Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Milo]

5 hours ago, Captain... said:

That is the exact issue with that poster, and some of other tactics of the leave campaign, it wasn't interested in accuracy or informing the public it just wanted to stoke the fears and worries of people who are probably not that well informed on the nuances of freedom of travel around Europe. 

And the remain Project Fear campaign wasn't??!

[Buce]

 

I'm sure the Tories on here will support this, you know, them being the Party of law and order:

 

Vote Leave members 'may have committed criminal offences'

Lawyers call for inquiry into whether Brexit campaigners should face prosecution

 

A number of possible criminal offences may have been committed by members of the official Brexit campaign during the EU referendum, according to the expert view of some of Britain’s leading barristers.

Intensifying the pressure on senior figures within Theresa May’s cabinet and No 10 Downing Street, Helen Mountfield QC and Clare Montgomery QC of Matrix Chambers, concluded there is a “prima facie case” that a number of electoral offences were committed by the Vote Leave campaign.

An urgent investigation is required, they say, to determine whether the case should be referred to the Crown Prosecution Service.

Having examined a “significant body of new whistleblower evidence” which includes the testimony of three individuals with close knowledge of the Vote Leave campaign, the QCs’ legal opinion is that “there would be realistic prospects of conviction” in relation to claims revealed in the Observer that Vote Leave may have flouted referendum spending rules during the EU referendum campaign.

 

The QCs said that, from the documents and files they had seen and which have now been sent to the Electoral Commission, there were “strong grounds” that Vote Leave overspent, as it channelled money through another campaign, which it may have been co-ordinating with. This, if proved true, amounts to a breach of electoral law.

Vote Leave, whose leading members include Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, strongly denies any co-ordination with another campaign group during the referendum.

The new evidence, according to the 50-page document examining payments made by Vote Leave during the EU referendum, is “highly significant because it substantially changes the evidential picture” compared with the material previously examined by the Electoral Commission.

The document says that the Electoral Commission must use its powers to investigate members of the campaign and that “in our opinion, the extensive grounds for suspicion of the commission of offences under PPERA [Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000] are sufficiently strong, and the potential offences sufficiently serious, that there is a good case for the exercise by the commission of its investigative powers”.

Mountfield, Montgomery and a third barrister from Matrix, Ben Silverstone, also examined evidence in relation to the possible deletion of key Vote Leave names from a shared drive with a referendum campaign organisation called BeLeave. The QCs concluded that the material “justifies further investigation with a view to establish whether there is reasonable suspicion that the offence of perverting the course of justice has been committed”.

The Electoral Commission has already “assessed” the issue twice and found in favour of Vote Leave on both occasions. However a judicial review launched by the Good Law Project in November led to the commission re-opening an investigation into the donation and is yet to report its findings.

Edited 26 March 2018 by Buce

[breadandcheese]

 

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Maybe I am overthinking it (I'm sometimes guilty of that) or maybe you're underthinking it? People can make their own minds up - and my departure from this topic is long overdue. 

 

I found the artist's Twitter page and a Facebook video and post he did about this mural.....

https://twitter.com/mearone/status/977301388186214400

 

 

He does confirm that the symbol is meant to relate to Freemasons and it does all sound a bit "conspiracy theorist", though in the global capitalist conspiracy / military-industrial complex sense, not so much Judeo-Masonry. He's clearly well to the Left in his views, but does insist it's about capitalism/class, doesn't even mention Jews (apart from denying antisemitic intent) - and names J.P. Morgan among the demons alongside Rothschild & co. Can an assault on capitalists really be antisemitic if it names Jews and non-Jews?

 

I don't get a sense of him as an overt antisemite in any way. Hard to deny some of your comments, though: e.g. "the hard left, so wedded to the idea of capitalism and conspiracy theories that they cannot see how wedded some of the ideas are to antisemitism". I'm more of a cock-up theorist myself. He comes across to me as naive and idealistic, not hate-filled, so if he is flirting with antisemitism and conspiracy theories, it seems accidental and rooted in ultra-leftist ideas rather than racism. He also seems to genuinely - if naively - want to stimulate and engage in public debate about these issues. A major shame if his actions have unwittingly done harm - and maybe undermined the very debate he wanted to stimulate.

