BS: Labour party discussion

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Dec 16 - 10:04 AM

What evidence have I that other parties need to conduct their own enquiries? Well, to ensure that I am not accused of quoting biased comment, now about this article in the Jewish News?

bobad - no it isn't.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 09 Dec 16 - 10:10 AM

Little wonder that Bobad failed to identify it

More Carroll Made Up Shit®"

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 09 Dec 16 - 10:16 AM

And here's an example of the "pro Palestinian" activists groups like Canary Mission expose for their Fascistic tactics.

Students are shouting down pro-Israel speakers — and silencing free speech

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Dec 16 - 11:55 AM

Israelis are silencing free speech of Palestinians permanently - by killing them off - men women and children.
Shouting supporters of a terrorist State measures pretty small next to that.
ISRAELI CENSORSHIP of PALESTINIAN JOURNALISTS
How free is that speech?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Dec 16 - 11:57 AM

" "pro Palestinian" activists groups like Canary Mission expose for their Fascistic tactics."
I think you miss the point about Canary Mission - read it again.

"Jewish Voice for Peace unequivocally condemns Canary Mission, a malicious website that seeks to vilify principled activists for Palestinian human rights with targeted campaigns of misinformation, bigotry and slander."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Dec 16 - 02:30 PM

Steve,
Next, the wording did not refer to "Israeli Jews." The poster said "Relocate Israel into the United States." Nowhere on the poster is the word "Jews" used, though "Jewish state" is referred to.

You admit that she condoned it, but forgot that she added "Problem solved" to it.

You say it was not about transporting the Jews.
You pretend to believe that moving out the indigenous Arabs was part of solving that "problem."
Bollocks. You know she meant the Jews.
She admitted it anyway.

"The MP for Bradford West remains suspended from the party for sharing a post on Facebook that called for the transportation of Israel to America, and adding the words "problem solved".

But, appearing at Sinai Synagogue in Leeds on Sunday night, she insisted her views had changed since the 2014 post as a result of engaging with the local Jewish community – something she insisted set her apart from her predecessor George Galloway.

"I looked at myself and asked whether I had prejudice against Jewish people. But I realised I was ignorant and I want to learn about the Jewish faith and culture. I do not have hatred for Jewish people."

So, it was about the Jews and you knew it.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Dec 16 - 02:37 PM

Dave,
Have you considered that it may be your mind that is closed to the idea that the Labour party is no better or worse that the others?

Yes Dave, but there is no case.
All parties have Jewish members, but it is only those in Labour who have been reporting anti-Semitism.

There is ample evidence for Labour having a serious problem, but none at all for any other party.
If you know of any please share, but neither Steve nor Jim have come up with anything.
I know evidence is important to you so you must take seriously the complete absence on one side against the plethora against Labour.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Dec 16 - 03:11 PM

Well, Keith, I'm getting to the end of my tether with you. You pile dishonesty on dishonesty. I did not "forget" to mention anything at all because the intention of my post was never to give chapter and verse on what she's said - it's all out there, it stinks and why would I deny it? - but to highlight your misrepresentations. Anyone can look at the poster and tweets online in a trice and I referred to it several times in my post. Unlike you, I do not try to hide inconveniences to my argument. In your case, you hide the whole of decades of Israeli regime atrocities from YOUR arguments, so don't bloody give me that load of hypocritical tosh if you don't mind.

As for bollocks I knew it was about Jews, etc., let me tell you something. It was a JOKE (a very misplaced and unfunny one). There was no real plan put forward to relocate anyone to anywhere else, was there, unless you've got Asbergers and want to take everything literally. I do wonder. It was very silly loose talk. No-one was doing the nuts and bolts of a serious proposal. It was a load of whimsy, frustration at the terrible behaviour of the Israeli regime during the last Gaza onslaught. She didn't say Jews, Finkelstein didn't say Jews, but Keith the bloody mind-reader is looking at the output of a right pair of clots and extrapolating "Jews" from what they posted. You desperately WANT it to be about Jews because that fits your stupid let's-tar-as-many-Labourites-with-antisemitism-as-we-can crusade, but, Keith darling (as you called Jim so you won't mind if I call you it too), there's no point. Dream on. What a pity dead horses don't fight back. Maybe this one will roll on top of you instead. Idiot.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Dec 16 - 03:11 PM

Does it not seem very strange that that there is no antisemitism in the Conservative party and yet there is Islamophobia as detailed in the link I gave above?

