Ken Livingstone Warns He Will Sue Labour If He Is Expelled For Anti-Semitism

The agreement was controversial at the time, and was criticised by many Jewish leaders both within the Zionist movement (such as the Revisionist Zionist leader Ze'ev Jabotinsky) and outside it.^[4] For German Jews, the agreement offered a way to leave an increasingly hostile environment in Nazi Germany; for the Yishuv, the new Jewish community in Palestine, it offered access to both immigrants and some economic support; and for the Nazis it was seen as a way of breaking the Anti-Nazi boycott of 1933, which had mass support among European Jews and was thought by the German state as a potential threat to a fragile German economy.

The Haavara Agreement was thought among some Nazi circles to be a possible way to rid the country of its supposed "Jewish problem." The head of the Middle Eastern division of the foreign ministry, the anti-Nazi Werner Otto von Hentig, supported the policy of concentrating Jews in Palestine. Hentig believed that if the Jewish population was concentrated in a single foreign entity, then foreign diplomatic policy and containment of the Jews would become easier. Hitler's own support of the Haavara Agreement was unclear and varied throughout the 1930s. Initially, Hitler criticized the agreement, but reversed his opinion and supported it in the period 1937-1939.
After the German invasion of Poland in September 1939, the program was ended.

nicko wrote:Sack him NOW.

nicko wrote:Sack him NOW.

Thorin wrote:In modern times it is not Labour’s normal practice to belittle the views of those who say they have been victims of racial prejudice, to query their motives and to reject the premises of their complaint. For good reasons, the party’s default position has become a determined readiness to define racism as its victims would like it to be defined. But there is arguably now an exception to this basic ethos of sensitivity: Jews. When the allegation is antisemitism and a Labour politician is being accused, the dynamic is often reversed. A presumption can take hold that the offence cannot have been committed because the left is opposed to all racism.

Warped logic then unfolds: anti-racists cannot be guilty of prejudice against Jews, so it follows that Jewish complaints about prejudice are dishonest. The offence is pushed back on to the people who thought they had been offended. It is reconfigured as a plot to discredit political foes; part of a hidden agenda connected to Israel-Palestine. This argument then feeds the idea that an accusation of antisemitism is a weapon deployed by Jews (usually for decorum’s sake recast as “Zionists”) for nefarious purposes. Thus the ancient racist narrative of kosher conspiracy and shadowy machination thrives even among those who imagine they are policing racism.

This pattern has played itself out in public view in the case of Ken Livingstone’s disciplinary hearing. He was charged with bringing the party into disrepute over remarks he made last year – and has repeated subsequently – bundling Zionism and Nazism together in a mangled retelling of the 1930s, depicting Hitler’s supposedly more nuanced attitudes “before he went mad”. Even aside from the grotesque misreading of history, this kind of language is deeply offensive. Its rhetorical purpose is to imply intellectual or actual Jewish complicity with the perpetrators of their genocide, diminishing the crime of the Holocaust, and so undermine the moral foundations of the state of Israel.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of Middle East conflict, that is a malicious way to handle matters of enormous complexity and cultural sensitivity. Mr Livingstone’s statements and unapologetic stances ooze contempt for the Jewish community. He has had every opportunity to moderate his language, rephrase his opinions and seek conciliation. Instead he has chosen gleeful defiance. He and his supporters have dismissed the row as a plot by enemies of Jeremy Corbyn, a smear campaign to discredit the leader and his friends.

Leave aside the internal wrangles that have tortured the opposition for the past two years. Set apart parallel arguments around Mr Corbyn’s opinions. Mr Livingstone’s case is egregious. The Labour leader on Wednesday recognised that his old comrade has caused “deep offence” that he has “failed to acknowledge”. Mr Corbyn has already committed Labour to a policy of “zero tolerance” on antisemitism. The party recognises definitions of the term that include vindictive revisionism of the Hitler-as-Zionist variety.

Every significant Jewish community body, every respectable historian, and every organisation that studies the Holocaust, to learn its lessons, has said that Mr Livingstone’s language is unacceptable.

Most Jews think it was hurtful. But a Labour committee has decided not to mind their pain. Mr Livingstone was found guilty of bringing the party into only minor disrepute, such that only suspension is required. Mr Corbyn has suggested further disciplinary action might be taken, although it is unclear of what kind.

How has it even come this far? Labour has heard every credible source say that one of its members has perpetrated and stoked prejudice against the Jewish community. It says his actions were wrong, but he is still in the party. An ugly conclusion is inevitable: Labour values Mr Livingstone’s membership over the fight against antisemitism. “Zero tolerance” was a lie.


