 sj |
||
|
||
BS: A new political low take 2
|
|
|
Subject: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 22 Dec 16 - 11:00 AM Following the closure of the last thread on this subject due to too much off topic abuse I am trying again. Maybe this time we can have a sensible discussion without the derailment? Thanks. Farage and his cronies have hit rock bottom. Farage attacks Jo Cox's widower Sadly I think, like Jones, that worse is yet to come with the thumbs up given to the new US president. And who's fault is it? Sadly, ours :-( We let it happen but surely we can say 'no more'? Let us do what we can to stem the flow of this hateful type of politics. Don't support them. Let those who do support them know they are promoting hate. We can but try and, if enough people get together then surely our voice will be heard. Cheers DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Greg F. Date: 22 Dec 16 - 11:41 AM "These individuals are a political cesspit. Some say: just ignore them. This is, I'm afraid, terribly naive." Hear, hear. And on both sides of the pond. Dissent is becoming treason. 1968 Redux. Only much worse. Good luck, UK, and God Help AmeriKKK |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Stilly River Sage Date: 22 Dec 16 - 12:09 PM Meanwhile, good news on this side of the pond (from your same news source): Thursday's announcement by the Department of Homeland Security that it is tearing down the remnants of the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (Nseers) marks the most audacious attempt yet by Barack Obama to place roadblocks in the way of his successor's declared intentions. A key element of Trump's bid for the White House was his threat to prevent non-citizen Muslims from entering the US and to keep them under surveillance once inside the country. It's way more than time for that to go away. Many of the Bush-era moves that involved Homeland Security were too far-reaching and discriminatory. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Jack Campin Date: 22 Dec 16 - 12:38 PM Farage was in Putin's pocket more than two years ago, long before Trump declared any political ambitions. He's just the monkey, the problem is the organ grinder. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Greg F. Date: 22 Dec 16 - 12:52 PM Ah, but WHICH monkey is more beholdin to the organ grinder? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 22 Dec 16 - 12:53 PM That is good news, Acme. I think we can all take heart from these sensible moves. I hope none of you mind but as there were a few posts that were pertinent on the original thread I have taken the liberty of copying them here. I have credited them with your names and the only editing I have done is deleting any part of the post that was in response to prior personal abuse. Please feel free to contact the team if you want any of them deleting. Subject: RE: BS: A new politcal low? From: Keith A of Hertford - PM Date: 22 Dec 16 - 06:08 AM The Independent, "The row came after Mr Cox criticised the Ukip MEP for blaming German Chancellor Angela Merkel for a terrorist attack on a Christmas market in Berlin." Whatever the rights and wrongs, If Mr. Cox takes on someone like Mr Farage it is unreasonable not to expect a reply Subject: RE: BS: A new politcal low? From: Dave the Gnome - PM Date: 22 Dec 16 - 06:15 AM It is reasonable to expect a reply. It is unreasonable that the replies range from linking Mr Cox to extremists and branding 'Hope not Hate' an extremist organisation to saying that it was Mr Cox who politicised his wife's death and calling him a 'total arsehole'. Do you support those tactics, Keith? DtG Subject: RE: BS: A new politcal low? From: Stu - PM Date: 22 Dec 16 - 06:23 AM "If Mr. Cox takes on someone like Mr Farage it is unreasonable not to expect a reply" True, but you'd expect that reply to be measured, civilised and respectful of the fact the man lost his wife to an extremist encouraged by a volatile and aggressive political atmosphere fermented by some of our more populist politicians. But then Farage doesn't have that degree of integrity, does he? Subject: RE: BS: A new politcal low? From: Mr Red - PM Date: 22 Dec 16 - 06:45 AM Let Farage reply, we defend his right. Let him be judged on what he says. That is our right. But by and large Farage has an army doing his saying, not all obviously. Remember the Farcebook posts that reached way beyond the believable. Even for Sun readers. Your "friends maybe" did the dissemination, not necessarily the origination. remember Farage was a commodity trader. ie a chancer. a spiv. Subject: RE: BS: A new politcal low? From: Jim Carroll - PM Date: 22 Dec 16 - 06:52 AM "If Mr. Cox takes on someone like Mr Farage it is unreasonable not to expect a reply" Assuming that you are talking to a reasonable person and not a racist scumbag like Farage Cox was entitled to a reply to what he said, which was, "blaming politicians for the actions of extremists? That's a slippery slope Nigel" Nothing wrong with that, especially as his wife was murdered by someone who supported Farage's ideas. There is a knee-jerk tendency to blame all these acts on one group or the other before any evidence has been gathered - the first thing the police did was to arrest the wrong person. What Cox said was true and it's no surprise that people like Farage wish for this this automatic blame to continue - then we can send them all back to where they come from. (Deleted section) Shitbags like Farage thrive on this cultural and race hatred. Jim Carroll Subject: RE: BS: A new politcal