What conclusion are we to draw from this?

Is Labour is the party of Islam while Conservatives support other religions?

Maybe Islamophobia is not considered as racist as antisemitism in some quarters?

Particularly the popular press?

Do we know how many Jewish members of the Labour party have reported antisemitism both before and after Corbyn was elected as leader?

Why are some sources saying that Labour has a 'rampant' problem with antisemitism yet others are denying that it is endemic?

So many questions. So few answers...

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 09 Dec 16 - 04:19 PM

"Jewish Voice for Peace unequivocally condemns Canary Mission, a malicious website that seeks to vilify principled activists for Palestinian human rights with targeted campaigns of misinformation, bigotry and slander."

Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP)is just another far left extremist group that promotes anti-Israel BDS campaigns on U.S. campuses, in academic associations, unions, churches, and in corporate stockholder meetings by deploying the language of demonization and delegitimization. JVP also acts to provide a façade of Jewish legitimacy to these campaigns. Moderate Jews consider their activities to be anti-Semitic. Small wonder that they would demonize a group that opposes the Fascistic tactics of the Brown Shirts of the far left.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Dec 16 - 04:52 PM

You couldn't make it up, could you, bobad? Except that YOU do. Enjoy your fantasy bubble.

Dave, we stupidly let ourselves get drawn into these sterile arguments. Some git or other out of half a million Labour members may well say "something antisemitic." I won't deny that. Oddly, however, out of all the antisemitism hawks on this forum, not a single one has ever quoted a single antisemitic remark made by a Labour member. And I mean "quoted" before the usual shitbags start quoting the "appalled NEC," etc. etc. I bloody hate antisemitism and have fought it all my life. You too, I reckon, up there in Prestwich, where there are thousands of Jews and where antisemitism is unfortunately rife (I know, I lived there and still go up there six or seven times a year), as well as me in east London in the 70s where antisemitism was a massive local issue which we fought against like buggery in our trade unions. The same East End that saw off Mosley and his bunch of fascists in spite of the police and the army (used to get pissed a couple of times a week in an amazing pub in the next street). In the words of John Seymour, the working class in the East End may not have had much time for the Jews but they bloody well weren't going to help anyone to send them to the gas chambers. Right-wing arseholes like Keith, bobad and Teribus haven't got a bloody clue, all theory, their crusade against the wrong sort of antisemitism aimed at the the wrong sort of people and all based on theory and stuff they read on Israeli websites. It took you to give chapter and verse on Naz Shah's remarks, not one of those tits, in spite of my asking Jeith again and again for quotes. Know why he didn't cough up? Because he knew damn well that none of her remarks were antisemitic in the REAL sense. Sword of truth in your hand, Dave. Good man!

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Dec 16 - 04:55 PM

Not Jeith. You know who you are.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 04:22 AM

" just another far left extremist group that promotes anti-Israel BDS campaigns on U.S. campuses"
Another bunch of "self-hating Jews" - eh?
You really couldn't make this up.
"The MP for Bradford West remains suspended from the party for sharing a post on Facebook that called for the transportation of Israel to America, and adding the words "problem solved"
That was a joke suggestion made by Jewish writer, Norman Finkelstein - Shah apologied and accepted it was anti semitic - end of story.
Is there any difference in the suggestion and THIS suggestion made by Minister of Justice and lawyer, Tzipi Livni ?
The difference to me appears to be one is made by an Israeli, the other by a British politician
I don't recall Livni ever withdrawing it.
How about THIS nine month old demand.
Or this headline from the Israeli newspaper Haaretz - can't link to the article without subscription:
"Israelis Excel at Camouflaging the Expulsion of Palestinians
Here is an inventory of the methods of expulsion in their various concealments.
Amira Hass Oct 20, 2014 4:01 PM
Arabs driven out of Israel make up the largest number of REFUGEES on the PLANET
The other difference between Sha's statement and these (and many more) is that hers was taken from a joke and put forward as a peaceful solution to the Palestinian problem, all of these are aimed at forcing an entire people out of theit rightful homes - and to agree HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED
If one is antisenmitic, the other is Islamophobic in the extreme and is aimed at ethnic cleansing
This is about Arabs - and you know it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 04:48 AM

Steve, yes it was intended as a joke, but an anti-Semitic joke.
Suggesting the transportation of Jews as a final solution to a problem is offensive, anti-Semitic and not at all funny.

