Labour councillor suspended in anti-Semitism investigation

First topic message reminder :

A Labour councillor has been suspended from his local party group while allegations he wrote anti-Semitic posts on Facebook are investigated.

Manchester council leader Sir Richard Leese suspended Majid Dar after images of his posts were shared on Twitter.

Sir Richard said he believed the posts were "anti-Semitic and, in at least one case, grossly so".

Mr Dar said he was "apologetic", but explained his words criticised Israel and Zionism, not Jews.

His suspension comes two months after the government's equalities watchdog launched an investgation into the Labour Party over allegations of anti-Semitism .

'Facebook-savvy'
Sir Richard told councillors in an email that he had "received information alleging anti-Semitism relating to posts appearing on Majid's Facebook pages".

He wrote that he had met with the Ancoats and Beswick councillor, who had "maintained his innocence", but added that the content of some of the posts "is, in my view, anti-Semitic and, in at least one case, grossly so".

"On that basis, I have suspended Majid from the Labour group until further notice as a neutral act to allow a full investigation to take place."

The posts in question date from between 2012 and 2014 and have since been deleted.

Images of the posts were circulated on an anonymous Twitter account, which identifies itself as being "run by Jewish, ex-Labour Party volunteers", and show that other Facebook users have commented on them, targeting Jewish people.

Mr Dar said he had been criticising a government, not a people, and explained that had he been "Facebook-savvy" at the time, he "would have deleted it".

In more recent posts, which have not been deleted, Mr Dar has repeated his criticisms of Israel, while also sharing videos of Jewish anti-war speakers and photographs of his visit to a Bosnian Jewish museum.

Mr Dar said that if his posts were found to be anti-Semitic, "then I will surely apologise and I am apologetic".

Manchester City Council declined to comment. The Labour Party have been approached for comment.


https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-england-manchester-49113927?__twitter_impression=true


And this is the massive issue here. How the fuck can he not even know whether something is antisemitic or not?

Also imagine replacing the word Zionist with Muslim and rightly people would call that anti-Muslim bigotry. Yet as seen hate against Jews who believe in a historical homeland through self determination. Is seen as exceptable to hate Jews through this lens. Its basically replacing the word Jew with Zionism to allow hate to go unchallenged. If people are critical of Zionism, that is fine. {Which would still be odd, being as its basically calling for self determination for Jews in the land that they had their genesis. I mean imagine applying this to any other indigeneous group?} But being critical of something does not mean its then okay to hate the people that follow that concept. If they are against that view, they would also have to be against any nation of people that has self determination. Yet for some reason. This is only ever applied towards the Jewish state. Hence its a blantant cover for antisemitism

phildidge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:We don't know if this man has done anything wrong yet. Of course it's unwise to talk about Israel or Jews at all on Facebook, but we don't know if he made antisemitic comments or not.

Yes we do as he has been suspended

So what? Do you assume that everyone who is ever suspended from work pending an investigation is guilty, or that anyone arrested for an offence is automatically guilty?

phildidge wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Yes, I'm a firm believer of the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" too, and you have put your finger on what is becoming a serious threat to freedom of speech and expression, something that is equally important in my book.

It is becoming "unwise" to talk about a whole range of important issues that even marginally involve ethnicity because of the growing tendency of opposing factions to play the race card as their default position in an attempt to stifle debate.

Its not a case of innocent until proven guilty. He was suspended by the council leader as he deemed the facebook comments as antisemitic

Its only now a case of what punishment he faces for this

He's suspended whilst the matter is investigated.

Raggamuffin wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Its not a case of innocent until proven guilty. He was suspended by the council leader as he deemed the facebook comments as antisemitic

Its only now a case of what punishment he faces for this

He's suspended whilst the matter is investigated.

He has been suspended because he compared Israel to the Nazi's as well as other antisemitic posts. Again this is defined under Labours own defitinion of antisemitism. Like I said, it will only now be a case of what or if he faces any punishment. Its an open and shuit case on antisemitism by their own policies

phildidge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

He's suspended whilst the matter is investigated.

He has been suspended because he compared Israel to the Nazi's as well as other antisemitic posts. Again this is defined under Labours own defitinion of antisemitism. Like I said, it will only now be a case of what or if he faces any punishment. Its an open and shuit case on antisemitism by their own policies

Please quote his exact words rather than rely on what someone else claims.

In the meantime, try to understand that a suspension from a political party pending an investigation does not mean that someone is automatically guilty.

