BS: Labour party discussion

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 04:14 PM

The 'disputed' bit refers to the fact that it is disputed that what Naz Shah said and did was antisemitic. She did criticise the state of Israel and many people would dispute that is antisemitic. I suspect that many other people would have read my comment as that but, for some reason Keith, you and I seem to have a communication barrier that I do not know how to surmount. There is also the fact that, when I referred to 'rampant antisemitism' you said specifically that No-one is or has said that Dave. When I provided chapter and verse as to who said it and where you then changed your statement to no-one in this debate has claimed such a thing. Are you saying that the article linked by bobad is untrue then? If things that appear in the media can be discounted, which sources are we to rely on?

What was your speculation on the cause of Labour's 'problems' anyway? I must have missed that.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 04:22 PM

So I take it you've fallen out with bobad then, Keith. He NEVER listens to Chomsky...

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 04:32 PM

Maybe we shouldn't, bobad but why should we care what you think either?

Well, you seem to care enough to respond but why you should or shouldn't I haven't the foggiest.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 04:34 PM

Yasmin Alibhai-Brown and Mr Ban gave Keith the same difficulty on the nomenclature front, Raggytash. Damn those non-English spellings, eh, Keith? Bloody foreigners!

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 04:35 PM

He NEVER listens to Chomsky...

He's just another opinion - ask your friend Greg what opinions are.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 04:35 PM

"I haven't the foggiest"

You can say that again.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 04:42 PM

"Bloody foreigners!"

Racist!

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 04:44 PM

Heheh. Spoken like a "man" who hasn't got the foggiest.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 04:48 PM

He, He, caught you in own little game I did.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 04:52 PM

Do enjoy your reverie.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 04:55 PM

I wouldn't quite say care enough to respond. More of a duty to consider others no matter what I actualy think of them.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 05:16 PM

Thanks Dave, that's touching.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 05:31 PM

Well, many people have commented that you are touched :-) But I would not be so unkind.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Teribus
Date: 12 Dec 16 - 06:03 PM

"Found out how bulldozers dig mass graves yet Jim?"

The question still stands Jim. You haven't answered it neither have the links you provided.

The Mobil one refers to "earth moving equipment" not bulldozers - That is credible.

The Balkans one refers to "construction equipment" not bulldozers - That too is credible.

Possibly it is a translation thing and to many anything that moves earth or operates on a civil engineering construction site is to them a "bulldozer".

The IDF had armoured bulldozers with them in South Lebanon in 1982 they are used by combat engineer units to clear obstacles - fact still remains you cannot use them to dig anything - they simply are not designed for that purpose.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Raggytash
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 06:06 AM

Has someone had lessons in pedantry from the professor.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 06:17 AM

Dave,
The 'disputed' bit refers to the fact that it is disputed that what Naz Shah said and did was antisemitic.

Disputed by who Dave?
Just you three.

" Corbyn's aides defended Shah, saying the comments were antisemitic but the MP had "shocked herself," and did not mean what she said."

She herself admits it was anti-Semitic.
Why should anyone care or take seriously that you three think it was not?!!

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 06:22 AM

Dave again,
When I provided chapter and verse as to who said it and where you then changed your statement to no-one in this debate has claimed such a thing. Are you saying that the article linked by bobad is untrue then? If things that appear in the media can be discounted,

No-one in this debate has claimed such a thing, so it is not part of our debate, so why raise it as an issue?
Obviously you can find someone in the world who does say whatever you want to be said. So what.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 06:27 AM

Steve,

So I take it you've fallen out with bobad then, Keith. He NEVER listens to Chomsky...

No. Bobad would also state categorically that criticism of the state of Israel is not antisemitism.
The fact that Chomsky makes such a completely anodyne statement has no relevance to anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 06:42 AM

You still changed you statement from no one said such thing to no one on this discussion said such a thing Keith. It makes me very reluctant to respond to or comment on anything else when I have no idea what I am responding to or commenting on. Sorry, but as far as I am concerned, you are changing what you initially said and that was what I was responding to. Please feel free to claim that point if you like. I lose.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Raggytash
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 06:56 AM

It is perfectly feasible for a bulldozer to excavate a trench, it may even be the most efficient way, it is possible. Firstly make a small depression, then gradually create a ramp and making a deeper depression, increase the ramp and make a deeper depression eventually you have a trench with a ramp in and out.