Dave, Your link was about a Muslim leader suggesting Tories investigate Islamophobia.
A bit like Israel complaining about anti-Semitism in Labour.
Jim thought it should be dismissed and I never referred to it.

All the complaints about Labour anti-Semitism came from within Labour.
There have been no complaints of intolerance from any of the many Tory Jews or Muslims.
If we are widening the intolerance away from just anti-Semitism, remember the complaints from within Labour of homophobia and misogyny.

BBC, "Over 40 female Labour MPs have written to party leader Jeremy Corbyn urging him to do more to tackle abuse of MPs."

Where are the internal complaints of intolerance from any other party except Labour Dave.
There is a plethora of evidence from within Labour of prejudice and intolerance, but none from any other party.

Evidence Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 05:21 AM

"Evidence Dave" my arse. I've repeatedly asked YOU for ANTISEMITIC QUOTES, not your jaded and threadbare attacks on the party you're determined to demonise at all costs, and you never give me any. Not a one. Because you can't. And I've explained the whole thing to you at length. You are a total sham. Thank you for confirming everything I've accused you of being. A sad obsessive who never listens, who appeals to authority as a substitute for developing your own opinions. Dishonest, hypocritical, hopeless.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 06:02 AM

"Steve, yes it was intended as a joke, but an anti-Semitic joke."
In fact it was made by a strong advocate of Israel who made that point when he wes confronted with the afct that the idea came from him
Norman Finklestein
Stop making on-the-spot excuses for something you have no knowlege of and addreaes the facts.
Now, tell us what's the difference between calling for the deportation of the Israelis and the calling for the deportation of the Palestinians?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 06:12 AM

From Jim's second link:

Nearly half of Jewish Israelis agree that Arabs should be expelled or transferred from Israel, and a solid majority (79 percent) maintain that Jews in Israel should be given preferential treatment, according to a Pew Research Center in Israel survey published on Tuesday.

The poll, with 5,601 in-person interviews of Israeli adults, conducted between October 2014 and May 2015, found that Israeli Jews increasingly believe the West Bank settlements help, rather than hurt, Israel's security – and most (61%) believe Israel was given by God to the Jewish people.

Well, Keith, it looks like Israel is half-full of mirror images of Naz Shah, only they AREN'T joking, are they?

Amazing what decades of anti-Palestinian propaganda can do...

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 06:20 AM

Thanks, Steve. It is appreciated but not really necessary. We don't want to give the impression of an 'old boys club' after all, do we ;-)

Anyway, yes, out of any group there are going to be a proportion of antisemites, Islamphobes, racists, misogynists and any amount of other people harbouring unsavoury prejudices. The Labour party will be no different. There is also the vast majority of people that are good, caring and fair minded. If we accept that, then tarring any group of people with a negative label because of the actions of a tiny few is wrong. Much was made the other day of my misuse of the term 'endemic' yet, shorty after, a link was provided, by bobad, to an article saying there was 'rampant' antisemitism in the Labour party. Something which I do not believe.

Antisemitism is a problem wherever it occurs, as are any other forms of racism. If we accept that across the whole population there is a percentage of antisemites then it does not make sense that they are more prevalent in any one large organisation unless that organisation is one that has antisemitism as part of its constitution, which I am pretty sure the Labour part does not. I fully understand what you are saying about there being no antisemitic quotes from the people concerned but, to be honest, I am unsure of that. I am sure some of the quotes and actions could and have been construed as antisemitic and the people responsible should and have atoned for their mistakes.

What I have asked, many times, and had no answer to is why it should be more prevalent in the left wing of politics than anywhere else. Remember this was not an issue until the Labour party moved slightly to the left. Because of that I am suspicious. The only genuine evidence we have for 'rampant antisemitism' in any political party is from the extreme right in the middle of the 20th century. Why would it be that only the left wing is antisemitic, as has been suggested above? Things don't 'just happen'. There is a reason behind everything and, if the left wing does have antisemitic leanings, then why have they only just been discovered?

