It *is* antisemitic to hold Jews as Jews collectively or individually response for Israel's conduct, to assume they are loyal to Israel or to promote Jewish conspiracy theories.
It is *not* antisemitic to describe Israel as an apartheid state or support boycotts/sanctions
[makes very clear why Professor David Miller's comments and views are unacceptable, as set out by me and others here: …erningbristoluniversity.wordpress.com But also why likening Israel's treatment of Palestinians to apartheid South Africa is an entirely legitimate political stance]
[Of course, it was entirely predictable, if depressing, that so many of the responses to this are either excuses for anti-semitism or claims that legitimate criticism of Israel are automatically anti-semitic.]
A much more thorough and knowledgeable thread by @YairWallach here:
New analysis from @ONS suggests fall in non-UK nationals in employment is much smaller than suggested by Labour Force Survey data (although still a large fall in EU nationals in London)
Key table here. Latest LFS data shows a 480K fall in EU nationals in employment; RTI data shows fall of 184K (concentrated in London)
Does this mean the analysis of the LFS data @StrongerInNos & published here is wrong? escoe.ac.uk/estimating-the… It certainly suggests our "upper bound" of 1.3 million is overstated..
1. Leaving Single Market/Customs Union means major new trade barriers - customs and border checks, regulatory barriers, end of rules allowing services to be sold across borders.
2. A deal doesn't change that. It means no tariffs and quotas and *some* provisions that will stop trade breaking down. But the main impacts -on our and the government's own analysis, about two-thirds - happen either way
*Why* did the Home Office ignore the law in order to implement racist policies? As the EHRC report found, because that's what Theresa May and David Cameron wanted.
As a direct consequence, Home Office Ministers and officials deliberately and illegally ignored the impact of the "hostile environment" on ethnic minorities:
Home Office Ministers - in particular but not only Theresa May - and senior officials *chose* to ignore the racist impacts of their policies, despite repeated and direct warnings at the time.
This from @BBradley_Mans is false. Section 1 of the Equality Act 2010 *requires* public authorities to consider socio-economic disadvantage & to exercise powers with due regard to reducing inequality.
*This* government has *chosen* not to bring these provisions into force.(1/3)
Here is Section 1 of the Equality Act 2010. Why is @BBradley_Mans making this false claim, and will he correct it?
I also note that AFAIC @BBradley_Mans never signed the Early Day Motion calling for Section 1 to be brought into effect. So this tweet is not only false, but pure virtue-signalling. If he was serious about this issue, why not actually do something?