Connect with us

News

Labour MP Accuses Leader Jeremy Corbyn of Promoting anti-Semitism

Mirror News Desk

Published

on

anti-Semitism

Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the Labour Party, is once again accused of promoting anti-Semitism and has been claimed dangerous to the secular and tolerant society of the country.

Dame Louise Ellman, associated with the Labour party for more than 50 years, has resigned from the party claiming that Corbyn is “a danger to the country” and a “danger to the Jewish community” since his election as the Labour leader.

This is not the first time Corbyn or Labour party has been accused of such racial controversies. Earlier, in February and July this year, the party took action against 350 members of the party with the action ranging from expelled to giving formal warnings or asking them to resign from the party.

The anti-Semitism accusations come at a very serious time when the Labour Party is looking to gain the support of common people, in case of general elections.

Moreover, the accusations have forced the common secular, tolerant Britons to consider the fact that if a party like Labour can have an ideology against one of the major communities of the UK, then how safe other communities are if Labour emerges as the winner in general elections.

The Jewish community majorly hails from the Middle East that migrated in an attempt to safeguard themselves from various factors like physical abuse, anti-Semitism, political instability, poverty, and forced expulsion.

Ellman, while announcing her resignation from the party, said, “There is certainly a possibility, if not a likelihood, that Jeremy Corbyn could become prime minister, and this means I’ve had to face taking a decision.”

“In that situation I do not wish to stand as a Labour MP, asking people to vote for Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister. So I have come to the conclusion that I have to resign,” she added.

Last year, even former Prime Minister Theresa May claimed the same, saying if labour gains the majority in the parliament, it would be “national calamity”. Additionally, it won’t be wrong to consider the fact that it was the exact anti-Semitism thinking of the Labour party and its leaders that led to a decline in numbers of the community across the country, recently.

For a long time, the Britons have been successful in maintaining the air of harmony, secularism, and growth by working together and supporting every part of the community.

However, any such comments might lay waste to all those efforts and hard work of the citizens, adversely affecting the growth of the country, its economy, defence, trade and various other sectors on which the society and its entire section is completely dependent on.

The Home Affairs Select Committee should investigate the reason and truth behind such claims, ensuring that the Britons and the leaders do not commit the grave error, which Gulf region did a long time back.

News

Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab Favours Repatriation of ISIS Fighter’s Children

Mirror News Desk

Published

on

Dominic Raab

Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab has announced that several British orphans, whose parents died in Syria, will return to the UK.

Showing direct sympathy towards these children, Dominic Raab said, “These innocent, orphaned children should never have been subjected to the horrors of war. We have facilitated their return home because it was the right thing to do. Now they must be allowed the privacy and given the support to return to a normal life.”

The exact number of children to be repatriated has not been revealed as yet. Also, the identity of their parents is being kept hidden. But a recent tweet from Kurdish administration official Abdulkarim Omar stated that three British orphans from ISIS parents were handed over to a delegation representative of the British Foreign Ministry.

The fate of these children has been a matter of grave concern since a long time now. A humanitarian aid organisation, Save the Children welcomed the transfer referring to Omar’s tweet. As stated by the Head of Humanitarian Campaigns at Save the Children, Alison Griffin, “Today the UK government is transforming the lives of these innocent children who have been through terrible things that are far beyond their control.”

Highlighting the seriousness and the need to take immediate action, Griffin warned, “as many as 60 British children” are still stuck in Syria and warrant repatriation. She added, “All are as innocent as those rescued today and our very real fear is that they won’t all survive to see the spring. They must all be brought home before it is too late.”

Several others took the news with mixed optimism as the Senior Researcher of Human Rights Watch, Letta Tayler spoke of the move by Dominic Raab as a “token gesture”.

Speaking to CNN, Tayler said, “While it’s great that the UK is allowing the return of these citizens, shame on them for waiting this long. These returns should be the UK’s first step in immediately helping to evacuate all of its citizens trapped in northeast Syria. Bringing home only a few is a token gesture.”

Prior to this, Foreign Secretary David Davis warned that almost 60 British children who successfully escaped the ISIS earlier are thought to be trapped in Northeast Syria. Sources claim that he enquired details over the help given to them from Andrew Murrison, Foreign Office Minister. To this Murrison clearly stated that the orphaned children are government’s priority.  

Past records show that Dominic Raab has been concerned about the kind of life the British orphans in Syria are living as he strongly advocated in favour of the issue at the NSC meetings held in October.

The larger issue which remains unanswered even now is if the children who have parents do not deserve to be repatriated to the UK, where they can get better living conditions including proper educational facilities that are important for building a better future. Dominic Raab focusing only on “orphaned” children surely left the rest of them without any support from the government and the vision of a bleak future continues to prevail!

Continue Reading

News

Jo Swinson Delivers Flurry of Promises in Poorly Launched Manifesto

Mirror News Desk

Published

on

Jo Swinson

With General Elections less than a month away, the leader of Liberal Democrats, Jo Swinson, has released a flurry of promises in her election manifesto. Although the general elections have brought along a series of concerns, the election manifesto launch at the nightclub in north London seemed to mock those concerns.