I have also been accused of arguing from ignorance and many other things before but I am not arguing. Just questioning. In any such discussion people will present their own 'spin'. Significant points will be astutely ignored. Inconvenient facts will be obfuscated with trivia. We have all done it and, as passions rise, it gets worse. I am making a deliberate attempt to not get caught up in that. Don't get me wrong, I am still as passionate about issues. Like you, this particular subject has been lifelong. My Grandfather, a Cossack and committed Christian who became a Russian Orthodox priest, endangered his life assisting Jews in his home town of Bialystok during the Nazi occupation. Now, I am not my Grandad, but his stories have been with me since childhood. I have a very close relation who is Jewish, a left wing activist and incensed by the treatment of Labour in the media.

We will get to the bottom of this eventually and Labour will weather the storm. They will come out of it stronger and better equipped to repel any future onslaught from their enemies. I suggest that the other political parties should ready themselves for when their time comes. Enough from me.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 07:03 AM

It seems to me it's about time we looked at this claim anyway
Keith is obviously not going to respond to what is being called for regarding deporting Palestinians, so we must take by his silence that it's happening and he has no problem with it (when has he ever had any problem with anything that is done to the Palestinians in Israel)
The proposal that the Israelis move to the U.S. (whatever its intention) was aimed at the idea that this was done voluntarily and those who wished to move out of choice.
I's true that, in the unlikely event that ti would ever be taken seriously, it is the Jews who would take it up - so what?
Where is it "antisemitic" to suggest that ISRAEL should resite in the U.S.?
The European definition specifies attacks on Jews, not Israelis - but that definition has long become invalid since Israel has made all criticism of Israeli policy "antisemitic" - where does it say that in the definition?
You can't have a pick-'n-mix definition - some bits you adhere to, other bits you ignore totally for political purposes.
The ideal solution, of course, is that all communities in Israel learn to live together in peace and none be driven out - that has nothing to do with being Muslim or Jew - that is simple humanity.
When South Africa ditched Apartheid, there was no suggestion that one the whites should find somewhere else to live - that would be ethnic cleansing
What is happening in Israel is ETHNIC CLEANSING , and it's been going on for a long, long time
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 07:26 AM

Another bunch of "self-hating Jews" - eh?

More Carroll Made Up Shit®

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 08:36 AM

"More Carroll Made Up Shit®"
More antisemitic Bobad bile
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 09:20 AM

Then there's the forced "relocation" of the Bedouin in the Negev, bulldozing homes in "unrecognised villages." The express reason for this, no point denying it, was to ensure that Arabs could never outnumber Jews in the Negev.

Netanyahu wasn't indulging in a "tasteless joke" either. Was he, Keith?

Anyone else think that inventing official-sounding terms such as "unrecognised villages" to cover up ethnic cleansing has a ring of apartheid about it? How about "separate development?"

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 10:18 AM

"unrecognised villages"

Rather like the illegal settlements that the government of Israel has planted all over the place, eh Bubo?

I suppose the significant numbers of persons in the Israeli government and Israeli citizens who oppose these illegal settlements are antisemites, self hating Jews or both, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 10:26 AM

Israel has absolute legal authority to relocate the inhabitants of the illegal Bedouin "villages". The Bedouin are squatters on land to which they have no title, land which they colonized during Ottoman and British rule. The land which they occupy is Israeli state land.

Israel claims that the Bedouin will be better off in towns which have services such as running water, electricity, paved roads and schools which their "villages" lack.

The legality of Israel's decision to relocate the Bedouin is unassailable, the rightness or morality of the decision is a matter of opinion. I wonder if those who oppose the Bedouin relocation would also oppose the Palestinian Authorities demand that the Israelis residing in the "West Bank" be relocated.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 10:29 AM

Rather like the illegal settlements that the government of Israel has planted all over the place

There are no illegal settlements - unless of course one assumes that Jews should not own property or build in those areas because they are Jews. Every current Jewish "settlement" is on land owned by Jews before 1948 or purchased after 1967. Settlements that tried to set up on land that was not Jewish owned have been dismantled. We continue to hear the term "illegal", but "legal and illegal" has to be more that political desires and interests. It has to refer to law. And, frankly, law established during the illegal Jordanian occupation of the area in which jewish property was confiscated and retitied, and current PA regulations that ban sales or ownership of property by Jews is not valid.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 10:35 AM

I suppose the significant numbers of persons in the Israeli government and Israeli citizens who oppose these illegal settlements are antisemites, self hating Jews or both, eh?