low? From: Jack Campin - PM Date: 22 Dec 16 - 07:38 AM If Mr. Cox takes on someone like Mr Farage it is unreasonable not to expect a reply It was also reasonable to expect that reply to be about as humanly sympathetic as the contents of an oozing rectal abscess. Farage delivered. The rest of the posts were personal attacks and defenses. I have not linked to the original but feel free to look it up. Cheers DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Dec 16 - 01:44 PM If you make controversial statements in public you must expect a reply whatever your personal circumstances. Like you I disapprove of hateful personal abuse, but Farage did not do that, so I can not agree that this is some "new low." Farage's view Cox objected to is widely held in Germany and perfectly reasonable. Merkel was criticised at the time for allowing in without checks around a million "refugees," who were in fact overwhelmingly young (military age) men, on the grounds of the security threat posed. The criticism could only intensify as Germany suffered terror attacks, and support for Merkel has plummeted. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Donuel Date: 22 Dec 16 - 02:03 PM Cents and nonsenseabilities is a romantic dramedy bio movie about new Trump Lows every 32 seconds - Against a background of guffawing Republicans making excuses for high crimes, treason and unconstitutional decrees. Until recently it was LEGAL for US senators to use insider information to invest in stock. Naturally Trump wants $ from his office. He will use foreigners who want access for cash of course. But I was thinking how he can invest in all his seeing eye dog blind trusts with more than insider info. HE COULD INVEST BY TWEET RUMOR. For example he could tweet the CEO of Westinghouse is a real drug addled son of a bish, wait 2 days, buy low, and tweet He's a real great guy. Sell high. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Greg F. Date: 22 Dec 16 - 02:26 PM Like you I disapprove of hateful personal abuse, but Farage did not do that Excuse me????? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Dec 16 - 03:20 PM Did you fart Greg, or do you have examples of Farage doing personal abuse. He has often been the victim of it however. Remember "swivel eyed loon?" And, read what Jim calls him! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Greg F. Date: 22 Dec 16 - 04:10 PM Like you I disapprove of hateful personal abuse, but Farage did not do that Excuse me????? Guess your hero Trump doesn't do it either. Idiots. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 22 Dec 16 - 04:25 PM Who mentioned personal abuse about the exchange between Farage and Cox, Keith? Farage commented "Terrible news from Berlin but no surprise. Events like these will be the Merkel legacy." Brendan Cox replied "blaming politicians for the actions of extremists? That's a slippery slope Nigel" Which, in my opinion and in that of the articles author, is quite a logical thing to say. How can a criminal murdering innocent people be blamed on Merkel? Farage responded with what we are actualy discussing; that Cox "would know more about extremists than me" because of his links to the anti-fascist organisation Hope Not Hate. This is the first low. Equating Hope not Hate to an extremist organisation when it blatantly is not and then accusing a man who has just lost his wife to extremism of having extremist links. Maybe to you that is acceptable behaviour, but not to many others. Now, quoting directly from the article Then came Farage's sidekicks. "When are we allowed to say that Brendan Cox is a total arse?" tweeted the Breitbart columnist James Delingpole. "I'm sorry about his wife but he chose to massively politicise it. Who does that?" asked Ukip bankroller Arron Banks, accusing Jo's widower – rather than the far-right terrorist who killed her – of politicising her death. I find this a disgusting thing to do. How would you feel, if you had just lost someone in such circumstances, to be accused of extremism, to be told you was cashing in on their death and then be called a total areshole for complaining about it? If you find it acceptable then I think I may have discovered the reason we cannot easily communicate - We operate on totally different moralities. Cheers DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 22 Dec 16 - 05:28 PM Interesting chain of events that puts Farage's statement that started this exchange in context. In 2010 Anis Amri, the suspect now being hunted for the Berlin terror attack, was accused of stealing a lorry in his homeland of Tunisia. His family say he drank, had girlfriends, and was not overtly religious. In February 2011 he was charged with armed robbery but fled the country. He was convicted in his absence and handed a five year sentence. He went to Italy, where he he claimed asylum as a minor - he was probably about 17 at the time - but after a series of crimes including arson at a school he was given a four year jail sentence. Upon his release in early 2015 he was taken to a detention centre to await deportation. His family say he had become religious. In July his expulsion order expired because Tunisia didn't sort out the paperwork. He was ordered to leave Italy anyway, and so crossed into Germany where he claimed asylum in July 2015. In August 2015, German president Angela Merkel responded to the growing migrant crisis by saying her country would take in 1million Syrians. She was heavily criticised by right-wing politicians, who said this was an open invitation to terrorists. In February 2016 Amri moved