Knife crime in London, another 4 dead.

fillyboy said:
He told BBC London: "When Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel.
Click to expand...


Aren't you going to tell me?

Is it true?

There are two possibilities:

A) Livingstone said something that is true, but people don't like it.

B) Livingstone said something that isn't true, and people don't like it.

I would not be happy with (B).

But (A)?
 
OK.

So you've told me:

fillyboy said:
He told BBC London: "When Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel.
Click to expand...

And you've told me that was not Hitler's policy in 1932.

Why did that take so long?
 
I just started looking, and there's been a lot of argument.

I see that two of the inaccuracies pointed out are (1) it was signed in 1933, not 1932 and (2) the place was not called Israel at the time, it was called Palestine.

These seem rather trivial, perhaps there are more convincing errors in what Livingstone had to say.

But do you agree with those first two points?

Or do you deny that the Haavara Agreement ever existed?
 
JohnD said:
B) Livingstone said something that isn't true,
Click to expand...
Yup

Ken Livingstone would do well to read Grossman, learn his history and not attack historical memory through the lens of antisemitic falsehoods

It’s possible that Livingstone alluded to The Haavara (Ha’avarah) Agreement of 1933. This plan would allow German Jews to emigrate to Palestine and keep some of the value of their property in Germany. Negotiations proved controversial in many Jewish circles. The Nazis saw this as a means to undermine the solidarity of Jewish boycotts of German goods. It had little to do with a desire to resettle German Jews
https://www.faith-matters.org/2016/04/29/why-ken-livingstone-is-wrong-about-hitler-and-zionism/
 
Notch7 said:
Yup

Ken Livingstone would do well to read Grossman, learn his history and not attack historical memory through the lens of antisemitic falsehoods

It’s possible that Livingstone alluded to The Haavara (Ha’avarah) Agreement of 1933. This plan would allow German Jews to emigrate to Palestine and keep some of the value of their property in Germany. Negotiations proved controversial in many Jewish circles. The Nazis saw this as a means to undermine the solidarity of Jewish boycotts of German goods. It had little to do with a desire to resettle German Jews
https://www.faith-matters.org/2016/04/29/why-ken-livingstone-is-wrong-about-hitler-and-zionism/
Click to expand...
What did Livingstone say that wasn't true?
By the way I notice that your sources are Jewish which is ok, therefor others who quote sources which are of non Jewish origin should be ok as well.
 
fillyboy said:
You missed this bit:

He told BBC London: "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."

That's the line that earned him the condemnation of and suspension from the Labour party. What he said about Netanyahu was misrepresentation, as was his re-writing of history. If that wasn't the case, then surely he wouldn't have been suspended from the Labour party, would he?
Click to expand...
It is all down to interpretation, if you don't like Livingstone then it can be construed as anti Semitic , on the other hand if you don't have an axe to grind it could be that Livingstone is guilty of clumsy history.
Netanyahu made a notorious speech in which he claimed that the Palestinians were responsible for the Holocaust, if that isn't anti semitism directed against Palestinians I don't know what is.
Using the smear of anti semitism' to take out political Opponents only devalues the true interpretation of anti semitism'.
 
fillyboy said:
Click to expand...
That bloke John Mann appears to have mental health issues, you only have to look at his eyes to see he is under some sort of Psychological stress.
It isn't really fair on the guy to use him like that .
 
Vinty said:
It is all down to interpretation, if you don't like Livingstone then it can be construed as anti Semitic , on the other hand if you don't have an axe to grind it could be that Livingstone is guilty of clumsy history.
Netanyahu made a notorious speech in which he claimed that the Palestinians were responsible for the Holocaust, if that isn't anti semitism directed against Palestinians I don't know what is.
Using the smear of anti semitism' to take out political Opponents only devalues the true interpretation of anti semitism'.
Click to expand...

Actually, I quite like Ken Livingstone, he's a real character and I certainly have no axe to grind with him, but, he's got a very long track record of antisemitism, as a result he was suspended from the labour party followed by a second suspension pending more detailed investigations whereupon he resigned from the party.
He knew he couldn't fight his corner because quite clearly, his position was indefensible.
 
Vinty said:
That bloke John Mann appears to have mental health issues, you only have to look at his eyes to see he is under some sort of Psychological stress.
It isn't really fair on the guy to use him like that .
Click to expand...

That's Jews for ya, no sense of humour.
 
fillyboy said:
Actually, I quite like Ken Livingstone, he's a real character and I certainly have no axe to grind with him, but, he's got a very long track record of antisemitism, as a result he was suspended from the labour party followed by a second suspension pending more detailed investigations whereupon he resigned from the party.
He knew he couldn't fight his corner because quite clearly, his position was indefensible.
Click to expand...
Livingstone was thrown to the Wolves by his own party because they didn't want to be stigmatised as anti Semitic ,,so they got got rid of him hoping that would be the end of the problem , but it wasn't was it?what you don't understand all this "Labour anti semitism" canard only surfaced since Corbyn became leader of the Labour party.
Face the fact that there are elements in your own country and Abroad who are terrified of the prospect of a Corbyn government.
The UK is still a big hitter in world affairs and with a Corbyn government in charge a lot of problems could arise.
Corbyn has said that his government would recognise a Palestinian state , Israel has said that is totally unacceptable.
 
And there's the rub, lets not forget he once referred to Hamas as his friends ffs.. a terrorist group. He's almost a saviour for the Tories because of this. Who in their right mind wants Boris or that corrupt sellout to Sky corp as PM let alone Corbyn.
 
festive said:
And there's the rub, lets not forget he once referred to Hamas as his friends ffs.. a terrorist group. He's almost a saviour for the Tories because of this. Who in their right mind wants Boris or that corrupt sellout to Sky corp as PM let alone Corbyn.
Click to expand...

When was this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top