I suppose they are either ignorant of the law or history or both.

As to the term "self-hating Jews", the ones I see using it most are either Jews or Jew haters in mockery, interesting that.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 10:54 AM

There are no illegal settlements

Thousands of Israelis disagree with you on this, Bubo.

'nuff said.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 10:58 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/14/world/middleeast/bill-to-legalize-west-bank-settlements-advances-in-israel.html?_r=0

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 11:00 AM

http://www.trtworld.com/mea/israeli-parliament-legalises-illegal-settlements-on-palestinian-land-248273

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 11:27 AM

Land in Judea and Samaria, whether occupied or not was retitled as "privately owned" by Jordan during it's illegal occupation. Jordan renounced all claims to Judea and Samaria in 1988. The lands of Judea and Samaria were returned to the previous legal owners (see uti possidetis iuris).

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 11:51 AM

So the close to one-half the members of the Knesett who voted against the "legalization"[sic] bill are antisemitic, self-hating Jews?

Thousands of Israelis disagree with you, Bubo.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 11:53 AM

Well let's just forget that this is all about the inhuman shuffling around of real, live human beings by a recently-invented country just because they don't happen to fit their religious or ethnic agenda, shall we? I mentioned apartheid just up there, I seem to remember...

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 12:01 PM

Steve,
I've repeatedly asked YOU for ANTISEMITIC QUOTES, not your jaded and threadbare attacks on the party you're determined to demonise at all costs, and you never give me any. Not a one. Because you can't.

Apart from Shah that is true. I do not know what anti-Semitic statements were made because they have not been published, but I know they were made.
I have more than hard evidence for it. I have proof.

"The NEC are appalled by recent cases of anti-Semitic abuse."
"The entire NEC recognises the seriousness of this issue"
http://labourlist.org/2016/05/alice-perrys-nec-report-corbyn-fighting-prejudice-and-listening-to-voters-online/

So there it is.
Proof. Despite all your nasty and personal abuse,I was right and you were wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 12:13 PM

Dave, you must have missed this.
All the complaints about Labour anti-Semitism came from within Labour.
There have been no complaints of intolerance from any of the many Tory Jews or Tory Muslims or any other minority.
If we are widening the intolerance away from just anti-Semitism, remember the complaints from within Labour of homophobia and misogyny.

BBC, "Over 40 female Labour MPs have written to party leader Jeremy Corbyn urging him to do more to tackle abuse of MPs."

Where are the internal complaints of intolerance from any other party except Labour Dave?
There is a plethora of evidence from within Labour of prejudice and intolerance, but none from any other party.

Evidence Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 12:26 PM

No, I am pretty sure I saw that. Maybe you missed this though, Keith.

What I have asked, many times, and had no answer to is why it should be more prevalent in the left wing of politics than anywhere else. Remember this was not an issue until the Labour party moved slightly to the left. Because of that I am suspicious. The only genuine evidence we have for 'rampant antisemitism' in any political party is from the extreme right in the middle of the 20th century. Why would it be that only the left wing is antisemitic, as has been suggested above? Things don't 'just happen'. There is a reason behind everything and, if the left wing does have antisemitic leanings, then why have they only just been discovered?

Or shall we just say as there seems to be no common ground here we may as well stop banging our heads on a brick wall?

BTW - Repeating what someone else said or thought or reported is not evidence. It is hearsay. There is a distinction.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 01:50 PM

"I do not know what anti-Semitic statements were made because they have not been published, but I know they were made.
I have more than hard evidence for it. I have proof."

Anyone else here ever read a more entertaining piece of utter tosh in their lives? 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 02:13 PM

Steve, giggle away but you can not deny that I have proved my case.
You can pretend to laugh but you can not challenge or reply to anything I have posted.

Dave,
What I have asked, many times, and had no answer to is why it should be more prevalent in the left wing of politics than anywhere else.

