BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 06:24 AM

Joe said it is OK to continue if we stick to the subject.
Please do not try to make this another Israel thread, which some here simply can not discuss rationally.

Jim, following Steve's dismissal of The Community Security Trust (CST) report widely reported in the media, you posted a lot of stuff about the Labour Deputy Leader.
Why?

Do you also dismiss the report Jim?
Watson was elected Deputy Leader by the membership. Why should anyone care what you think of him?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 06:38 AM

Tom Watson has been involved in opposing BDS - the Israeli link to accusations of antisemitism in The Labour part has been well established.
The accusations first appeared when Corbyn announced his intention to support BDS
They died down and then re-appeared when a delegation led by Tom Watson visited Israel.
They died down again and have now resurfaced, prompted by Tom Watson, as Israel has gone viral on expanding illegal settlements on Palestinian owned land - a coincidence too far.
Until someone produces firm evidence of the type of "antisemitism" Labour is supposed to be involved in and how many people are involved in attacking The Jewish People, these are no more than unfounded allegations by pro-Israeli opponents of BDS and right wing political opponents of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership - they have no foundation whatever.
The fact that Israel regards all criticism of their policy as antisemitic is a clear indicartion of what Labour "antisemitism" is - criticism of the Isreali regime
No definition of the term includes that
Produce your examples of antisemitism and you may have an argument - until you do, you haven't
Why should anybody care about Tom Watson's report if it has no foundation in actual fact?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 06:45 AM

You are seriously out of order with your obsessive dredging-up of this, Keith. And I can't believe that you think we won't see through your disingenuousness in trying to insist that we shouldn't make this another "Israel thread." That is precisely what you want and precisely what we don't need all over again. You are a very tiresome man. Remember when you went off on your holiday with your parting shot that you wouldn't be taking any of this shit with you?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 07:17 AM

Incidentally, I did not "dismiss" the report. I dismissed your gnawing away at this well-sucked old bone.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 07:52 AM

to be honest there are more areas of concern than Tom Watson and Israel in the Labour Party.

In many ways one senses it must be a pleasing distraction for those who will not address the problem of how the hell we are going to get elected in the forseeable future.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 08:19 AM

"to be honest there are more areas of concern than Tom Watson and Israel in the Labour Party."
Not really Al
Interference in the affairs of a major political party by a right-wing foreign power is as concern-making as it gets.
If Corbyn is not allowed to live up to his promises it doesn't matter two monkeys whether Labour attains power or not - who wants another Blair or Kinnock.... or any of the quislings who have sold out Labour Party principles down the decades?
If a Socialist Labour Government is not possible, a principled and articulate opposition is infinitely preferable to more of the same.
Put the right back into leadership and once they get their feet under the Parliamentary table, you'll never shift them.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 08:57 AM

'If a Socialist Labour Government is not possible, a principled and articulate opposition is infinitely preferable to more of the same.'

well that's where we disagree. England is a very conservative country. Alot of people voted for a character like Thatcher. Foot, Corbyn and even the much despised Kinnock - their perception by the broad mass of society is that they too left wing.

The Labour Party - even in the hands of flawed individuals has done wondrous things for ordinary people. mobility Allowance, The Open University, minimum wage - things that the tories would never think of.

Fuck principled opposition the people need protecting from the Thatchers of this world. And that means compromises and the tricky business of acquiring power.

If I have a vision of why Labour must be in power - its seeing that bastard Botmmley making up a Gilbert and Sullivan parody sneering at those of of us who spend our lives looking after a disabled partner to a cheering tory conference. They are arseholes, and I don't want them in power.

Yes i would like a more extreme left wing government, but given the disposition of the English people -its not going to happen. A right wing Labour party admisitration is all that is achievable.