Amidst nearing elections, the entire nation continues to figure out the moves that might root out the knife crime altogether, boost foreign relations post-Brexit, and enact policies so that Brexit does not negatively impact the economy, trade sector and employment sector.

In such a scenario, the promise of £50 billion as remain bonus, legalisation of cannabis for people over 18+ and creating programs to improve the condition of drug addicts and reduce prisoners, seems too good to be true.

Moreover, Jo Swinson has promised to ensure the flow of such a large amount by remaining with the European Union as it would provide a boost to the trade sector and economy of the country.

Other eye-catching points of Lib Dems’ election manifesto include increasing the number of teachers in school and their salaries, achieving 80 percent of energy through renewable sources, scrapping the UK’s continuous at-sea nuclear deterrent but maintaining a downgraded capability, replacing business rates in England with a Commercial Landowner Levy and constructing more homes and buildings each year.

With all these fascinating policies, it is pretty evident that Jo Swinson has completely utilised her learnings during the time she was a Business Minister in David Cameroon’s government.

Additionally, these policies portray the fact that the manifesto was introduced to lure all sections of society. However, the only limitation of these policies is the question, would remaining in the European Union provide funds for all of the above policies. And if not, what is the backup plan of the former business minister.

Aside from introducing flurry of promises, the other point that might stick out with the voters is the launch of the election manifesto. 39-year-old Jo Swinson launched the manifesto during a party at a nightclub and not during an official release with other party officials.

Additionally, calling Brexit ‘national humiliation’, which was decided democratically three years ago, might not go well with pro-Brexiteers or those seeking second referendum, and can even spark criticism from many, resulting in a further drop of support of Lib Dems in the YouGov polls.

If launching an election manifesto in a night club is set aside and the manifesto is looked upon closely, the manifesto might tip the voters in the favour of Lib Dems, possibly helping them in gaining more than 21 MPs in the House of Commons.

Continue Reading

News

Election Debate: Twitter Condemns Conservatives for Playing with Accounts

Mirror News Desk

Published

on

Election Debate

The fire of criticisms ahead of the general elections is like a usual order that brings more transparency in the parties’ doings and the policies they support. Recently, Twitter issued a warning against Conservative Party that rebranded one of its Twitter accounts “factcheckUK” during an ITV general election debate poll.

The debate that took place between Conservative Party leader Boris Johnson and Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn on Tuesday drew huge condemnation from the users and the organisations on social media platforms.

Both the leaders clashed over which of them is best placed to safeguard the NHS if they win the general election, with the Labour leader accusing the prime minister of being ready to sell it off to US corporations.

Even though the Twitter handle was solely based for the Conservative Party press office (CCHQPress), the name and images on the page were switched to a purple background with a checkmark and name “factcheckUK”. The account was used to check facts of Corbyn’s statements during the election debate between the leaders.

As the CCHQPress account carries a blue verified badge by Twitter, it signified the fact that it was a real account. Even though the name and branding of the account was changed during the election debate, it succeeded in keeping its badge of authenticity. On retweets, the name “factcheckUK” was displayed to the users.

Most of the Twitter users called the move as misleading the citizens, while the Twitter spokesperson warned that “any further attempts to mislead people by editing verified profile information – in a manner seen during the UK Election Debate – will result in decisive corrective action”.

An independent British fact-checking charity, Full Fact, condemned the change of name and the purpose amid a pivotal election debate as inappropriate and misleading.

“Please do not mistake it for an independent fact checking service,” the charity wrote.

According to one of the Twitter policies, the social media platform is allowed to permanently suspend the accounts that pose as another person, brand, or organisation in a confusing or deceptive manner. This is called Twitter’s impersonation policy, which is enacted upon violation of its rules.

Other than FactCheck, Labour Party has joined the wave of criticism saying, “Conservatives’ laughable attempt to dupe those watching the #ITVDebate by renaming their twitter account shows you can’t trust a word they say.”

Against the criticisms, the Conservative Party chairman James Cleverly said that the Twitter account was clearly identified as conservative, and was fact-checking the claims put forward by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. “It makes it absolutely clear it’s a conservative website, absolutely clear,” he further added.

The Conservative Party has been under fire earlier also for misleading usage of social media platforms, by posting unreal data related to the opposition. In the wake of misleading contents, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey in late October announced the banning of political ads on its platform.

The policy that is to come into effect on November 22 will severely affect the online campaigning of different parties and put an end to acts defaming the political party’s image before elections.

Despite the criticisms, Johnson handed 51-49 win in election debate poll, indicating the fact that he is still the favourite amongst Britons.  

Continue Reading

News

Labour’s Pledge to Eliminate Wildlife Crimes Might Turn Brexit’s Fate

Mirror News Desk

Published

on

Wildlife Crimes

As the general elections are nearing, members of both Labour and Conservative Party have been in a tussle, contesting to win. In the wake of inefficient Brexit delays, it appears that the leadership evaluations will highly impact the voting behaviours of the citizens, for the leaders are the human face of election campaigns.