Try it in your sandpit with your Tonka toys teri.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 06:59 AM

You have been given half a dozen references to Bulldozers being used to dig mass graves - you have nit-picked with one, but in fact Mobil actually refers to using bulldozers.
You have been supplied a dozen times with different news items stating that Israeli bulldozers were found to be on site digging mass graves (Israel actually admitted to only one in their own enquiry into the massacre, it was found that ten were used)
From the articles supplied:
"afterwards, they would bring the bulldozers to bury the people"
Ad Ma Hawil
"U.S. lend-lease bulldozers were used to dig graves for the prisoners"
Magadan
"Bulldozers used by the Indonesian military to dig mass graves"
Yadana
"Bulldozers being used to dig graves"
Mobil Gas Fields
"Bulldozers being used to raze houses on their occupants, whether dead or living, and to dig mass graves"
Sabra Shatila
"the bulldozers used to dig the mass graves"
Bosnia
To miss something occasionally is a mistake, to continually deny something from different sources from different accounts is simple dishonesty - agenda-driven lying.
You persistently request examples of your lying and I respond with lists - here's another half dozen - let's see how you deal with them
Perhaps it's worth remembering what this is really about (apart from your trying to make me out a liar or stupid – somewhat backfired here).
This arose from the fact that, after supplying weapons, access to the camp, transport, illumination and eventually, means of escape for the Falangists who spent three days massacring, raping and disembowelling up to 3,500 unarmed refugees and turning refugees attempting to escape, back into the arms of their killers, The Israeli Army assisted in digging the mass graves in order to hide their participation in this massive war crime, and eventually made most of this evidence inaccessible by building s sports stadium over them.
This atrocity was overseen by Menachem Begin, a man who was later recognised as being a fine, responsible human being and statesman by being made Prime Minister of Israel
This is what you are actually defending, not what machines were used for the job.
Your openly stupid denial of a proven fact and your wriggling attempt to hide your stupidity makes you what you are.
You are not even very good at it - at least Keith trawls up unread "real historians who sell their real books in real bookshops" to cover his efforts.
Maybe it's time you came to terms with your limitations?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 08:22 AM

"She herself admits it was anti-Semitic."
And has apologised and withdrawn her statement
Why she did so is a moot point, but even if we accept her having made an anti semitic statement - that leaves you with one single identifeid example - a long way from a "major problem"
Until you come up with more examples, that'a all you've got.
What you have not got is an excuse for the fact that nearly one half of Israeli citizens, including the former Justice Minister and other officials, wish to deport the Arabs living there
There are up to 6.5 million Palestinian refugees who have been refused the right to return home - the biggest single group of refugees on the planet
These are facts - not antisemitic statements or threats - actual reality effecting actual human beings.
It is little wonder that there has been a rise in antisemitism in the world today when the Israelis have skulked behind the Jewish People to keep themselves from being tried for crimes against humanity
It puts an ill thought out comment by a labour politician in context - doesn't it?
You won't respond to this - not with facts anyway - it doesn't matter - it's not for your benefit.
The longer you continue this farce, the more chance I will have of repeating these facts and adding links to them - like this
NEARLY HALF of ISRAELIS WANT TO EXPEL ARABS - TIMES of ISRAEL
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 08:41 AM

NEARLY HALF of ISRAELIS WANT TO EXPEL ARABS - TIMES of ISRAEL

Statement of desire is one thing, actual expulsion like what was done to Jews in the Arab countries and Judea and Samaria is another entirely. Goose and gander- right Carroll?

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 09:20 AM

"like what was done to Jews in the Arab countries "
So yous say if Arabs in other states expel Jews then it ok for Israel to expel Arans who have nothing to do with those actions?
What a sick, simple-minded part of the universe you occupy
Thank you for clairfying that point
"Carroll?"
Tsk-tsk - your ill breeding is shoing again - couldn't you parents have made a better job than that?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 09:34 AM

Well if statements of desire are "one thing," then why do you keep regaling us with that Hamas charter? It's only a "statement of desire" after all. Sinn Fein's call for a united Ireland is only a "statement of desire" too. We still work with them, don't we?

Not so, Keith. Whenever we list the many undeniable atrocities of the Israeli regime, bobad denies them all and calls us Jew-haters, even though we are criticising the actions of the state, not of Jews. You need to do a bit more listening.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 10:27 AM

Well if statements of desire are "one thing," then why do you keep regaling us with that Hamas charter?

Nice attempt at making an equivalence between the charter of a ruling government and the opinion of the man on the street, but the verdict is.......FAIL!


As for this garbage:
   
So yous say if Arabs in other states expel Jews then it ok for Israel to expel Arans who have nothing to do with those actions?
What a sick, simple-minded part of the universe you occupy
Thank you for clairfying that point

from the sick, twisted mind of the hateful little twerp all I can say is........GET HELP!