 

What would be good would be to see him given a proper grilling about his ideas: get him on with Andrew Neil or Andrew Marr! 

 

Enough already....I'm outta here (for now at least).

Alf, last post from me on the matter a well, but just wanted to address one or two of your points. I think the author of the mural doesn't recognise his anti-semitism or why the imagery is anti-semitic but it doesn't mean he's not being anti-semitic, either wilfully or probably more likely by lack of education.  In answer to your question, can an assault on capitalists really be antisemitic if it names Jews and non-Jews?  I would say yes, as stated above, because in this case it is propogating the false Judeo-masonry conspiracy theory.  In another context, can anti-capitalism contain images of people who happen to be Jews, well yes, but it is all about context and the use of imagery.

 

And I think that's the point, this is an image that shouldn't be used at all to provoke a debate on capitalism.  Just as we recoil at images of blacked up white people and wouldn't use them any more due to the inherent racism, neither should images like this be used, not when there are other ways to attack capitalism, without invoking imagery that was used in the past to stoke up anti-semitic attacks.

 

The question for the author of the mural is whether he'd use that imagery again, knowing full well the significance of it.  The answer to that is sadly yes.

 

 

The author does a cracking job of exposing his anti-semitism in the first line of his response.  "Though historically several of the characters may be of Jewish decent (sp) or ideology..." Please, what is Jewish ideology? Someone needs to educate this author because he doesn't realise that Jews, just like non-Jews, i.e. people, all have different beliefs, rather than one coherent group think ideology.  Seriously.  There is no argument left, the author is an anti-semite. But presumably, he doesn't see himself as anti-semitic because he would defend a jew against an attack by a neo-nazi (although I dread to think how the two braincells in his head would react if the neo-nazi was attacking a Jew who happened to work for Barclays.  Would he support it or not?).  

 

It does speak for something that there are a number of people who don't see the Jewish significance in it and don't recognise the people on the mural as such.  In a way, that's actually a good thing. But that doesn't mean the image isn't using anti-semitic imagery.

 

Edited 26 March 2018 by breadandcheese

[Guest MattP]

Absolutely scenes in Westminster. 

 

On the outside Jews, Labour MPS and Tory MPS are protesting against the Labour leader and inside John Woodcock just stood up and told Corbyn he was lying before reading a pro-Russia piece from the Morning Star penned by JC.

 

Chris Williamson went mental and appeared to offer him out - will post the video when it's up.

[Guest MattP]

Imagine turning up to a anti-Semitism demonstration to shout about Palestine......

 

 

[Beechey]

 

Oh my Christ, the fact that Corbyn wrote that and people still think he's fit to be PM is utterly astounding.

Edited 26 March 2018 by Beechey

[Guest]

Not sure what else the guy can do tbh

 

Jeremy Corbyn concedes Labour has failed to address antisemitism problem

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/26/jeremy-corbyn-accused-of-being-figurehead-for-antisemitism?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Beechey said:

 

Oh my Christ, the fact that Corbyn wrote that and people still think he's fit to be PM is utterly astounding.

Tbf the expansion of NATO into eastern European areas IS a real issue - as recognised by Peter Hitchens on QT last week. 

 

It's a real shame Corbyn has been so active in terms of his political beliefs when it comes to his electability. Take away his background and he has enthused the young, built the largest political party in Europe, developed progressive policies that have public support and genuinely brought some personal honesty into the policy sphere. 

 

But his history won't go away.

 

I don't really know what to think when it comes to his history. 

[Guest MattP]

9 minutes ago, Beechey said:

 

Oh my Christ, the fact that Corbyn wrote that and people still think he's fit to be PM is utterly astounding.

Brilliant. Even his own MP's now calling out his bullshit.

 

Expect Woodcock to get some serious abuse unfortunately after that.

