BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 11:01 AM

Dave, the papers did not invent the allegations against Corbyn.

They may not have. I don't know. What I do know for certain is that they invented the sensationalist headlines only hours before the election. Why have we not seen other publications using the same smear tactics? Because the Scum and the Daily Heil are only fit for wiping your arse on.

Or cleaning custard off your willy...

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 09:24 AM

That was quite a nifty rumour about your arse and those old women up Blackpool Tower, wasn't it, Teribus?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 07:47 AM

But I have still told no lies chaps. That is the only point in question. Just like the newspapers. May be smoke, mirrors, misdirection and, to coin Keith's word of the day, bollocks but if anyone would care to sue me over it I would welcome the challenge

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 07:33 AM

Having lost the argument you resort again to posting drivel.

Dave, the papers did not invent the allegations against Corbyn. I have seen him faced with them on numerous interviews and seen them in the media many times.
They have been posted on here too. Bobad has provided many quotes on the subject.

So, those papers were referring to well established incidents in his past, and have printed no libel.

Has it been denied?
Has legal action been announced?
Have broadcasters or rival publications reported a shocking affront to the democratic process?

No. Just you.
You are you just talking bollocks again Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 07:29 AM

I don't think I have ever voted conservative, even in my youth, but I am about to break the habit of a lifetime.
Mrs May will get my vote, as the exit from the EU is the most pressing issue facing the country.
I believe the election was called in an effort to give Mrs May a decent majority to fight or cause and The Consrvatives are the only party capable of giving the country what they voted for....an end to "Freedom of Movement of labour within the EU.
I have long been a Scottish Nationalist, but the EU issue transcends all others including Scottish Independence. It also transcends the election of a Labour government or what is laughingly referred to as "A Progressive alliance".

Were Labour to be elected now, within weeks Mr Corbyn would be knifed in the back and the Blairites would seize power.....Tony may even make a triumphant return to lead the gory bunch.

Please think before you vote, those of you without the ideological lock down.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 07:21 AM

Steve Shaw - 08 Jun 17 - 06:48 AM

Are you starting a rumour that I'm a liar, Keith?

No rumour Shaw, it has been proven and clearly shown on this forum that you most certainly are a liar - or had you forgotten this?

SHAW'S WHEATCROFT SAGA

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 07:14 AM

Dave the Gnome - 08 Jun 17 - 04:01 AM

The rumour is that Keith enjoys dangling his willy in a bucket of custard while the vicar throws cream cakes at him.

Have I said anything that is untrue?

:D tG

The "rumour" started by you Gnome - under oath I do not think that we could find anyone who had ever heard it before the date stamp given. You challenge anyone to state if anything you have stated is untrue which automatically means that YOU believe your statement to be true. One person called Keith can claim with total certitude that "the rumour" is completely untrue.

Now what has been said by any reporter in the media that is untrue about Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott? In response to what has been written and said about them by reporters there have been no denials, instead we have been regaled with rather limp and implausible accounts in an attempt to explain the reports.

The election of a Labour Government under Corbyn would be an absolute disaster for the United Kingdom on every level imaginable. It took Blair and Brown having been handed a country whose economic and financial health was undoubted. In the course of 13 years they basically managed to completely trash it - 13 years, Corbyn & Co will bankrupt the country in the course of one Parliament.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 06:48 AM

Are you starting a rumour that I'm a liar, Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 06:36 AM

...and I am only doing exactly the same as those newspapers you so robustly defend are doing but on a much smaller scale.

:D

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 06:34 AM

You call us liars but cannot prove that Keith. That is called an unsubstantiated accusation. I thought you were opposed to those?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 06:30 AM

You make liars of yourselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 06:27 AM

Same here, Dave. And the version I'm spreading has even more gory details.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 06:14 AM

There is no such rumour.

Everyone I have spoken to has heard it.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 06:12 AM

Great piece, Jack. It isn't hard to imagine that an equivalent piece could be put together about Jeremy Corbyn.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 06:08 AM

Dave the SNN that you linked to is a spoof site with a staff of one.
You also refer to Twitter!

Now, did either of those actual publications actually say anything that was not true Dave?

Lies told against a Party leader on the eve of an election would be a massive issue, but no-one except you has picked up on it apart from SNN and some Tweets.

Has it been denied?
Has legal action been announced?
Have broadcasters or rival publications reported a vast challenge to the democratic process?

Or are you just talking bollocks again Dave?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 06:05 AM

Well it's a rumour now. I've been spreading it around like wildfire.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 06:00 AM

Dave,
The rumour is that Keith enjoys dangling his willy in a bucket of custard while the vicar throws cream cakes at him.
Have I said anything that is untrue?