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 11:25 AM

"from the sick, twisted mind of the hateful little twerp all I can say is.."
Apparently that's all you can say - though you might be far more effective you you actually answer the point.
What do you hope to acheive by behaving as you do?
You answer nothing
You pour out bilious accusations of antisemitism and refuse to qualify them with proof.
You just present yourself as an incredibly unpleasant individual so unsure of his arguments that he can replace them by pure vindictiveness.
Is that the way you behave at home or in public life - is that the way you've been brought up to behave - do your want your cause to be associated with such behaviour?
Sorry Bobad - people like you are totally beyond me.
As you say - GET HELP - you are doing neither yourself nor Israel any favours
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 11:34 AM

Dave, You still changed you statement from no one said such thing to no one on this discussion said such a thing Keith

Your original question was why are people saying it is rampant within the Labour party I wonder? Why expect us to answer for other people? It is reasonable to point out that none of us here have argued that, and to wonder why you ask us.

Is it "people" anyway? So far, in the whole world, you have only identified one person who said that.

Jim, The Israeli Army assisted in digging the mass graves in order to hide their participation in this massive war crime,

That is a lie Jim. A single bulldozer was loaned to the militia, but no Israelis were involved.

Until you come up with more examples, that'a all you've got.

I do not need to find more examples. We know they exist from the testimonies of people like the entire NEC, Sadiq Khan, the Deputy Leader, the Leader of Scottish Labour and others.

the Israelis have skulked behind the Jewish People to keep themselves from being tried for crimes against humanity

Another lie Jim. You are just consumed by hatred and will say anything.

So yous say if Arabs in other states expel Jews then it ok for Israel to expel Arans who have nothing to do with those actions?

No, but it is reasonable to ask why you do not condemn the actual expulsion that the Jews suffered.

Steve, that Hamas charter? It's only a "statement of desire" after all

No. It is a statement of intent by a government already acting on that intent.

Not so, Keith.

Yes so. Bobad agrees that it is OK to criticise Israel, so it is wrong to suggest he disagrees with everything Chomsky says.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 11:38 AM

Jim,

You pour out bilious accusations of antisemitism and refuse to qualify them with proof.

Jim, by the definitions of anti Semitism long used by UK police and now being enshrined in UK law, you are guilty of anti-Semitism.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 11:39 AM

you might be far more effective you you actually answer the point.

To answer your Made Up Shit® would be sinking to your level, I give it the response it warrants.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 12:03 PM

it is wrong to suggest he disagrees with everything Chomsky says.

I agree with Chomsky's rejection of BDS which he bases on the grounds of it's support of UN General Assembly Resolution 194 and it's demand for recognition of the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 12:12 PM

Good to see you admit your racism at last.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 12:27 PM

Jim, by the definitions of anti Semitism long used by UK police and now being enshrined in UK law, you are guilty of anti-Semitism."
I have never attacked Jews in any shape or form - by any definition, your accusation is antisemitic.
All your denials have been dealt with a thousand times - the only evidence you have ever offered are denials by Israel - by your own admission "I'm just putting the other side"
You are now confirming your dishonesty on this by refusing to even respond to the proved ethnic cleansing that is taking place
As promised - I will continue to provide further evidence of those crimes and

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 12:32 PM

http://www.i24news.tv/en/news/international/europe/51687-141120-poll-israel-s-treatment-of-palestinians-similar-to-nazi-persecution-of-jews

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 12:43 PM

Good to see you admit your racism at last.

Idiot!

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 12:56 PM

From Carroll's link:

Just over 27 percent of those surveyed in September said they agreed with the idea that Israel's treatment of the Palestinians was no different than Nazi persecution of Jews during the Holocaust.

So, that would reflect the number of anti-Semites in the survey as Germany is one of the 31 countries adopting the IHRA definition.

Comparing Israel to Nazis is anti-Semitic, 31 Western states declare

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 12:56 PM

Jim,
According to the IHRA definition, "Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis." is anti Semitic.

In posts to this thread on 8 October you did just that.

Also you knowingly lie about Israel.

The Israeli Army assisted in digging the mass graves in order to hide their participation in this massive war crime,
That is a lie Jim. A single bulldozer was loaned to the militia, but no Israelis were involved.

the Israelis have skulked behind the Jewish People to keep themselves from being tried for crimes against humanity
Another lie Jim. You are just consumed by hatred and will say anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:01 PM

the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality.

Absolutely, Bubo, Yahweh forfend that anyone should extend fundamental rights and equality to the Palestinians.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:03 PM

Absolutely, Bubo, Yahweh forfend that anyone should extend fundamental rights and equality to the Palestinians.