Who knows, but it is an indisputable fact that it is.

Or shall we just say as there seems to be no common ground here we may as well stop banging our heads on a brick wall?

It is hard to find common ground with you when you deny hard factual evidence that it is true just because you do not understand why it is true!

All the evidence, claims and complaints come from inside Labour.
There are no comparable complaints from any other party.

You demanded evidence, were supplied with proof but you still refuse to believe.

Do you have any evidence to support your position?
No.
Is there hard evidence and even proof that you are wrong?
Yes.
So what is your case Dave?

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 02:22 PM

BTW - Repeating what someone else said or thought or reported is not evidence. It is hearsay. There is a distinction.

Rubbish!
Dave, do you really believe that "the entire NEC" were lying and their statements not evidence.
You make yourself ridiculous.

You have no evidence at all to support your position, and you scrabble desperately for a reason to disbelieve the hard facts in front of you.

"The NEC are appalled by recent cases of anti-Semitic abuse."
"The entire NEC recognises the seriousness of this issue"
http://labourlist.org/2016/05/alice-perrys-nec-report-corbyn-fighting-prejudice-and-listening-to-voters-online/

So there it is.
Proof.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 02:47 PM

Council for the prosecution: Mr Gnome. How do you know that Mt X showed his willy to Mrs Y in the butchers shop window?

Mr Gnome: Because I read in the paper that the whole of the butchers shop saw it. Everyone knows that it is a fact.

Council for the defense: Objection, M'lud!

Judge: Sustained. Keep your evidence to what you actually know or saw yourself, Mr Gnome. Not what you read in the paper.

No, I do not believe the entire NEC are lying. Why suggest that I am? Of course the NEC are appalled by recent cases of antisemitism and recognise the seriousness of it. What right minded person would not be? It is an indication that the Labour party are being open in investigating the allegations. It still does not answer the question as to why antisemitism has suddenly become 'rampant' in the Labour party since Jeremy Corbyn has become leader.

Do you not find that in the slightest bit suspicious?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 03:13 PM

Israel has absolute legal authority to relocate the inhabitants of the illegal Bedouin "villages" The Bedouin are squatters on land to which they have no title, land which they colonized during Ottoman and British rule.
You've just sunk your own case - Israel has no say over these Bedouin villages, in fact they have no claim land whatever over land that was occupied before the State was formed, the agreement never gave anybody the right to evict settled tenants
ETHNIC CLEANSING of BEDOUINS
PROTESTS AGAINST ETHNIC CLEANSING of BEDOUINS
"There are no illegal settlements "
Evicting Arabs from settled land is ILLEGAL - the Israelis have done this consistently and with growing regularity
"Apart from Shah that is true."
If Israel can demand the deportation of Palestinians (including Israel's Justice Minister) then Naz Shah has made no antisemitic comments
Her comments were aimed at the Israelis, not the Jews.
Try again.
Now, tell us what's the difference between calling for the deportation of the Israelis and the calling for the deportation of the Palestinians?
"The entire NEC recognises the seriousness of this issue"
Back to square one again - the NEC was appalled at the accusations, which have been found groundless - game over.
"Do you have any evidence to support your position?"
Do you have evidence as to what this evidence is -
No?
Then you have no case
"Gentlemen of the jury -have you reached a verdict?"
Yes, m'lud - we don't know what crime he has committed, but someone has accused him of it so he must be guilty"
"You demanded evidence, were supplied with proof but you still refuse to believe."
Hw can there be proof if the charged have not been specified, as you have said yourself?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 03:30 PM

Keep your evidence to what you actually know or saw yourself, Mr Gnome. Not what you read in the paper.

I have quoted nothing that was not factual.
If the NEC are reported as saying they were appalled by recent cases of anti-Semitism, then we know for a fact that there had been recent cases of anti-Semitism.
That is what you Steve and Jim have been denying.
My case has always just been that it is a serious issue in Labour, and "the entire NEC" also "recognises the seriousness of this issue."

You also deny that Shah made anti-Semitic statements.
Perhaps you are unable to recognise it.
" Corbyn's aides defended Shah, saying the comments were antisemitic but the MP had "shocked herself," and did not mean what she said."