And thanks to the dicking about of those who keeping whining about Blairite scum. Even that is looking like a remote possibility.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 09:00 AM

"Anti-Semitic incidents within the Labour party contributed to a record rise in attacks on Jews in the UK last year, a charity report has found."
Totally unsubstantiated - there has been no evidence put forward and no research carried out to suggest that alleged antisemitism in the Labour Party has been the cause of any attacks
It is quite likely that any increase in antisemitism has been caused by those who have linked Israeli policy with The Jewish People - the main culprits being the Israeli regime themselves who have described criticism of its behaviour as "antisemitic"
There is as much evidence to suggest the behaviour of Labour Party has caused attacks on Jews as there is of there being a serious problem with antisemitism - none whatever, and there never will be until that anti-Semitism is defined and enumerated.
"So tell us all Shaw, what is your take on this report that you do not dismiss? "
Why not point out the evidence that the Labour party has had anything to do with attacks on Jews - such serious allegations need substantiation - so far we have only more of the same.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 09:16 AM

How is it possible to discuss this without reference to Israel when the premise of this thread refers to a report on antisemitism?

Also please note that the original Labour party discussion thread was started with no reference to Israel or antisemitism at all

Subject: BS: Labour party discussion
From: McGrath of Harlow - PM
Date: 13 Aug 16 - 01:50 PM

Since the thread about 'Whither the Labour Party" has drifted far from home and turned into a rather unpleasant series of skirmishes about matters of peripheral relevance, I thought I'd start up one where we could talk about the current hurly burly. Preferably without getting into slanging matches. But that might be too much to ask. Coherent and even-tempered slanging matches, at least?
..............................

The latest court finding would apear to mean that the NEC could perfectly properly retrospectively bar from voting everyone who has joined the party after any date it chooses to name. Strange.

One thing that strikes me is that the manoeuvre by which recent members were barred from voting - waitng enough of those who would have opposed it has left the room before tabling the motion - was just the kid of "Trotskyite" ploy that Militant were always being accused of. I rather suspect that all those kind of tricks were very much part of theculture of Labour (and other parties) since they were founded.

So to call this thread part 2 of that one does not make much sense.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 09:25 AM

It is interesting to read through the various accounts of this report, including those in the Jewish Press.
Nowhere is it suggested that Labour is the cause and increase in these attacks, in fact The Jewish Press quotes a suggestion that British populism leading up to and following Brexit are responsible.
The suggestion that Labour is in anyway responsible comes from Tom Watson and his anti-BDS stance has been long established - back to the Israeli regime again - another coincidence maybe?
As Sherlock Holmes once said - "the Universe would not be so clumsy"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 09:47 AM

As this and the previous thread have continued without agreement for more than 550 days and almost 2000 individual posts it seem reasonable to assume that agreement will never be reached by the various parties.

Perhaps it is time for all parties to hang up the keyboard.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 09:48 AM

all my computer says is

'RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II'

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 10:31 AM

Regarding what the report actually says, this is the only mention The Labour Party gets in its actual wording.

"These factors included the conflict in Gaza and Israel in summer 2014; terrorist attacks on Jewish communities in France and Denmark in 2015, and other terrorism in Europe; and in 2016, high profile allegations of antisemitism in the Labour Party; a perceived increase in racism and xenophobia following the EU referendum, including an increase in recorded racial and religious hate crime; and regular, high-profile discussion of antisemitism, racism and hate crime in mainstream media, politics and on social media during the year."

The other causes that were actually suggested were The Gaza Conflict, Terrorist attacks in France, Denmark, and elsewhere, an increase following THE BREXIT REFERENDUM and media discussion of hate crimes - all carefully avoided in his crusade to show that it was Labour wot dun it!!
Labour involvement remains unsubstantiated accusations by anti BDS groups and anti Corbynites, prepared to use any mud to have him removed.
Using this report as evidence of Labour party antisemitism is a desperate attempt to denigrate it - utter and complete agenda-driven nonsense.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 11:05 AM

Something else carefully omitted by our OP was included in the report - I wonder why?
This deathless piece of prose on a hand-written leaflet headed and footed by Swastikas was delivered to a charity shop in November.

BREXIT - TRUMP - The final solution
Fuck you kikes, dykes, fags and Niggers
You are all going to the Oven!