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/05/the-guardian-view-on-labour-and-ken-livingstone-wrong-decision-terrible-message

Let's remember when Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.

Raggamuffin wrote:Here's the quote:

Let's remember when Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.

If you miss off the first part, the second part isn't in context.

Raggamuffin wrote:What he said was perfectly clear and logical. There's nothing antisemitic about it.

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:What he said was perfectly clear and logical. There's nothing antisemitic about it.

Really, all those who participated in the holocaust did so not out of hate, and were all mad?

How is claiming Hitler wanting rid of Jews. No matter where in the world, not Israel, as it did not exist then (context missed by you again to deligitimnize Israel through comparisons to the nazis, which is a form of antisemitism,). Is some how to you supporting Zionism.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Really, all those who participated in the holocaust did so not out of hate, and were all mad?

How is claiming Hitler wanting rid of Jews. No matter where in the world, not Israel, as it did not exist then (context missed by you again to deligitimnize Israel through comparisons to the nazis, which is a form of antisemitism,). Is some how to you supporting Zionism.

I've explained to you several times, but you don't understand.

I don't think that saying Hitler went mad is antisemitic either.

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I've explained to you several times, but you don't understand.

I don't think that saying Hitler went mad is antisemitic either.

Really?

You don;t think its Nazi apologist babble for the holocaust? Claiming a madness caused the holocaust and not hate of the Jews?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Really?

You don;t think its Nazi apologist babble for the holocaust? Claiming a madness caused the holocaust and not hate of the Jews?

No.

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No.

Well you think Hitler went mad and murdered 11 million then and it had nothing to do with hate?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Well you think Hitler went mad and murdered 11 million then and it had nothing to do with hate?

I don't think it's nazi apologist babble to claim that Hitler went mad and killed six million Jews.

Raggamuffin wrote:More red herrings, more straw man arguments, more moving of the goal posts. It's you who's digging yourself into a hole Didge.

Raggamuffin wrote:The case is certainly closed - Ken has not been expelled because he was not antisemitic.

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:The case is certainly closed - Ken has not been expelled because he was not antisemitic.

He is as seen a Nazi apologist, like yourself, who thinks its okay to not blame the hate of Jews via Nazism, but Chronic anxiety on the holocaust.

You really fucked up this time Rags

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


He is as seen a Nazi apologist, like yourself, who thinks its okay to not blame the hate of Jews via Nazism, but Chronic anxiety on the holocaust.

You really fucked up this time Rags

Chronic anxiety? You just made that up. You've messed up badly this time Didge.

Go and harass someone else if you want a row.

Raggamuffin wrote:Since when is having chronic anxiety the same thing as going "mad"? That's just stigmatising those who have chronic anxiety. Shame on you Didge.

Raggamuffin wrote:Anyway, saying that Hitler went mad isn't antisemitic, whichever way you look at it. Only someone who is paranoid or a bit strange would think so.

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Anyway, saying that Hitler went mad isn't antisemitic, whichever way you look at it. Only someone who is paranoid or a bit strange would think so.

So to Rags, the holocaust was not due to ideological hate but madness

David Irvine would love you rags

You do realise you have made yourself a Holocaust denier by such a claim?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


So to Rags, the holocaust was not due to ideological hate but madness

David Irvine would love you rags

You do realise you have made yourself a Holocaust denier by such a claim?

I didn't say that. I said it's not antisemitic to say that Hitler went mad. Try actually reading what I say rather than what you wish I'd said.

You clearly don't know what Holocaust denial is.  

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I didn't say that. I said it's not antisemitic to say that Hitler went mad. Try actually reading what I say rather than what you wish I'd said.

You clearly don't know what Holocaust denial is.  

That makes you a holocaust denier, claiming hate is not the reason for the murder of a 11 million but madness is the excuse for you.

All can read what you have said and its Nazi apologist babble

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:

That makes you a holocaust denier, claiming hate is not the reason for the murder of a 11 million but madness is the excuse for you.

All can read what you have said and its Nazi apologist babble

I didn't claim anything of the kind. You're telling more and more lies Didgey. Had another bad day?

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I didn't claim anything of the kind. You're telling more and more lies Didgey. Had another bad day?

You have defended Kens claim to Hitler going mad and then murdering Jews and not any hate of Jews as the cause.
Its you having the bad day being exposed as a Nazi apologist

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


You have defended Kens claim to Hitler going mad and then murdering Jews and not any hate of Jews as the cause.
Its you having the bad day being exposed as a Nazi apologist

You claimed that I said the holocaust was caused by chronic anxiety, which is a lie. You exposed yourself as a fan of the murder of Palestinians a long time ago - because you hate Muslims.

