[Malcolm Armsteen]

[The Weeping Angel]

Have any Western leaders gone in hard on Israel? Seems like there’s an agreed position, with the US leading on it.

The leadership have, via briefing, been unnecessarily tactless, same as they were in Batley and Spence.

According to someone on another forum it's because he won't call out Israel by name.

[Andy McDandy]

Lots of stress on the rule of law. Something Sunak had problems matching at times.

[The Weeping Angel]

Oh and he's endorsed war crimes

https://labourlist.org/2023/10/labour-k ... ignations/

Labour’s stance towards the conflict between Israel and Hamas is drawing growing criticism, with Starmer’s statement last night condemned by left-wing members of the party’s ruling national executive committee (NEC). Mish Rahman accused the Labour leader of having “endorsed war crimes”, adding: “You still don’t have the courage to call them out for what they are. You are no better than Sunak or the Tories on this. Equally complicit.” His NEC colleague Jess Barnard also hit out at the statement, writing: “Ten days innocent Palestinians have been under bombardment. Thousands of innocent people are dead and still without food, water and power. Where have you been?”

[kreuzberger]

I can't imagine Netanyahu being fearful of the UK government's stance, even if that is backed up by the opposition. The debate is close to irrelevant.

I am also no great fan of the Vase Carrier's timidity, but he has been mentioning "international law" since the moment this all kicked off. Maintaining diplomatic courtesy is not complicity. In fact, everyone knew who and what he was talking about - except those fucking idiots, clearly.

[The Weeping Angel]

When I was on my way back from Tamworth someone I know and trusted wasn't happy with Starmer's comments on LBC and she said that Jess Phillips and other MPs were getting grief over this from their muslim constituents. Then there's this article from The Times, showing the concern that MPs have over this.

[Youngian]

Do people from Pakistani backgrounds feel strongly that states concocted with British imperialist connivance in the late 1940s shouldn’t exist?

[davidjay]

Do people from Pakistani backgrounds feel strongly that states concocted with British imperialist connivance in the late 1940s shouldn’t exist?

There's a lot of pro-Palestinian flags and posters in Muslim areas.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Corbyn got a very high number of Muslim votes. Depends where the drop off from that is. 20 constutyencies have a Muslim population over 30%, though they will be younger than average so the electorate percentage will be a fair bit younger.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/co ... -religion/

Most of these are very safe Labour seats. Don't know about the others.

One to look out for might be Wycombe. Steve Baker has been supportive of Palestinian statehood since the vote in 2014, and that might help him get a hearing, particularly if he's got some constituency work on issues like helping with visa applications to point to as well. Maybe being a Brexiter isn't unhelpful in this context. Maybe a smaller than expected swing against him?

[Abernathy]

This does need some attention. The last time significant numbers of muslim voters deserted the Labour Party was in 2003, as a reaction to Blair’s unwise decision to join George W Bush in invading Iraq. It did not ultimately prevent Labour from being re-elected to government in 2005, but we certainly felt the effects in local elections in our patch, where some re-drawn ward boundaries that brought several hundred muslim voters into the ward , coupled with some cynical Lib Dem bandwagon jumping, led to us losing councillors.

The issue seems to be that these folk think that Starmer said that he thought Israel was right to cut off water supplies and electrical power to Gaza. He did not. He has been extremely careful to assert that Israel has a right to defend itself, but that doing so must mean acting within the bounds of international law(which cutting off power and water is not). This needs to be more forcefully asserted.

[davidjay]

I don't think it will be as much of a problem in Parliamentary elections as in local ones, where the kingmakers in Muslim areas will happily flit between whichever party offers them the most. I hope not, anyway.

[Tubby Isaacs]

The issue seems to be that these folk think that Starmer said that he thought Israel was right to cut off water supplies and electrical power to Gaza. He did not. He has been extremely careful to assert that Israel has a right to defend itself, but that doing so must mean acting within the bounds of international law(which cutting off power and water is not). This needs to be more forcefully asserted.

It didn't look great when Starmer didn't answer a direct question on cutting off power and water though. It seems to have been an agreed position among the allies to keep criticism of Israel implied rather than direct and trust the US to talk them out of their wildest Likud stuff. But you can see why lots of people strongly committed to Palestine would not be happy with that.

The SNP have lost a lot of votes lately but might be in a position to gain some over their position in some Glasgow seats. The Lib Dems probably less so. Don't know if a Rahman type candidate could run in Tower Hamlets, but both Labour MPs are probably safe anyway.

[The Weeping Angel]

This does need some attention. The last time significant numbers of muslim voters deserted the Labour Party was in 2003, as a reaction to Blair’s unwise decision to join George W Bush in invading Iraq. It did not ultimately prevent Labour from being re-elected to government in 2005, but we certainly felt the effects in local elections in our patch, where some re-drawn ward boundaries that brought several hundred muslim voters into the ward , coupled with some cynical Lib Dem bandwagon jumping, led to us losing councillors.

The issue seems to be that these folk think that Starmer said that he thought Israel was right to cut off water supplies and electrical power to Gaza. He did not. He has been extremely careful to assert that Israel has a right to defend itself, but that doing so must mean acting within the bounds of international law(which cutting off power and water is not). This needs to be more forcefully asserted.

He has responded over that

[davidjay]

If I was him, and I looked at those replies , I'd think "Fuck it. This lot deserve another five years of the Tories."

[Tubby Isaacs]

Starmer's call to go after these people has aged fairly well.

[Yug]

While JVFL appear to be hinting at a "false flag" attack, I reckon if there's anything in this it's most likely to be "collateral damage".

Bad things happen in wars.

[The Weeping Angel]

[Abernathy]

"The relationship is becoming terminal"

What on earth can that mean ?

[Oboogie]

"The relationship is becoming terminal"

What on earth can that mean ?

Are they going to defect? To where? Which is the pro-Hamas party?
Or are they going to instigate a no-confidence vote in Starmer? To replace him with whom? Who is the pro-Hamas leader-in-waiting who can win an election?

[Watchman]

Fortunately Kier is a grown-up, and is perfectly capable of behind the scenes conversations