Perhaps Mr T and Keith would like to remind us where they stand on Brexit and Trump!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 11:24 AM

Well, let's see. Reported antisemitic incidents went up considerably last year. So Keith, rabidly anti-Labour, finds a report in the Telegraph, rabidly anti-Labour, and they connive in shamelessy applying that well-known logical fallacy, post hoc ergo proper hoc, to the findings, namely that the attacks are the result of the "antisemitism crisis" in Labour. I notice Keith didn't choose the BBC report instead, which makes a brief, passing reference only to Labour. Oh no, that wouldn't do because it didn't fit Keith's Labour-smearing mission. Neither did he want to quote Jenny Tonge's sharp criticism of the CST, who accused it, rightly in my view, of displaying a perpetual victim mentality and of failing to help real decent Jewish people.

Neither Keith, the Telegraph nor I know why the reported incidence of attacks went up last year, but I should like to put up a few ideas for consideration:

1. If you fish for reports of attacks you'll get more reports.

2. The self-same right-wing media that appeals most to xenophobes, racists and bigots had been obsessed with antisemitism talk for months in their attempt to smear Labour as much as possible.

3. Global terrorism has fuelled anti-Muslim sentiment, which has a polarising effect on communities such as those in north Manchester and London where large populations of Jews and Muslims are found side by side.

4. The long runup to the referendum was replete with anti-foreigner sentiment which was strengthened by lies about the adverse effects outsiders have on the British way of life, "taking us over" sort of thing. Seems to fit very nicely with the abhorrent conspiracy theories about how Jews are taking over...

5. The continuing actions of the Israeli regime in discriminating against Palestinians and stealing land for illegal settlements whips up anti-Jewish sentiment.

Now I don't know to what extent, if any, those or other factors may have contributed to increased reports of attacks. But here's the crux: neither does Keith, neither does Teribus, neither does the CST and neither does the Telegraph. So to focus on the issue within Labour implying that you've found the cause is dishonest and unscientific. By the way, my little list is in no way intended to imply excuses or justification for these attacks. I shouldn't have to say that, but you never know who's waiting to pounce on you round here, as we found yesterday.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 11:37 AM

Teribus/Keith/Bobad - If we accept as given that we all understand how "divide and rule" works,
and which ideological sectors of UK society would most probably succeed in winning from it..

Then you 3, as persistent and obsessed as you are, are mere infinitesimal minor players / disrupters
within the confines of a folk forum of such little consequence
that the wasted time & effort you put into trying to annoy 'us' lefty liberals is just laughable.... 🙄


..as you can probably guess, i've hit a tedium threshold doing houshold chores
and had a quick look here in mudcat..

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 12:13 PM

I've just been doing that as well. Bloody wind blew coal ash all over me as I was emptying the fire just now. 😡Left the hoovering for Mrs Steve - team work. 😉Just off into the kitchen to assemble my ingredients for the whore's spaghetti we're having for tea and I've just found a £7.99 magnum of Lidl's Nero d'Avola I didn't know I had. 😜

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 12:24 PM

You've had a summary of the report Keith highlighted, you either cross-posted or or decided to pass it off as a "load of made-up shit"
Doesn't matter really - the report says what it says and Brexit features large in it - Labour does not
Keith used it to attack Labour - Heaven forfend that you two should fall out
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 12:40 PM

Steve,
"unbelievable!" was my response to Keith having the brass neck to reopen this shagged-out topic,

It was back in the news Steve.
It was on the BBC R4 Today Programme yesterday morning, on the BBC site, Sky News, Evening Standard and in the Telegraph, so not widely considered to be "unbelievable."
A serious report suggesting that Labour anti-Semitism contributed to a rise in anti-Semitic attacks.
Of course that merited a mention in a thread for discussing the party, especially when endorsed by the Deputy Leader!

Jim, again you post loads of stuff about Watson without telling us how it is relevant!

Dave, of course we can discuss the Labour Party, including its anti-Semitism, without needing to bring Israel into it!
Israel seems to be an obsession with some people.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 12:44 PM

Jim, I know other contributory factors were suggested for the rise in anti-Semitic attacks, but Labour's anti-Semitism was up there and that makes it relevant to any current discussion about Labour.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 12:54 PM

Dave, of course we can discuss the Labour Party, including its anti-Semitism, without needing to bring Israel into it!

