wrong about the 'slap in the face' regarding the Galileo project, he's wrong about Theresa May's current white paper being adequate, he's wrong expecting twenty-seven other EU nations needing to together to fix the UK's Tory Brexit. Tory government haven't submitted any responsible requests about what it wants. That's not a failing of the EU nations. That's the UK's problem.

citizenJA wrote:

Timothy Garton Ash wrote:"Right now, the ball is in the EU’s court. Amazingly, the 27 leaders have not had a major strategic discussion of Brexit since spring 2017. Since then, the negotiation has been left to the European commission team led by Michel Barnier, national officials, lawyers and Brussels theologians."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ar-britain" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That entire section is baffling
'Brussels theologians'?

I'll not post any more of the article here; let me know if I've posted too much already.
I'm baffled by his entire article and want your feedback on what you all think.
Please do read it if you have time.

I only read it quickly, but the only specific compromise the author suggests the EU should make that I could find is as follows:

Is there no compromise at all to be made, for instance, on the issue of labour mobility, if Britain wants to stay in the single market for goods?

This is, I think, what's sometimes referred to as "the Jersey option":

https://capx.co/britains-best-brexit-be ... ey-option/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm not really sure if this would ever be acceptable to the EU, but as Theresa May is bulking at a Customs Union, even for just Northern Ireland, we're still an extremely long way from even asking for it let alone managing to get the EU to agree to it. As long as our own red lines remain in the way, it's quite a cheek to blame the EU if we are unfortunate enough to end up with what we have told them we want. Garton Ash is inexplicably ignoring the fact that the Tories are choosing to pursue a hard Brexit that will impoverish us.

@Willow904
Thank you for the following

Willow904 wrote:...we're still an extremely long way from even asking for it let alone managing to get the EU to agree to it.

Ash seems oblivious to this fact

The EU nations are making preparations for Brexit.

Ash wrote:...most of our continental partners...for the last two years,... is consistently...underestimate the dangers for the whole of Europe that flow from Brexit...

nonsense

adam wrote:The guardian is running two opinion pieces today both saying that the EU really need to start being more reasonable or they'll suffer terrible damage if they make us leave with no deal one by Timothy Garton Ash and one by Henry Newman. Both come with thousands of 'you are delusional' comments before comments were closed. Garton Ash's one actually manages to get through the whole thing without mentioning that we have chosen this situation for ourselves.

Henry Newman wrote:"It’s incumbent on all member states – above all the largest – to focus on Brexit. They need to look beyond the details of customs arrangements and participation in this or that agency, important though they are, to the bigger canvas: the future shape of this continent. And though the UK is but one departing state, it’s Europe’s second biggest economy and its major defence, development and security player. It’s too big to ignore."

I don't care for Newman's tone

Where’s the F in News ?

Just in , half- soaked while stacking firewood from my tractor bucket, so your linkies and wisdom later

Listening to the above .

( I still miss Sandi Tostvik at 18.30 Fridays , snif .)

https://www.theguardian.com/science/liv ... lipse-live" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


https://www.rmg.co.uk/discover/explore/lunar-eclipse" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[youtube]TzFnYcIqj6I[/youtube]

In a state of non run serenity was rare but becoming more common.

Nicotine tea equilibrium

Even the worst possible thing that can happen has positives."Thankyou for being you" gives you unbeatable relentless power and purpose no counterveiling force can compete with.

I love you
goodnight, everyone
cJA

The point of course of pointing out the evil,and it unquestioningly is,of targeting the obviously tend not to live as long for reductions/removals and misrepresenting as being unfair is that it is exactly the opposite,receiving far less return than the majority of the party membership that is enacting such things as an obvious real comparative rather than imaginary or delusional not a benefit amnesia.Apparently this is a difficult concept.

With some now bitten,will things change?

So if they insist on playing the money game,their failure and misanthropy is only amplified by continual.pointing out.IMHO

There was an extraordinary storm here earlier, continuous lightning for nearly half an hour, I think this would be the same storm further north.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Before you to the discouragement/penalisation of refusing to play the suffiicently pathetic,take the given with gratitude and be independent all participation maybe used against you contributions ignored accept to deny you made any.

I disagree with small State utterations ,they need control,patronisations,cash cows for the private sector and people to play with.

Inadequate people projection.

(You can be serene and vociferous)

The only red I saw were my changeable solar lights.