Despite all the challenges that the political leaders of the two major parties have been facing, Labour Party has made some big announcements to combat wildlife crimes. The decision came days after the Conservative Party announced that on winning the election they will triple the tree planting rates.

Labour Party has promised to spend £4.5m on 82 new officers, who would be responsible for tackling wildlife crimes including banning fox hunting, hare coursing, maiming and killing wild animals, if it succeeds in winning the general elections scheduled for December 12.  

As has been noted, the government has continuously failed in meeting its international obligations to protect its most important wildlife sites and vulnerable species. As a result of which, it now lags behind other EU countries on its key criteria of co-existence.

Though the government previously pledged to improve environment record, but the European report shows no progress defending designated habitats. The Tories’ latest decision to preserve nature has attracted more hostile criticisms from the opposition but no such announcement has been made in terms of protecting wildlife species.

The EU has long set rules regarding animal welfare and works with the international community to fight illegal wildlife trade. Will the UK’s exit from the EU post Brexit bring an end to such practices and lead to more wildlife crimes in the country? If the voters, consider this as a possibility then Johnson-led government’s long fight for holding general elections, which has now become a reality, would be futile.

A recent report stated that 64 percent of the species assessed in the UK were either in “bad”, “poor” or “unknown” condition, which was up from the 57 percent diagnosed in between 2007-12. As of now, only 88 police staff, including civilian managers and community support officers, are dedicated to keep an eye on wildlife crimes.

Such statistics poses a serious question on the credibility of the UK achieving a strong, independent and environmental watchdog status, without a dramatic increase in the funding of environmental monitoring and restoration before Brexit. Henceforth, Labour’s move of addressing wildlife crimes is considered to be a wise move by many analytics.

Meanwhile, the Shadow Environment Secretary Sue Hayman said that the policy would “help protect both wild animals and property in rural communities”.

As known, increasing the number of wildlife and rural police officers across the country will help to gradually reduce wildlife crimes, promoting the UK’s promise of preserving nature and its precious species from the threat of extinction. But will the Labours succeed in winning the general elections on the disclosed motive at a time when the Conservatives have already announced their environment friendly program?  

Continue Reading

News

Did Britain Commit War Crimes in Iraq, Afghanistan under the Shadow of its Position?

Mirror News Desk

Published

on

British Army

The British army that has been deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq from the past few years as part of security responsibility for millions of citizens residing in both the countries, is accused of committing war crimes, leading to death of children and civilians’ torture.

Earlier, both in Iraq and Afghanistan, British soldiers were granted the permissions to kill unarmed civilians on suspicions of being spotters. There was an increase in violence and attacks against them by local fighters and militants, who opposed the British military occupation in their country.

It is believed to have started in Amrah in South East Iraq as early as June 2004, in the middle of intense fighting between the British army and Shia militia groups. To halt the violence and war crimes committed by the troops, international military campaign was later set up in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Iraq historic allegations team (IHAT) and Operation Northmoor was set up by the British government in 2010 and 2014 respectively to keep an eye on British army’s doings in Iraq and Afghanistan. Another aim of such campaign was to reduce the terrorist threats that rose with Taliban’s growing control in Afghanistan.

At present, around 1,000 British soldiers are deployed in Afghanistan.

The IHAT inquiry firm was established after 146 Iraqi men claimed to have been tortured at the hands of the British army, while Operation Northmoor was set up post 52 alleged illegal killings in Afghanistan.

Both IHAT and Operation Northmoor were closed in 2017 by the British government after the campaigning human rights lawyer Phil Shiner was struck off on grounds of multiple professional misconduct charges, including dishonesty and lack of integrity.

Many former IHAT and Operation Northmoor investigators said Shiner’s actions were used as an excuse to close down the inquiries.

The recently leaked documents from Iraq historic allegations team (IHAT) and Operation Northmoor contained evidences of murders by a senior SAS soldier, who was referred to prosecutors for attempting to pervert the course of justice as well as year-long investigations related to deaths in custody, beatings, torture and sexual abuse of detainees by members of the Black Watch.

In context of allegations on British government’s hindering the investigations, a spokesman from Ministry of Defence said, “Allegations that the MoD interfered with investigations or prosecution decisions relating to the conduct of UK forces in Iraq and Afghanistan are untrue.”

“Throughout the process, the decisions of prosecutors and the investigators have been independent of the MoD and involved external oversight and legal advice.”

The MoD said cases were referred to the independent Service Prosecuting Authority (SPA) as a result of investigations in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

“Cases from Iraq were referred as a result of historic investigations. It is untrue to claim cases investigated under Operation Northmoor in Afghanistan were not acted upon. After careful investigation, overseen by a former chief constable, no Northmoor cases were referred to prosecutors,” the spokesman said.

Though the reports of British army committing crimes were dismissed by many leaders as flawed, baseless and biased, it has succeeded in spreading misinformation against the brave servicemen. While some of the citizens remained troubled with the disclosure of such a news, many found it hard to get a hang of it.

Continue Reading

Trending