to Berlin and a month later came under investigation after a tip-off to police that he was preparing an act of terror. In June 2016 his claim for asylum was rejected. He was detained for a day but because he had no identity documents they could not establish he was the right man, so had to let him go. By this point he claimed six separate identities and three different nationalities. In August 2016 Amri was arrested for a minor offence, and Germany asked Tunisia to provide a passport so they could deport him. In September 2016 surveillance was called off. Amri was seen dealing drugs and fighting in a bar, but there was no sign of terrorism. (Source Daily Mirror) These are the facts that we know about the suspect. There are other things that could be deduced by the forensic evidence in the truck but I do not care to speculate on them save to say that it looks like the Polish lorry driver put up and fight. So, based on what we do know I believe that Farage has been proven to be wrong in blaming Angela Merkel and Brendan Cox has been vindicated for saying so. Do we think Farage will apologise? DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Steve Shaw Date: 22 Dec 16 - 05:46 PM I'm going to get personal with you, Dave. Where are those missing bloody bingo balls, pal? Had a near-riot on me hands last week when a bunch of 85-year-olds spotted that legs eleven, clickety-click and two fat ladies hadn't cropped up for three years. I mean, I did try to TELL you not to try carrying them in a soggy cardboard box in the pissing rain across a dark car park... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Dec 16 - 02:34 AM Yebbut if those numbers ever cropped up they would all win. They are on all the cards since we decided to photocopy the first one to save cash. :D |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 23 Dec 16 - 05:31 AM Dave, How can a criminal murdering innocent people be blamed on Merkel? As I said yesterday, many in Germany blame Merkel because she allowed in a million people, mostly young men from N.Africa, Middle East, and Afghanistan, with little or no checks. It was feared at the time to be a security threat and there have now been several terror incidents in Germany related to that influx. Who mentioned personal abuse about the exchange between Farage and Cox, Keith? You described it as Farage attacking Cox, and it being a new political low. In fact it was a reasoned reply and in no way a new political low. If you read stuff from Breitbart you do not expect to find reasoned debate. Nothing to do with Farage. Why did you call the columnist his "sidekick?" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Dec 16 - 06:24 AM ""Well professor you seem very keen to criticise the labour party at every available opportunity." You have attempted to prove antisemitism, and misogyny, and have posted claim after claim that this happened without producing a single hint of "a serious problem" or an example of that antisemitism When you were unable to do so, you blamed The Jews in Parliment for refusing to reveal it. You still persist in these claims and you are still unable to provide examples. Jim Carroll" So asylum seekers are all potential mass murderers, just as male Pakistanis are all potential rapists A twisted world you live in. I've just been listening to a British security man being interviewed on this attack, and he said the sheer impossibility of checking people fleeing these wars absolves the Germany Government from all blame He said something like "Work out the man hours it would take to check the security of each individual and multiply it by the number of refugees seeking asylum and you begin to see the problem". He also said, to his credit, that the alternative was to turn them all away, and that was unthinkable - except to people (Christians) like you, it would seem. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Dec 16 - 07:00 AM Not that it should worry you too much Keith, given your attitude to the Jewish people, but exactly the same arguments were being used by your lot to stop taking in Jews fleeing to Britain from the Nazis, only then it was that they were potential Bolsheviks rather than terrorists Funny how a turning world always returns to the same place Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 23 Dec 16 - 07:42 AM Who is my lot Jim? Britain had an exemplary record for taking in Jewish refugees from the Nazis. Does any country have better? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Raggytash Date: 23 Dec 16 - 07:49 AM Exemplary record eh The facts: A short History |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Dec 16 - 07:59 AM "Who is my lot Jim?" People who talk about Jewish pacts of silence to hide antisemitism Keith "Who is my lot Jim?" My point exactly - pity that spirit of generosity is not extended to today's refugees Those of your lot I was referring to where the few who argued that taking Jews in was a risk - the antisemitism right (if it fits, wear it) Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Dec 16 - 08:01 AM As I said yesterday, many in Germany blame Merkel because she allowed in a million people, mostly young men from N.Africa, Middle East, and Afghanistan, with little or no checks. And, as I pointed out earlier, the main suspect entered the country prior to the German governments (Not Merkels, you will note. It was approved by the whole government, not one person) decision to let more refugees in. The right wing are just using this as an excuse to stir up more hate against immigrants and attempt to discredit the current administration. As to the rest of your points. well, there may be something you say in that Farage may have attacked Cox after Cox criticised him for getting it wrong over Merkel. An attack by a politician, who should know better, on a member of the public who has suffered a tragedy. Whatever spin you you would care to put on it there is no excuse to lambaste someone who has had their family destroyed by extremism by suggesting they have links to extremist groups. No excuse whatsoever. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Dec 16 - 08:02 AM ...and please everyone, do not turn this into another thread about anti-semitism or it will simply be closed again. Cheers DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Dec 16 - 08:27 AM Nothing to do with Farage. Why did you call the columnist his "sidekick?" Maybe for the same reason that you tend to lump everyone who argues against you as 'a little gang' and ask me to comment on Jim's or Steve's posts. But, point taken, I shall not use the term where it is not applicable again. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Jack Campin Date: 23 Dec 16 - 08:48 AM Why did you call the columnist his "sidekick?" Just google "delingpole farage" and see what you get (I'm not about to recycle that shit). That's exactly what he is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Charmion Date: 23 Dec 16 - 08:51 AM Who did better than Britain at providing sanctuary for Jews fleeing the Nazis? Not Canada. Not the United States. Not Australia. Not any of the English-speaking countries. The Dominican Republic, of all places, did better, offering settlement opportunities (accepted by only a few refugees) and, more importantly, travel papers that thousands used to find sanctuary elsewhere. Bolivia was surprisingly welcoming, accepting some 20,000 Jewish refugees between 1938 and 1941. The Mexican consul stationed in Marseilles under the Vichy regime was personally responsible for producing travel documents that allowed tens of thousands of Jews to get out of Europe via France. He was so successful that the Gestapo arrested him and his family, holding them in Germany for a year. Check out the Holocaust Museum site for more information. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Donuel Date: 23 Dec 16 - 09:15 AM IT GOT REAL Less than two hours Putin announced that Russian needs to upgrade its tactical nuclear bombs when Trump tweeted an expansion of our nuclear arsenal. (collusion?) I know we still use 8 inch floppies to run our guidance and detonation system. but a nuclear bomb race we do not need. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Jack Campin Date: 23 Dec 16 - 10:18 AM Who did better than Britain at providing sanctuary for Jews fleeing the Nazis? Japanese-occupied Shanghai. Look it up. Geographically, the obvious place to flee to for most European Jews faced with annihilation was the USSR. I have not yet found any believable information about how many went there - every site I can locate on the web obscures the demographic facts behind mountains of ideological garbage. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 23 Dec 16 - 10:44 AM People who talk about Jewish pacts of silence to hide antisemitism Keith Not me then Jim. Dave, From your post, In August 2015, German president Angela Merkel responded to the growing migrant crisis by saying her country would take in 1million Syrians. She was heavily criticised by right-wing politicians, who said this was an open invitation to terrorists. In February 2016 Amri moved to Berlin and a month later came under investigation after a tip-off to police that he was preparing an act of terror. He arrived in Germany as an asylum seeking refugee. It is a widely held view that the open door policy allowed many Jihadists to enter, and has led to the upsurge in attacks in Germany. An attack by a politician, who should know better, on a member of the public who has suffered a tragedy. Whatever spin you you would care to put on it there is no excuse to lambaste someone who has had their family destroyed by extremism by suggesting they have links to extremist groups. No. The criticism was put to Farage in a broadcast interview and any politician would have had to give a full strength response. Even tragic personal circumstance do not allow you free hits in politics. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Dec 16 - 10:51 AM Fine, Keith, we know your position on this. I do not believe there is any excuse for the actions of Farage and his supporters, including yourself now. No need to confirm it any further. The criticism by Brendan Cox was on twitter BTW, not in an interview. However it does not matter, it was Farages response that was unforgivable and as we are obviously poles apart there is no point in continuing the discussion. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Dec 16 - 11:23 AM "Not me then Jim." Please stop lying stupidly Keith You said exactly this - it is archived as this If you doiid not say it, what excuse did you give for the Jewish members not revealing the nature of the antisemitism? You have till the end of the day to makeup another porkie. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Dec 16 - 12:51 PM Lat's settle this once and for all Keith You claim there is a serious problem of antisemitism within the Labour Party Why haven't the Jewish victims of this antisemitism gone public? What is to stop them from going to the press, who would be more than happy top publicise it and get it stopped? Simple - answer the question Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Greg F. Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:07 PM Can we get this back on track of Farage being an obnoxious lying arsehole (like his doppelganger Trump) and let the Zionist bigots/apologists destroy other threads as per usual? Thank You. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:09 PM This is not a thread about anti-Semitism in the Labour party, Jim. There seems to be enough of them going on already without turning this into another. This thread is about the depths to which some politicians will stoop to gain attention. I suppose the two things are loosely linked but unless you can link the two in a sensible manner here I would politely ask you to keep to the topic. Many thanks in advance. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:13 PM Thanks, Greg - Cross posted but the message was the same :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:33 PM Dave, The criticism by Brendan Cox was on twitter BTW, not in an interview. Farage made his comment about Merkel on twitter too, but Brendan's criticism was put to Farage on LBC so he could not duck responding to it. I do not believe there is any excuse for the actions of Farage What actions Dave? He replied to the criticism of him. What exactly are you accusing him, and now me, of doing that was so terrible? Norman Tebbit's wife was maimed in a terrorist attack, and eventually died of her injuries. Did he get any special dispensations? Jim, I answered your questions on the Labour Party thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:53 PM Just heard some brilliant news on the BBC. Brendan Cox is to deliver the alternative Christmas message. on Channel 4 on Christmas day. In it he will call for an end to the rise in hatred. Now, I wonder why they did not offer that job to Farage? I wonder what the hate mongers will make of it? Cheers DtG PS, that same article comments that Earlier this week, Mr Cox clashed with Nigel Farage on Twitter after the former Ukip leader said that the Berlin lorry attack would be "[Angela] Merkel's legacy". Mr Cox responded by saying "blaming politicians for the actions of extremists" was a "slippery slope" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:57 PM ...Farage then of course responded by trying to smear by linking himto extremists. And that is where I came in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 23 Dec 16 - 02:02 PM Here is all of what Farage said according to Huffington, When asked about Cox's comments during an interview on LBC this morning, Farage responded: "Yes well of course he would know more about extremists than me, Mr Cox. "He backs organisations like Hope not Hate who masquerade as being lovely and peaceful but actually pursue violent and very undemocratic means. "And I'm sorry Mr Cox but it is time people start taking responsibility for what happened. Mrs Merkel has directly caused a whole number of social and terrorist problems in Germany, it's about time we confronted that truth." Forced to acknowledge that no-one has arguably been more on the receiving end of this sort of extremism than Cox, Farage said: "Yes and it's a terrible thing that happened to his family with the murder of his wife but he continues to be active in the political arena and as I say, given some of the organisations that he supports I can't just stand here and say 'I'm not going to respond'." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Jim Carroll Date: 23 Dec 16 - 02:04 PM " Jim, I answered your questions on the Labour Party thread." You didn't - it will take you a second to answer it here Why did they not describe the antisemitism you claim they were subjected to?It will take you a few seconds to get me off your back Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Dec 16 - 02:18 PM Precisely, Keith. Brendan Cox made a perfectly valid statement on twitter. Instead of responding in kind, Farage used his high profile public position to try to smear Brendan Cox and the Hope not Hate campaign as being extremists. It is just sick and I simply cannot understand how anyone can attempt to justify it. You complain profusely when someone on here, a little read specialist forum, tries to smear you with what you deem to be lies. Yet when a public figure abuses his prominent position to tell the world a widower is linked to the very thing his wife was fighting against when she was murdered, it is perfectly acceptable to you? As I said earlier, there is not point in continuing this discussion with you. Our moralities and sensibilities are poles apart. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Nigel Parsons Date: 23 Dec 16 - 08:45 PM From: Dave the Gnome - PM Date: 23 Dec 16 - 01:53 PM Just heard some brilliant news on the BBC. Brendan Cox is to deliver the alternative Christmas message. on Channel 4 on Christmas day. In it he will call for an end to the rise in hatred. Just a little late. I believe HRH Prince Charles has already covered that subject very well, also on "Thought for the day" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 24 Dec 16 - 03:02 AM The more the merrier, Nigel. He will also say it is the "moment to reach out to somebody that might disagree with us" so, in that spirit and it being the season of goodwill... Although I simply cannot understand your viewpoint, Keith, you are entitled to hold and express it without fear. It may be a sticking point in this discussion but I hold no animosity and wish you and your loved ones a happy and peaceful