The observation that Jeremy is not antisemitic is not incompatible with the suggestion that the Labour party under Corbyn's leadership is institutionally antisemitic. For this suggestion to be true does not require intent, only that an environment exists which fosters antisemitism.

The argument I've heard is that whilst it is true that antisemitism within the Labour party is no more rife than within wider society, and whilst it is likely that some complaints of racism on both sides may be motivated at least as much by the embarrassment they cause to political opponents as genuine concern, and whilst reasonable minds may differ as to what constitutes antisemitism especially with respect to criticising Israel; the Labour party's process for dealing with these complaints may be considered so unduly ineffective as to be effectively giving the message that a level of antisemitism was acceptable.
.
If for example it treated these complaints as an attack on the party more than an opportunity to set a positive example; if for example the process was inept and slow. If the justice carried out was downplayed rather than trumpeted as an example to all. Then we might see any of these as reasons why progress in rooting out antisemitism in the party does not live up to our high expectations. With other areas of human rights Labour tends to be ahead of the curve. The stereotype is that the left wing is less racist, less sexist, less homophobic than society at large. Why would being only-as-antisemitic-as-average be considered something for Labour activists to crow about ?

I don't know if that's the case. I'm not saying that any of this is the case. Just that the arguments being put forward are not what I want to see. I'd rather see evidence of swift decisive action being taken on the complaints. I'd like to see objective measurement showing these interventions having an impact.

However guess I'm rare in finding these more convincing than the non sequitur, tu quoque and denialism that tends to cross my newsfeed. That said it's not a matter I've investigated that much and the arguments that Corbyn is racist tend to be similarly weak - e.g. well poisoning or guilt by association.

The trouble I suspect is the we live in a post truth society where rhetoric is a more effective tool to apply to the masses than logical persuasion and unless I make an effort to dig out the pertinent facts, all I'll see each way are emotive but ultimately insubstantial arguments.

It seems to me that this is religion messing with politics. Fair enough the Jews have good reason to fear political opinion, but that said. Keep out of politics and choose when the holocaust card really needs to be played.
There is evidence that Corbychov is both anti semitic and anti Israel. I'll add that that comes from a connection I have in Westminster.

Agree. It’s not helpful. I am sure Jonathan Sachs would not have been so vociferous on the matter.