Tell it to Chomsky.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:11 PM

We are telling it to YOU. You said you agreed with Chomsky and you made it clear that you oppose the fundamental right to equality in Israel for Palestinian Arab citizens. That is an explicitly racist viewpoint by any measure.

That's what you said. I'll check out Chomsky later. The chips are in the oven.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:18 PM

Keith, I am not going to fall out with you over something so trivial but if you cannot understand what I am trying to say there is no point in continuing. You will only end up changing something else and I will end up frustrated. Please feel free to claim a victory as I consider it a loss when I fail to communicate so severely!

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:23 PM

Dave, I have not changed anything, but I may not have explained clearly enough what I meant.
Sorry for that.

Your original question was "why are people saying it is rampant within the Labour party I wonder?"
Why expect us to answer for other people? It is reasonable to point out that none of us here have argued that, and to wonder why you ask us.

Is it "people" anyway? So far, in the whole world, you have only identified one person who said that.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:23 PM

We are telling it to YOU.

You are trying to use your friend Carroll's tactic of Made Up Shit® to smear me. It is cheap and dirty.

I said I agree with Chomsky's rejection of BDS. I then posted Chomsky's rationale for his rejecting it. I didn't say I agreed with his rationale only his rejection. But you know that, don't you. You are a lying prick.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:31 PM

"According to the IHRA definition, "Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis." is anti Semitic"
Avvording to all definitions of antisemitism, it is antisemitic to associate the Jewish People with the actions of Israel
You do it, Bodad does it, Israel does it......
While you people continue to do it you will make shit of any definition and you will continue to expose the jEwish People to attacks
If you think I in any way concerned at being described as an antisemite by someone who has accused the Jewish politicians, as a body, of refusing to identify the antisemitism that is claimed to exist in the Labour Party for the love of that party - think again - that is probably the most antisemitic statement that has ever been made on this forum - AND YOU MADE IT
"Just over 27 percent of those surveyed in September said they agreed with the idea that Israel's treatment of the Palestinians was no different than Nazi persecution of Jews during the Holocaust."
I'm sure that was not intended to confirm what I have just said, but that is exactly what it does do.
Israel has branded the Jewish People as being responsible for their crimes - in doing so, they make shit of any definition.
"Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis."
Leading
Israelis, ex Prime Ministers, Military men, ex heads of security, the liberal Israeli press, Jewish intellectuals, Holocaust survivors and their families..... and many many more Jews, are making just this claim
You once described the phrase "Self hating Jew" as applied to modern Jewish critics of Israel, as having been made up by me - it is now a standard knee-jerk defence of all Israeli crimes
I'm not Jewish, but these are the people I identify with, not the ethnic cleansers of Israel and certainly not people like you and Bobad.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:37 PM

From: Jim Carroll - PM
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:31 PM

LOL........somebody has totally lost the plot.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:41 PM

I think it started further back than that when you pulled me up for using the word endemic but, honestly, there is absolutely no gain in continuing down this path. It does not matter how it started. It finishes here.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:45 PM

Whoops - forgot my promise
ETHNIC CLEANSING or DEMOCRACY HAARETZ
By the way
"That is a lie Jim. A single bulldozer was loaned to the militia, but no Israelis were involved."
You have been supplied with an eyewitness account that up to ten bulldozers were seen on the site
There were certanly more than the one Israel claimed.
"On Saturday morning, September 18, 1982 Israeli Mossad agents inside the camp actually were observed driving three of the bulldozers in a frantic attempt to assist the Christian militia in covering up evidence of the crime before the exported international media arrived on the scene."
By FRANKLIN LAMB
TWENTY NINE YEARS LATER
Can you hurry up with your denials and refusals to respond - I have a list of links as long as your arm ready for posting?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:50 PM

Dave, there is no danger of us falling out over such a minor misunderstanding.
Let us sort it out.
If you are unable to answer the questions I just put to you again, let us start again.

Someone used the word "rampant" in a linked article.
I absolutely accept that fact.
What point would you have liked me to address? I promise to thoughtfully and honestly address that point.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:51 PM

Bubo, best enroll in a review course in English composition, grammar, syntax and English comprehension. You apparently don't understand what you are saying/posting.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Dec 16 - 01:53 PM

"it is wrong to suggest he disagrees with everything Chomsky says."

I agree with Chomsky's rejection of BDS which he bases on the grounds of it's support of UN General Assembly Resolution 194 and it's demand for recognition of the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality.

There you are in black and white. What you said. You agree with his rejection. You give us the grounds. No demurring or qualification from you. Racism. I'll check Chomsky later (you do have a habit of mischaracterising) but you don't need any checking. Very clear.