Jury Chairman, " Why not guilty Mr Gnome? Ten passing nuns saw him do it!
Mr. Gnome, "Just hearsay then."
Chairman, "But his prints and DNA were on the knife through the heart."
Mr.Gnome, "How do we know this?"
Chairman, "The forensic report."
Mr. Gnome, "Repeating what someone else said or thought or reported is not evidence. It is hearsay."
Chairman, "But the victim gave a dying testimony to a passing party of High Court judges!"
Mr. Gnome."Just hearsay then."
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/27/naz-shah-suspended-labour-party-antisemitism-row
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/18/labour-antisemitism-jews-jeremy-corbyn

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 03:34 PM

Jim,
the NEC was appalled at the accusations,

No Jim. They were appalled by RECENT CASES of anti-Semitism.
Not just accusations of it.

which have been found groundless

Which accusations have been found groundless Jim, or did you just make that up?
Produce some evidence for us please.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 03:48 PM

Why not guilty? Surely it is innocent until proven guilty in this country :-) Guilty beyond all reasonable doubt at that and I believe we have more than enough reasonable doubt. You will need to do better than that.

Still no comment on why this only happened when Jeremy Corbyn was voted leader? An inconvenient significant fact maybe? Reasonable doubt as to the motives maybe?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 03:52 PM

Oh - And which accusations have been proven? Why should it be up to someone else to prove that the accusations have been found groundless. IIRC hate crime is punishable by law in this country. If the accusations of antisemitism have been proven, why have there been no criminal prosecutions brought about? Surely the Daily Heil and the Stun would be all over that wouldn't they? :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 03:55 PM

BTW - I am on call, monitoring a priority 1 incident that I don't really have anything to do with buy, in their wisdom, the management team have decided to call out everyone who knows how to spell computer.

What is everyone else's excuse for having nothing better to do on a Saturday night?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 03:56 PM

ETHNIC CLEANSING of BEDOUINS

Lol.


You've just sunk your own case - Israel has no say over these Bedouin villages, in fact they have no claim land whatever over land that was occupied before the State was formed, the agreement never gave anybody the right to evict settled tenants

You don't know what you're talking about - suggest you do some research - and not only on anti-Israel propaganda sites.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 04:00 PM

Round and round and round we go. Been there, done it, got the tears-of-laughter-stained t-shirt. Keith is a walking farce. Leave him to it. Ten years from now there will be an isolated and lonely thread somewhere out there in the interwebby ether, that only he ever posts to and only he ever reads, which will be featuring ghostly, dismembered snippets from way back when, such as "appalled NEC...I proved everything but they wouldn't listen...just putting Israel's side...Naz...maps...serious problem...you bastards are all antisemites...I never lied about Wheatcroft...only speaking generally...you lose...why are you all having a go at me...I'm centre-right..." (lonesome piano music fades into the distance...)

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 04:10 PM

I have a Chateauneuf du Pape that I was saving for Christmas day, Steve. I am that mind numbingly bored monitoring servers that have nothing wrong with them just because the management read somewhere (possibly the Daily Mail) that magic moonbeams can cause servers to become antisemitic during a network failure. Think I should open it now or does it need to breath a good while before it is drunk?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 04:39 PM

Did you say you had some connection with Morrisons? They're selling a cracking good red from Sicily for a fiver, on special, the Signature Nero d'Avola 2015. Worth eight or nine quid of anyone's money. We actually went through Avola in September. Lovely area but don't mention the M***a! 😱

I don't bother with all that breathing malarkey (I never drink pricey booze anyway). Just make it glug a bit when you pour it out, I reckon. Some people pour it into a jug then back into the bottle to get it all aerated, but doing that just gets me all aeriated....

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Dec 16 - 04:46 PM

I do work for Morrisons. The issue they have just had was a power outage at a distribution centre that knocked the network out for a few minutes. I suppose I can understand them getting twitchy considering the time of year! We get 10% discount so I will try some of that Sicilian for £4.50:-) I bought the CNDP when it was half price and on a 20% pre-Crimbo discount week. I think it worked out at about £7 in the end. I was disappointed with the last one so I wondered if letting it breath may help.

Hope no one minds us injecting a bit of frivolity into an otherwise dull evening but I suspect we may get some stick ;-)

DtG