Yes, all of it.
There is no such rumour.
You made it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jack Campin
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 05:37 AM

An excellent piece about Diane Abbott by the cookery writer Jack Monroe. This perspective hadn't occurred to me before, and it puts the bullying crap from our resident fascist thugs into perpective:

https://cookingonabootstrap.com/2017/06/07/we-need-to-talk-about-diane-abbott-now-explicit-content/

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 05:36 AM

More evidence that others believe that the Scum and the Daily Heil stink

Apologist for Snickers: Twitter users hit back against attack on Corbyn

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 05:30 AM

You don't need evidence for a rumour. You can just start one. There's a rumour that there's a God but there's no evidence at all for it. And I don't know why you're preaching to me about Theresa changing her mind. It wasn't me wot mentioned it, Mr Accurate. Off you go now, Teribus. I know you tell us that you are not aligned with any political parties, but your Tory needs you. Vote early and vote often.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 05:26 AM

But have I said anything untrue, Teribus? A simple yes or no will do.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 05:18 AM

Having been unable to challenge or counter what Keith A of Hertford has said the Gnome comes out with this nonsense:

Dave the Gnome - 08 Jun 17 - 04:01 AM

The rumour is that Keith enjoys dangling his willy in a bucket of custard while the vicar throws cream cakes at him.

Have I said anything that is untrue?

In relation to Keith A of Hertford what is untrue challenges our rotund, bald, bespectacled gnome?

1: No evidence at all of there being a rumour.

2: While what is said may be true of someone called Keith somewhere on this planet, there is nothing whatsoever that specifically links gnome's reported "rumour" to Keith A of Hertford

3: As to the "dangling willy" thing, this is probably a case of jealously on the part of the gnome as - wait for it - "Rumour has it that he hasn't see his own willy for at least nine years, hiding as it does under the overhang of his beer gut".

4: While what is said may be true of some vicar somewhere on this planet, there is nothing whatsoever that specifically links the vicar mentioned to anyone known to Keith A of Hertford.

5: The "rumour" is exposed as a lie as Keith is allergic to custard and being renowned for not having a sweet tooth would not go anywhere near a cream cake even if his life depended upon it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 04:22 AM

And before you start with the 'no one has mentioned this except you' nonsense take a look at the satirical Southern News Network's take on the same topic.

Other satirical publications are available...

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 04:01 AM

The rumour is that Keith enjoys dangling his willy in a bucket of custard while the vicar throws cream cakes at him.

Have I said anything that is untrue?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 03:59 AM

Also, crime had fallen and continues to fall.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 03:48 AM

The call by Jeremy Corbyn for May's resignation after the London Bridge attack was very quickly back-tracked upon by Corbyn (You see Shaw he's allowed to change his mind as well) for very good reasons.

The resignation was called for because as Home Secretary Theresa May had reduced the number of police officers in England by 20,000 and according to Corbyn & Co., that was what made the terrorist attacks easier. Unfortunately AFTER the resignation call went out people did some checking and found out the following:

1. Those 20,000 officers would not have made any difference at all - In the same time frame anti-terrorist police resources had been increased by May.

2. Corbyn takes great pride in boasting that he has consistently voted AGAINST every piece of anti-terrorist legislation put in front of him.

3. John McDonnell supported by Corbyn has called for both M.I.5 and police firearms units to be disbanded completely. Both these units are essential in anti-terrorist operations.

Corbyn's crocodile tears and Band-Aid plaster response and solution that emerged after Manchester and London was a Laboour pledge to put 10,000 more police on the streets - So did Theresa May only get it half wrong? The reason the numbers of police officers had to be reduced was because of the complete and utter bollocks the Labour Government from 1997 to 2010 had made of the country's finances - there was no money to pay for them.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 03:32 AM

How would I know Dave?

Now, did either of those publications actually say anything that was not true?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 03:13 AM

So you really believe Corbyn supports Jihadis then Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 03:07 AM

Dave,
May when she said that she would not call an election before 2020?
She changed her mind Dave. So what?

Now, did either of those publications actually say anything that was not true Dave?

Lies told against a Party leader on the eve of an election would be a massive issue, but no-one except you has picked up on it.
Has it been denied?
Has legal action been announced?
Have broadcasters or rival publications reported a vast challenge to the democratic process?

Or are you just talking bollocks Dave?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 03:05 AM

Tell us then. Out with it. Put up or shut up, doc.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 02:54 AM

I think its pretty obvious what her health issues are.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jun 17 - 05:29 PM

Diane has been off-message for ages, Mike. If you know more about her her health issues than the rest of us, then let's be having it. Otherwise, your dark talk is just Daily Mailism. Cheers!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Jun 17 - 03:22 PM

So you really believe Corbyn supports Jihadis then Keith? You know damn well that it is all smoke and mirrors with the gutter press. They use weasel words, insinuations and know that many people will not read past the headlines.

MikeL2. Did you believe May when she said that she would not call an election before 2020? Just asking...

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: MikeL2
Date: 07 Jun 17 - 02:42 PM

Hi Steve

<" the most honest man of integrity in British politics today is going to do a damn sight better than you expected.">

Oh yeah. And do you believe him when he says that Dianne Abbott is ill when she should have gone up against the Home Secretary on TV ??