How much do you want to bet that it can't happen here?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 12:56 PM

Yes Dave, but Joe has given the gypsies' warning to keep to the subject and he might enforce it with deletions.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 01:02 PM

Now listen up for once, cloth-ears. I shall say this only twenty more times (my calculation as to how many times I'll have to say it before it finally sinks into whatever pile of poo passes for your brainbox). "Unbelievable" referred to you dredging this tired old rubbish up yet again. It most emphatically did NOT refer to any column, item, newsflash, bulletin, anecdote, report, op-ed, programme, or anything else. It really was all about you, Keith. As most things you "discuss" are all about you anyway, I thought you'd be delighted. And it really is only about the Labour Party in the most tangential way anyway, isn't it? Oops, sorry, except in the minds of the Daily Torygraph and your good self, of course, and whatever ragbag collection of other anti-Labour pro-Israeli regime obsessives you can muster. Now toddle off and go and pester someone else. Sorry, Jim, I don't mean you.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 01:27 PM

As new and relevant news items come up, of course it is right and proper that old threads are revived.

The report was not specifically about anti-Semitism it dealt with the increase in reported "Hate Crime" in 2016 and it highlighted various causes. It mentioned that anti-Semitic hate crimes accounted for one-third of all hate crimes reported and again IIRC that was the largest single category. The main identifiable reason given for the increase in 2016 was the apparent lack of concern about "high profile allegations of anti-semitism in the Labour Party"

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 01:28 PM

"but Labour's anti-Semitism was up there and that makes it relevant to any current discussion about Labour."
No it wasn't Keith - accusations of Labour was up there - no suggestion that the accusations were ever substantiated and certainly no suggestion that Labour antisemitism was in any way a contributory factor to the rise in antisemitism
It is yet another attempt by you to denigrate Labour and, as with all the others it has bounced up and smacked you in the nose.
You know as well as I do that if any substance o the accusations against Labour had in any way featured in the rise of antisemitism it would have featured large in the report.
"Jim, again you post loads of stuff about Watson without telling us how it is relevant!"
Please don't start this again Keith - you put up this reort to denigrate Labout - the only person in the report who makes accusations against Labour is Watson - Watson is Israel's poodle and he almost certainly was the cause of the accusation reaching the proportions it did.
Please do not suggest again that I have not explained why information on Watson is relevant.
The fact that he appeared in your carefully edited piece about the report make any information we have on him relevant to this discussion - you introduced him - not me, and you have used him for a large part of this argument   
He is a right wing, anti Corbynite mouthpiece of the Israeli regime and his dishonest behaviour in Parliament makes him an extremely unreliable source of information - a greedy career politician .
We can safely assume that, although they both feature the report RAISED BY YOU neither Trump not Brexit are going to be responded to by you.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 01:50 PM

"The main identifiable reason given for the increase in 2016 was the apparent lack of concern about "high profile allegations of anti-semitism in the Labour Party"

And who identified this "reason?" Where's the evidence that the allegations led to the increase? There IS no evidence, is there? It's just a supposition to fit the agenda of anti-Labour obsessives. If you have evidence for a link, let's be having it. Both Jim and I have given you plenty of other potential factors that may plausibly be involved. We can't prove any of those either and we haven't tried to. But I'm damn sure you can't prove this one. I suggest that you contemplate whether the distrust of The Other whipped up by the likes of your hero Farage might just have a little to do with it. Can't prove that either but it isn't too easy to dismiss, is it? Dare say you'll try...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 02:33 PM

One of the nastiest cases of shooting oneself in the foot I've ever come across
If there had been antisemitism in the Labour party, it would have been described as just that instead it was "allegations"
It would have featured largely in the report as "figures of authority committing acts of antisemitism" instead of allegations.
It does implicate the racist attacks as a result of Brexit, which put's the OPer and his mate, both Brexiters, in a position of having to respond to or (more likely) ignore that Brexit is partially responsible for the rise in antisemitism
The report also includes the Fascist leaflet implicating Trumpists
Oh dear!!
Nurse - the screens, the screens!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 03:50 PM