Raggamuffin wrote:

phildidge wrote:

He has been suspended because he compared Israel to the Nazi's as well as other antisemitic posts. Again this is defined under Labours own defitinion of antisemitism. Like I said, it will only now be a case of what or if he faces any punishment. Its an open and shuit case on antisemitism by their own policies

Please quote his exact words rather than rely on what someone else claims.

In the meantime, try to understand that a suspension from a political party pending an investigation does not mean that someone is automatically guilty.

I do not need to quote anything, you simple need to learn to read. I already posted the twitter link which shows what he posted on his facebook

Also

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/manchester-councillor-suspended-amid-anti-16639467

So I do not need to understand anything from you. Again his posts fall foul of Labours policy on antisemitism

phildidge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Please quote his exact words rather than rely on what someone else claims.

In the meantime, try to understand that a suspension from a political party pending an investigation does not mean that someone is automatically guilty.

I do not need to quote anything, you simple need to learn to read. I already posted the twitter link which shows what he posted on his facebook

Also

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/manchester-councillor-suspended-amid-anti-16639467

So I do not need to understand anything from you. Again his posts fall foul of Labours policy on antisemitism

It showed what someone else claimed he said.

Raggamuffin wrote:

phildidge wrote:

I do not need to quote anything, you simple need to learn to read. I already posted the twitter link which shows what he posted on his facebook

Also

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/manchester-councillor-suspended-amid-anti-16639467

So I do not need to understand anything from you. Again his posts fall foul of Labours policy on antisemitism

It showed what someone else claimed he said.

Actually both links show screenshots from his account. Which more importantly the councillor has not denied. Again the councillor admits to posting them and again the issue here is, that he deems them himself to not be antisemitic. It shows he does not know Labours own policy on antisemitism

Raggamuffin wrote:I really must sort out that forum. Quill appears to be on there, but I didn't activate him.

Hahaha...I saw that last night. Is it really him though?

Raggamuffin wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Its not a case of innocent until proven guilty. He was suspended by the council leader as he deemed the facebook comments as antisemitic

Its only now a case of what punishment he faces for this

He's suspended whilst the matter is investigated.

You're absolutely  right, Raggs; these are simply allegations. But the seemingly insoluble problem arises from the publication of and subsequent public debate over those allegations.

This issue is obviously important to those involved and the reputation of the organisation in which they are involved, and as has already been said this case is hardly world news.

For example, it pales into insignificance when compared to the impact of published allegations over the alleged paedophilia of Tory politicians Harvey Proctor, Leon Brittan and former PM Edward Heath by that odious character "Nick" who has just rightly been jailed by an obviously angry and disgusted judge. But the principles here are just the same - I remember the absolute feeding frenzy by the Left in forums such as this aimed primarily at scoring as many brownie points as possible against the Conservative Party.

It's a dilemma that is not going to go away, so far as I am concerned. While my heart tells me that allegations and initial investigations should not be publicised and thrown into the arena of speculation and vested interest point scoring ,which is why I oppose the naming of "celebrities" being investigated for serious and often grave offences (Sir Cliff Richard, for example) my old newspaper hack's head tells me that such matters are of genuine and important public interest and should be publicised (e.g. the Parliamentary expenses scandal).

But I don't know the answer.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I really must sort out that forum. Quill appears to be on there, but I didn't activate him.

Hahaha...I saw that last night. Is it really him though?

What and where is the forum you're talking about? Am I missing summat?

But, there you go, I must be considered too much of an ancient fuddy-duddy to warrant an invite!

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Syl wrote:

Hahaha...I saw that last night. Is it really him though?

What and where is the forum you're talking about? Am I missing summat?

But, there you go, I must be considered too much of an ancient fuddy-duddy to warrant an invite!

Not at all Fred, the average age of the poster there is about 70.

It's Rags forum...Angry Monkey.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I really must sort out that forum. Quill appears to be on there, but I didn't activate him.

Hahaha...I saw that last night. Is it really him though?

I really don't know. Whoever it is has posted a few times, but I can't tell if it's Quill.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Syl wrote:

Hahaha...I saw that last night. Is it really him though?

What and where is the forum you're talking about? Am I missing summat?

But, there you go, I must be considered too much of an ancient fuddy-duddy to warrant an invite!

It's an old forum Fred, and I'm afraid I do neglect it. I don't think I'm up to moderating anyone these days.