[Strokes]

1 hour ago, Buce said:

 

I'm sure the Tories on here will support this, you know, them being the Party of law and order:

 

Vote Leave members 'may have committed criminal offences'

Lawyers call for inquiry into whether Brexit campaigners should face prosecution

 

A number of possible criminal offences may have been committed by members of the official Brexit campaign during the EU referendum, according to the expert view of some of Britain’s leading barristers.

Intensifying the pressure on senior figures within Theresa May’s cabinet and No 10 Downing Street, Helen Mountfield QC and Clare Montgomery QC of Matrix Chambers, concluded there is a “prima facie case” that a number of electoral offences were committed by the Vote Leave campaign.

An urgent investigation is required, they say, to determine whether the case should be referred to the Crown Prosecution Service.

Having examined a “significant body of new whistleblower evidence” which includes the testimony of three individuals with close knowledge of the Vote Leave campaign, the QCs’ legal opinion is that “there would be realistic prospects of conviction” in relation to claims revealed in the Observer that Vote Leave may have flouted referendum spending rules during the EU referendum campaign.

 

The QCs said that, from the documents and files they had seen and which have now been sent to the Electoral Commission, there were “strong grounds” that Vote Leave overspent, as it channelled money through another campaign, which it may have been co-ordinating with. This, if proved true, amounts to a breach of electoral law.

Vote Leave, whose leading members include Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, strongly denies any co-ordination with another campaign group during the referendum.

The new evidence, according to the 50-page document examining payments made by Vote Leave during the EU referendum, is “highly significant because it substantially changes the evidential picture” compared with the material previously examined by the Electoral Commission.

The document says that the Electoral Commission must use its powers to investigate members of the campaign and that “in our opinion, the extensive grounds for suspicion of the commission of offences under PPERA [Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000] are sufficiently strong, and the potential offences sufficiently serious, that there is a good case for the exercise by the commission of its investigative powers”.

Mountfield, Montgomery and a third barrister from Matrix, Ben Silverstone, also examined evidence in relation to the possible deletion of key Vote Leave names from a shared drive with a referendum campaign organisation called BeLeave. The QCs concluded that the material “justifies further investigation with a view to establish whether there is reasonable suspicion that the offence of perverting the course of justice has been committed”.

The Electoral Commission has already “assessed” the issue twice and found in favour of Vote Leave on both occasions. However a judicial review launched by the Good Law Project in November led to the commission re-opening an investigation into the donation and is yet to report its findings.

Even if they are guilty, they’ll just get some sacrificial lamb to take the fall by taking the blame. I’d be amazed if BJ or MG got their hands dirty enough to be culpable in anything. It will go how these things normally go, such is politics.

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Even if they are guilty, they’ll just get some sacrificial lamb to take the fall by taking the blame. I’d be amazed if BJ or MG got their hands dirty enough to be culpable in anything. It will go how these things normally go, such is politics.

Just a quick reminder of the spending in this referendum, hopefully we'll also see investigation into the other side. 

 

This doesn't even the 9million the government spent on that leaflet telling us all to stay either. 

[Izzy]

21 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Tbf the expansion of NATO into eastern European areas IS a real issue - as recognised by Peter Hitchens on QT last week. 

 

It's a real shame Corbyn has been so active in terms of his political beliefs when it comes to his electability. Take away his background and he has enthused the young, built the largest political party in Europe, developed progressive policies that have public support and genuinely brought some personal honesty into the policy sphere. 

 

But his history won't go away.

 

I don't really know what to think when it comes to his history. 

Could be worse mate.

 

Imagine if he'd have ran through a field of wheat in the past for example 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Even if they are guilty, they’ll just get some sacrificial lamb to take the fall by taking the blame. I’d be amazed if BJ or MG got their hands dirty enough to be culpable in anything. It will go how these things normally go, such is politics.

Let's be honest, bj and mg only fronted leave because they thought it would get them closer to numbers 10 and 11.

[Donut]

2 hours ago, Milo said:

And the remain Project Fear campaign wasn't??!

Facts in brexit are utterly irrelevant.

 

Convince people theres something to be scared of, i.e. the EU and foreigners, and facts are irrelevant because emotions override facts.