The continuing actions of the Israeli regime in discriminating against Palestinians and stealing land for illegal settlements

Which, of course they don't do - it is their land and they have every right to build and live on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 05:26 PM

Why, of course! 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 03 Feb 17 - 06:48 PM

Truth is elusive to those who refuse to see with both eyes but I see you're coming around 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 02:54 AM

"And who identified this "reason?" Where's the evidence that the allegations led to the increase? There IS no evidence, is there? It's just a supposition to fit the agenda of anti-Labour obsessives." - Steve Shaw

How about OULC, Baroness Royall, Labour's NEC, The Community Security Trust, UCL. Strange that the vast majority of these "anti-Labour obsessives" all happen to be members of the Labour Party innit Steve?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 03:32 AM

£Where's the evidence that the allegations led to the increase"
THere is no evidence - only unfounded accusations.
The report refers only to "allegations" - no evidence
Allegations are not evidence in any civilised court.
These allegations have been generated by a foreign power and taken up by the right wing of he Labour Party who are opposed to Corbyn's leadership - not the slightest bit "strange"
There is evidence that Brexit is part of the rise of antisemitism - that''s cited in the report, but any evidence that points to the "wrong" conclusion is not worthy of discussion to some people.
It's a fairly safe bet that Trump's Trumpeters will add to the problem, but of course, that won't be worth considering either
The greatest threat to the Jewish People today comes from those who implicate them in the crimes of the Israeli regime - as those crimes continue unchecked, the threat will become a reality.
That's not worth discussing either.
Much of this is covered by Keith's repoort - no longer worth discussing either - a definite backfire
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 05:08 AM

Steve,
"Unbelievable" referred to you dredging this tired old rubbish up yet again.

Yes, you said that, but I did not dredge anything up. I referred to a breaking news story relevant to the discussion, so what is so unbelievable?

And it really is only about the Labour Party in the most tangential way anyway, isn't it? Oops, sorry, except in the minds of the Daily Torygraph and your good self, of course, and whatever ragbag collection of other anti-Labour pro-Israeli regime obsessives you can muster

The membership elected Deputy Leader of The Labour Party said it was about the Labour Party. Which of those categories does he fit Steve?

Jim,
It is yet another attempt by you to denigrate Labour

It was a prominent news story Jim. I had nothing to do with the conclusions of that report. You are just shooting the messenger.

Keith - you put up this reort to denigrate Labout -

I did not put it up. BBC R4, BBC News and various publications did.

the only person in the report who makes accusations against Labour is Watson

Watson was not involved in the report!

- Watson is Israel's poodle and he almost certainly was the cause of the accusation reaching the proportions it did.

Please clarify this statement Jim.
You seem to be claiming that Labour's Deputy Leader lies against his Party in the service of Israel.
Is that what you really believe Jim?

He is a right wing, anti Corbynite mouthpiece of the Israeli regime

You really do believe that Labour's Deputy Leader lies against his Party in the service of Israel!!!!

We can safely assume that, although they both feature the report RAISED BY YOU neither Trump not Brexit are going to be responded to by you.

I did respond.

The report refers only to "allegations" - no evidence

Yes. It cites them as a contributing to the sharp rise in anti-Semitic attacks.

If the Labour leadership says that anti-Semitism is a serious problem for Labour, your denial of it is worthless Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 05:23 AM

I invite you to peruse the thread slightly more carefully, Teribus, in order to find out why you have completely misinterpreted what I've been saying about cause and effect. You either did it on purpose or you're not very bright. The floor is yours.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 05:26 AM

If that isn't dredging up tired old arguments, Keith, well I'm the Queen of Sheba.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 05:32 AM

Steve,
You either did it on purpose or you're not very bright.

Third alternative, you are not very good at explaining what you mean.
Good example, your one word post "unbelievable."