Oh, are you drunk again? Is that why you can't read my posts?

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You claimed that I said the holocaust was caused by chronic anxiety, which is a lie. You exposed yourself as a fan of the murder of Palestinians a long time ago - because you hate Muslims.

Oh, are you drunk again? Is that why you can't read my posts?

I never claimed that.

I just stated that Hitler suffered from Chronic anxiety

You stated it was not antisemitic to claim Hitler murdered the Jews, because to you he went mad and not off ideological hate.

So are you claiming Nazism had nothing to do with the murder of 6 million Jews?

Or are you claiming it was only due to your claim and defense of Ken, being down to madness?

Take your time?

He is as seen a Nazi apologist, like yourself, who thinks its okay to not blame the hate of Jews via Nazism, but Chronic anxiety on the holocaust.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


I never claimed that.

I just stated that Hitler suffered from Chronic anxiety

You stated it was not antisemitic to claim Hitler murdered the Jews, because to you he went mad and not off ideological hate.

So are you claiming Nazism had nothing to do with the murder of 6 million Jews?

Or are you claiming it was only due to your claim and defense of Ken, being down to madness?

Take your time?

You said that Ken blamed it on chronic anxiety, and you implied that I agreed with him. He didn't say that, and I didn't imply it either.

He is as seen a Nazi apologist, like yourself, who thinks its okay to not blame the hate of Jews via Nazism, but Chronic anxiety on the holocaust.

You're really clutching at straws, as well as implying that people who have chronic anxiety are "mad".

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You said that Ken blamed it on chronic anxiety, and you implied that I agreed with him. He didn't say that, and I didn't imply it either.



You're really clutching at straws, as well as implying that people who have chronic anxiety are "mad".

Well that was the mental health condition he suffered from.
So for you both to back madness, means you think his Chronic anxiety was the cause of the Holocaust.
As there is no case for Hitler being insane.

So again, you defending Kens claim to Hitler going mad and then only after this murdering Jews.

So lets have you on record and say, that it was madness and not ideological hate, as you believe that caused the Holocaust?

This is Priceless, who would have thought you were a nazi apologist?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Well that was the mental health condition he suffered from.
So for you both to back madness, means you think his Chronic anxiety was the cause of the Holocaust.
As there is no case for Hitler being insane.

So again, you defending Kens claim to Hitler going mad and then only after this murdering Jews.

So lets have you on record and say, that it was madness and not ideological hate, as you believe that caused the Holocaust?

This is Priceless, who would have thought you were a nazi apologist?

I didn't say that though, so you're lying yet again.

Look, the only reason you hate Ken is that you support the Israeli soldiers killing Palestinians, and so you will lie about everything.

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I didn't say that though, so you're lying yet again.

Look, the only reason you hate Ken is that you support the Israeli soldiers killing Palestinians, and so you will lie about everything.

You said its not antisemitic to claim Hitler was mad to then carry out the holocaust

You are by such views an apologist for Nazism

That is a fact

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


You said its not antisemitic to claim Hitler was mad to then carry out the holocaust

You are by such views an apologist for Nazism

That is a fact

It's not antisemitic to say that Hitler went mad. Once again, you fail to see the context re the build up to killing the Jews. You think that everything happened overnight, so it's laughable for you to claim that you "know" about history. You know nothing about anything, and you don't understand anything, except how to cause an argument in an empty room.

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It's not antisemitic to say that Hitler went mad. Once again, you fail to see the context re the build up to killing the Jews. You think that everything happened overnight, so it's laughable for you to claim that you "know" about history. You know nothing about anything, and you don't understand anything, except how to cause an argument in an empty room.

There you go.

Rags thinks its nothing to do with Nazi ideology the murder of a 11 million people.

She then invokes the smile laugh as she knows she now is looking very much like a Nazi apologist

I wonder if they will teach this in school

Wolf was right about you being racist.

Case closed

Thorin wrote:I think someone is regretting their Nazi Apologist views on the holocaust.

Was so poor, its now recorded on this forum.

Thorin wrote:So now she admits to her Nazi Apologist stance and is using maniacal laughter

So apparently I am wrong and the Holocaust was not down to hateful ideology, but to rags a mental health issue

Go figure

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:So now she admits to her Nazi Apologist stance and is using maniacal laughter

So apparently I am wrong and the Holocaust was not down to hateful ideology, but to rags a mental health issue

Go figure

You're the one who equated chronic anxiety to being "mad", not me. You don't understand history at all, despite your claim that you do. Maybe you're just a bit thick.