As Shadow Home Secretary she is n embarrassment.

Let's see how it goes tomorrow. A lot of very marginal seats here in the North West.

regards

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Jun 17 - 02:16 PM

Did they actually say anything that was not true Dave?
Corbyn could sue them if so, and the damages would be spectacular.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Jun 17 - 01:08 PM

Anyone seen today's right wing rags? The Scum is the worse with 'Jezza's Jihadi Comrades' but the Daily Heil isn't far behind with 'Apologists for terror'. Blatant use of the latest terror attacks to smear Corbyn and the Labour party. Politics of the gutter and the right wing Barron's obviously shit scared. These tactics are nothing to do with free press or free speech. Just multi-billionaires trying to save their arses. Sadly, thousands will probably believe them :-(

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Jun 17 - 06:33 AM

Jewish restaurants attacked? Well let's see if the antisemitism allegation sticks, shall we? At present, two plus two makes five for you, doesn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 06 Jun 17 - 08:14 PM

Two Jewish kosher restaurants victims of arson attacks in Manchester, police treating it as anti-Semitic hate crimes.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jun 17 - 07:36 PM

Desperate stuff, bobad, showing how worried you are that the most honest man of integrity in British politics today is going to do a damn sight better than you expected.

"Says it all..."

Really? In your own words, and we don't mind single syllables, WHAT does it say? Take your time now...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 06 Jun 17 - 07:02 PM

That's Guido Sarducci, right?

It's actually Guido Fawkes but anyone who is a fan of Father Guido Sarducci is alright by me.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 06 Jun 17 - 04:35 PM

Anti-Semitic Labour BANNER depicting Theresa May wearing star of David earrings harkens back to dark days of Nazi Germany.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jun 17 - 02:18 PM

That's Guido Sarducci, right?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jun 17 - 01:39 PM

Looking in at this latest page in this monster thread tells me one thing. I haven't missed much by deciding early on that it wasn't worth following it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 06 Jun 17 - 01:35 PM

Following Guido's story this morning revealing Jeremy Corbyn addressed an extremist rally including hundreds of members of Al-Muhajiroun, a spokesman for the Labour leader has been forced to distance Jezza from the banned group:

    "Jeremy addressed a broad-based rally in support of Palestinian rights. It was a public event and he was in no way responsible for the views of all of the thousands of attendees. Jeremy condemns al Muhajiroun in the strongest possible terms."

A rally at which audience members chanted about gassing Jews was a "broad based rally" says Corbyn's spokesman. Says it all…

UPDATE: Defence Secretary Sir Michael Fallon has responded to Guido's revelations:

    "Jeremy Corbyn wants to be Prime Minister in just two days, but this latest revelation about his association with extremists shows exactly why he is unfit to lead the country. He has a long track-record of siding with people who want to damage and attack the UK and there can be no excuse for his decision to address this rally."

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Jun 17 - 04:14 AM

From the Mash today.
Could this "Tom" be you Thomson?

A MAN is convinced colleagues share his pro-Labour views after he ranted at them about all other parties being evil scumbags.
Administrator Tom Logan won over his politically wavering colleagues by warning them not to be selfish evil bastards who hate the poor and needy.

Logan said: "I've explained that if they voted Tory it would make me physically sick and I'd have to disown a disgusting person like that.
"Pete said he might vote Lib Dem but he's obviously changed his mind because he didn't stick up for them when I said they were just neoliberal Tory vermin in disguise."
He added: "The key to persuasion is to use intelligence combined with charm and wit."
Workmate Nikki Hollis said: "I really don't agree with Tom's view that voting Green makes you 'an enabler for Tory class genocide' but it's pointless arguing with him.
"I've got a nasty feeling it's going to be like 2015 when he couldn't believe Labour lost and got so drunk he soiled his 'Team Miliband' tracksuit."
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/man-sure-workmates-will-vote-labour-after-saying-theyre-scum-otherwise-20170606128892

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Thompson
Date: 05 Jun 17 - 02:37 PM

I looked at the Daily Mash for the first time and liked it, thanks, Steve. For your delectation,
Waterford Whispers News on the British election.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Jun 17 - 08:13 PM

OK, I'd better confess. The "fat, chocolate-covered unwashed arse" remark was nicked shamelessly from the Daily Mash. Google it and you'll get what I regard as the finest-ever article from the Mash. Enjoy!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Jun 17 - 03:47 AM

And, as ever, he entirely misses the points of both mine and Steve's posts. I suppose he just saw the word arse and had to react. Pavlov's dog is alive and well and posting on mudcat.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 03 Jun 17 - 11:17 PM

Veracity and quote marks are unrelated. We've known that for all of the time you put things in quotes.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Jun 17 - 06:56 PM

Well Dave "chocolate covered" is a bit over the top, and the quotation marks indicate that the words "fat" and "unwashed" were coined by some other.
I have no means of determining THEIR veracity.