Don't start with this, col. I can see that you're angry with me too now and that's fine but you have to admit that you did sort of say that selling arms to murderous regimes is a good thing if it keeps people in jobs and boosts the economy. I wouldn't have put it as bluntly as BBG did but I can see why he reacted like that to your comments.
Keir Starmer
- Thread starter GibbosEmpire
- Start date
Keir Starmer makes me want to cancel my labour membership to be honest he isn't a leader for us. This should be an exciting time in one years time should be labour government again but with Keir in power feel nothing will improve as he doesn't have the balls to stand up for what's right like tonight.
Former Chair of 'Labour Friends of Palestine', Lisa Nandy. I share your disappointment, but she never really spoke out against Israeli aggression even when she was in that role, so it doesn't surprise me.
HolgateCorner
Well-known member
I can see why people are disappointed that Starmer is being so careful to avoid the right wing elephant trap which has been carefully set for him on Israel by the Tory far right but for me it is even more disappointing that coluka can’t post and debate his opinions without suffering abuse on a Boro football forum.
That is exactly the sort of extremist intolerance which has led to the current violent bloodbath on the Gaza Strip.
That is exactly the sort of extremist intolerance which has led to the current violent bloodbath on the Gaza Strip.
30% of the labour MPs voted against the whip ..
Either
(A) Starmer has such a vested interest in this ( whether it's funding / fear of the papers / or some other reason) it was worth taking the Tories shambolicness off the front pages for ...
Or
(B) It's such a principled decision for him personally, in regards to ' not a ceasefire ' .. it's worth it to him.
I've been asked to ' hold my nose ' and vote for the centerists of the labour party often enough to stop the Tories in / gaining an advantage.
Shame he couldn't read the room and ' hold his nose ' . There's some very good labour MPs on that list , with good local following .
Either
(A) Starmer has such a vested interest in this ( whether it's funding / fear of the papers / or some other reason) it was worth taking the Tories shambolicness off the front pages for ...
Or
(B) It's such a principled decision for him personally, in regards to ' not a ceasefire ' .. it's worth it to him.
I've been asked to ' hold my nose ' and vote for the centerists of the labour party often enough to stop the Tories in / gaining an advantage.
Shame he couldn't read the room and ' hold his nose ' . There's some very good labour MPs on that list , with good local following .
What is the point of Labour friends of Palestine if they won't call for a ceasefire?
And
that a few on the board have blamed the left. I'm not sure how they're involved or what they did but it's defiantly their fault(A) is more or less the correct answer.
Have a look at who funded his leadership campaign. If this had been any other issue and he'd had the same backlash that he's had on this he'd have done his usual thing of changing his position within hours. He can't do that on this because that would be biting the hand that feeds.
r00fie1
Well-known member
Absolutely. I can go back and remember the Wilson Government and every other since.
Never in my lifetime.
Not in my name.
GibbosEmpire
Well-known member
Cancelled my Labour membership a few years ago, get the feeling it was the right decision
Unfortunately they've all been pushed out the sidelines or already had the whip removed. I know that roofie has a problem with the SCG at times but you could hardly blame them for keeping their heads down for a bit when Starmer had his axe out and his cronies were busy booting anyone with a left wing bone in their body out of the party.
BlindBoyGrunt
Well-known member
Not only did he take that money but he hid it until after the leadership election results had been announced.
He knew what he was doing then and he knows what he's doing now.
I just stopped paying and let mine lapse of soon as Starmer became leader. I know lots of other people who did the same thing. We could see him for what he really was, even back then and we wanted no part of it.
Amazed that no one has called me a Tory shill or a Tory enabler on this thread yet. That's what usually happens. Disappointing.
His opinion that the country is right to sell weapons and bombs to Israel, which we know are being used to carry out a genocide, because something something profit, something something Russia? Really? Can't say I see any particular reason that should be beyond criticism.
Well, I'll call you it if it stops you feeling disappointed. You're only a Tory enabler if your different left-wing perspective causes you to fail to vote to get/keep the Tory candidate out. Otherwise. I'm calm with people leaving the party and considered it myself over Reeves ruling out a wealth tax - a policy I can see no possibility of avoiding if the necessary social rebuild is to take place.
Personally, as I've said, the ceasefire issue is a nuanced - and ultimately irrelevant - call, and for that reason I think a free vote was justified. At the same time, it would be a brave position to call one, which the Tories would try to exploit.
You have a point, certainly: there's seldom any 'equivalence' in news coverage between Western 'like us' casualties and brown-skinned 'over there' ones.
You're absolutely wrong there's no "more to it than that" though. Like 9/11. the nature of the incursion on October 7th had an element of performative cruelty that it is impossible to turn away from, especially if you're Israeli. Imagine it happened down the road from you, to families you may know.
Of course it's a trap Israel was always going to walk into and now they're the bad guys whom everyone hates once again. But whatever the back story, you can't deny they have reason to walk there. It's also a 'Western luxury for us to sit in our cosy homes and fail to imagine how it feels to be them at this moment.
breakthewallsdown
Well-known member
I did as soon as he suspended McDonald
Otto42
Well-known member
Exactly this and why I kept out of this thread, except for a quip about Corbyn. They've driven off anyone vaguely right wing and if they aren't careful they'll drive off anyone not on the left of the Labour Party.
1finny
Well-known member
Fair enough for sticking with your principles - I do like that.
I‘m sure you know but membership of any party counts for very little in the big scheme of things (I recognise it means a lot to the individual).
It’s a bit sad but stopping a membership is about as symbolic as a vote in the UK commons on a ceasefire. All a bit pointless.
On the bigger picture ref Starmer and the ‘revolt’.
I think its a good thing.
I understand Starmer’s position and I understand the position of those that voted for the ceasefire.
I’m not going to condemn anyone for taking a view on this - I don’t think it is an easy one.
A ‘free vote’ would have been an easy option - I’m struggling to understand why he didn’t do that and all I can think of is there would have been a cry of ‘weak leadership’.
That is his headline for Sunak and he wouldn’t risk that.
TeaCider
Well-known member
Walking eyes open in to a trap set by the SNP, it was so avoidable. A free vote, it still wouldn't have passed, not that it would have been a bad thing if it had, and party unity wouldn't have been badly damaged over an issue they can't signifcantly impact in the first place.
Labour:
Labour:
HolgateCorner
Well-known member
I’m not saying I agree with his posts or that they should be beyond criticism but he does have the right to his opinion without being accused or abused.
Nobody on this Boro forum can vaguely influence Tory and U.K. foreign policy, nor can the Labour Party out of power in a divided nation, why be so vitriolic and intolerant about looking at alternative opinions?
I really, really can’t understand it.