 

Cambridge analytica have said that too.

 

And fact is, whether it offends people or not, a significant proportion of brexit voters are racist, are thick, are ignorant and had no idea what they do to the country.

 

If it offends you, tough. Youre probably one of them.

 

And then the goalposts are shifted over and over and over. No one agrees what brexit was and never will.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

Could be worse mate.

 

Imagine if he'd have ran through a field of wheat in the past for example 

Imagine having principles and sticking to them, even when it isn't popular. 

 

(Not saying he's right or wrong, and he's likely both at different times)

[Strokes]

3 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Let's be honest, bj and mg only fronted leave because they thought it would get them closer to numbers 10 and 11.

Exactly, which is why it would be astonishing if they corrupted to the point of making a victory. 

[Guest MattP]

1 minute ago, toddybad said:

Imagine having principles and sticking to them, even when it isn't popular. 

 

(Not saying he's right or wrong, and he's likely both at different times)

Do you still really believe he's honest and sticks to his principles? 

 

There a literally a video about 10 posts up of him being called out for his blatant lies, he campaigned for remain (albeit half heartedly) against 30 years of principles because his cabinet threatened to resign.

 

The whole honest, principled Jeremy is as bollocks, just like the kinder, gentler politics was. Just like the "I'll never nominate a peer" was. The guy is completely full of shit. 

[Strokes]

3 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Imagine having principles and sticking to them, even when it isn't popular. 

 

(Not saying he's right or wrong, and he's likely both at different times)

I think there is an awful lot to admire about him but unfortunately I don’t think that will be enough. If they can’t get him out, I can see this splitting the party in two.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Exactly, which is why it would be astonishing if they corrupted to the point of making a victory. 

I was agreeing, not arguing

[Beechey]

29 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Tbf the expansion of NATO into eastern European areas IS a real issue - as recognised by Peter Hitchens on QT last week. 

 

It's a real shame Corbyn has been so active in terms of his political beliefs when it comes to his electability. Take away his background and he has enthused the young, built the largest political party in Europe, developed progressive policies that have public support and genuinely brought some personal honesty into the policy sphere. 

 

But his history won't go away.

 

I don't really know what to think when it comes to his history. 

It might be an issue for Russia, but not for the countries who willingly join, and are free to leave if they so wish. It is Russia's fault in many respects that so many of their neighbours feel so threatened that they seek NATO membership.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Strokes said:

I think there is an awful lot to admire about him but unfortunately I don’t think that will be enough. If they can’t get him out, I can see this splitting the party in two.

I don't think so. 

He's actually done more about it then previous leaders.

[Strokes]

1 minute ago, toddybad said:

I was agreeing, not arguing

I know, I repped you and added further. No undertone.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Beechey said:

It might be an issue for Russia, but not for the countries who willingly join, and are free to leave if they so wish. It is Russia's fault in many respects that so many of their neighbours feel so threatened that they seek NATO membership.

Yeah I mean that's a perfectly valid argument but nato promised not to expand east. In the same way as Russia worrying it's neighbours, NATO on the doorstep worries the Russians. It's counter productive. It also allows Putin to make the west look like the bad guys. Not really sure what the answer is.

[Strokes]

1 minute ago, toddybad said:

I don't think so. 

He's actually done more about it then previous leaders.

What’s he done about it really? He ordered a review in 2016ish? What was the outcome? I don’t think we heard, or maybe I missed it, I can’t think of anything else tbh.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, MattP said:

Do you still really believe he's honest and sticks to his principles? 

 

There a literally a video about 10 posts up of him being called out for his blatant lies, he campaigned for remain (albeit half heartedly) against 30 years of principles because his cabinet threatened to resign.

 

The whole honest, principled Jeremy is as bollocks, just like the kinder, gentler politics was. Just like the "I'll never nominate a peer" was. The guy is completely full of shit. 

Tbh most of this stuff doesn't bother me that much. All I know is that when you see him with the public there's never been a politician more at home. Yes, I do believe he wants to make the world a better place for ordinary people. That isn't to say he hasn't done stupid things in the past.