Christmas. Cheers DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 24 Dec 16 - 04:48 AM Jim, Why did they not describe the antisemitism you claim they were subjected to?It will take you a few seconds to get me off your back They did describe their experiences of anti Semitism, to the Labour leadership. Dave, on twitter. Instead of responding in kind, Farage used his high profile public position No. It was put to him to respond to live on LBC, otherwise he probably would not have responded at all. Nothing sick in that. Not any kind of "new political low." to smear Brendan Cox and the Hope not Hate Is it a smear? I do not know but Farage is not known for making statements he can not support. I predict that the legal case will be quietly forgotten or it will fail. We will see. You complain profusely when someone on here, a little read specialist forum, tries to smear you with what you deem to be lies. Of course I do! They are lies. Yet when a public figure abuses his prominent position to tell the world a widower is linked to the very thing his wife was fighting against when she was murdered, it is perfectly acceptable to you? Absolutely not, unless it is true. There is no difference in our morality Dave and please do not suggest such a thing. I just believe that you have misread this event. Do have a joyful family Christmas. keith. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Dec 16 - 05:08 AM "They did describe their experiences of anti Semitism, to the Labour leadership." Not what I asked Keith - why didn't they take it further? You said it was out of loyalty to the party - that is antisemitic. The answer is simple, they didn't take it public is because, beyond critiscism otf Israel, it does not exist any more than it does in any other political party. Supporters of the Israeli regime, particularly those who oppose B.D.S., were perfectly at liberty to go to the press with it - they didn't. Unless and until somebody does, there is no case to answer - British justice, natural justice and simple common sense - you do not accuse siomebody of something and refuse to describe it and no jury in the land would convict somebody without considering fully what they have been accused of. You live in an Alice Through the Looking Glass World - "Off with his head". BDS and ANTISEMITISM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Dec 16 - 05:10 AM BDS and ANTISEMITIC SMEARS Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 24 Dec 16 - 08:23 AM Thank you, Keith, but I believe it is you that have misread it so we will just have to agree to differ. Answer me one question though. Do you believe that Hope not Hate is an extremist organisation and that Brendan Cox has links to extremism? Cheers DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 24 Dec 16 - 10:34 AM Jim The answer is simple, they didn't take it public is because, beyond critiscism otf Israel, it does not exist any more than it does in any other political party. But we know it does Jim because so many senior people have acknowledged that it does. The NEC itself said it was appalled by recent cases, and that it is a serious problem. That is proof Jim. Dave, Do you believe that Hope not Hate is an extremist organisation and that Brendan Cox has links to extremism? I know nothing about it Dave, but I know Farage to be wily and clever. As I said earlier, he is not known for making statements he can not support. I predict that the legal case will be quietly forgotten or it will fail. We will see. but I believe it is you that have misread it so we will just have to agree to differ. Then why can you not produce something offensive from Farage? Is anything in that Huffington transcript offensive? What? "A new political low" is a huge claim and you have failed to even remotely justify it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Dave the Gnome Date: 24 Dec 16 - 10:51 AM I just find it offensive to suggest that someone who has lost his wife to extremism has extremist links. I thought that was enough justification. If you do not, fair enough, but I am not on my own nor, I suspect, are you. If I may use an folk based illustration. I used to black up to play various roles in the Abram Pace Egg play. Some people said it was offensive and I argued for a long time that it was not. Then I had an epiphany about it. If someone genuinely finds something offensive then, to them. it is. If it is offensive and there is a perfectly viable alternative, then it should stop. From the Huffington transcript you provided - "Yes well of course he would know more about extremists than me, Mr Cox. "He backs organisations like Hope not Hate who masquerade as being lovely and peaceful but actually pursue violent and very undemocratic means. That is offensive in the extreme. It is, ultimately, suggesting that by supporting extremist organisations, Brendan Cox was somehow culpable in the murder of his own wife. I find it sickening. You may disagree. Not a good measure of whether I am right or wrong, I know, but I think you will find I am with the majority. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A new political low take 2 From: Greg F. Date: 24 Dec 16 - 11:42 AM You may disagree. Not a good measure of whether I am right or wrong Actually, Dave, it is an EXCELLENT indicator that you are indeed correct if The Professor disagrees with you, as has been proven without a doubt by his extensive posting history of arrant nonsense, supposition, false conclusions, lies, distortions & etc. As for what The Professor "believes" ... who the hell cares? |