If that isn't dredging up tired old arguments, Keith, well I'm the Queen of Sheba.

It is not, Your Majesty.
It is adding discussion of a highly relevant breaking news story to the original debate.

If you are tired of it, why do you keep trying to join in?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 06:02 AM

Well then Jim apply your self same arguments to you claiming that the Brexit campaign and vote resulted in an increase in "hate crime".

The CST commented on the increase in the number of hate crimes reported in 2016 and the fact that one third of them were anti-Semitic attacks. The CST identified the possible reasons for the increase.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 06:58 AM

"It was a prominent news story Jim"
Which had nothing to do with Labour and nothing to do with the title of this thread - which you chose.
"I did not put it up. BBC R4, BBC News and various publications did."
You put the report up as an attack on Labour - it was nothing of the sort - all your own work again
"Watson was not involved in the report!"
Watson's comment was included and he has been a part of accusing Labour of antisemitism on the part of his Israeli mates.
"You really do believe that Labour's Deputy Leader lies against his Party in the service of Israel!!!"
Do I believe politicians lie - tough one that - you're going to have to help me out there
Your "in the services of Israel" distorts what I say - deliberately, no doubt.
He is against BDS - true or false, he is a supporter of the Israeli regime - true or false?
He has helped revive attacks on the Labour Party on at least two occasions after visits to Israel - true or false?
This is an example of your gargantuan effort to denigrate the Labour party by smearing them with charges of antisemitism - true or false?
You have never produced a shred of evidence - true or false?
You have not responded to the Brexit link to antisemitism
The report implicates Brexit in the rise of Antisemitism in Britian - DO YOU AGREE WITH IT?
By including that Nazi poster, it also implicates Trump's victory in that rise - DO YOU AGREE WITH IT?
A simple yes or no will do in either case
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 07:20 AM

Well we can all come up with "possible reasons," can't we. But, Teribus, "possible reasons" are not proven causes. You've been given plenty of "possible reasons" for the perceived increase in hate crimes by me and Jim. But you and Keith are obsessed with just one "possible reason," and you seem to wish to eliminate from consideration all the other "possible reasons" and you are trying to erase the word "possible." In my view, the most plausible major reason for any increase in hate crime directed at ethnic minorities last year is the anti-foreigner talk that dominated the referendum campaign for months. I can't prove that but you can't dismiss it either. I do understand that that won't sit well with you and Keith as you both doughtily and unstintingly supported the main anti-foreigner racist, Nigel Farage, but that's your problem, and trying to shift all the blame on to the Labour Party is just blinkered.

And do give it a rest, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 08:05 AM

"Well then Jim apply your self same arguments to you claiming...."
Apart from your infantile use of a continuing use of a typo (seems to be yor comfort blanket) - can we drop the "my claiming" - I "claim" nothing - I put up the findings of the report
Your mate's report links Brexit and Trump with the rise in antisemitism, not me.
You are obviously not going to respond and I doubt if he will, but you, like he, were quick to defend the findings of this report until its implications were pointed out to you.
Of course Brexit was an issue - within days of the announcement racist incidents has rocketed ant there were reports of non-British residents being approached and asked when they were "going home" on the same day.
Trump's racist agenda and his inclusion of an antisemite on his staff is guaranteed to have the same effect.
The persistent practice of the Israeli regime with have the effect of targeting the Jewish People in the same manner, and the fact that he has drawn his support from groups like The Klan and The Tea Party are going to make the U.S. a hotbed of antisemitism, racism and cultural intolerance.
Good days ahead.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 08:14 AM

Sorry - should be two separate sentences
" The fact that Trump has drawn his support from groups like The Klan and The Tea Party are going to make the U.S. a hotbed of antisemitism, racism and cultural intolerance.

The persistent practice of the Israeli regime with have the effect of targeting the Jewish People in the same manner,
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 09:12 AM

Jim,
Do I believe politicians lie - tough one that - you're going to have to help me out there

Not what I asked Jim.
I asked if YOU believe that THIS politician lies against his OWN PARTY on behalf of the government of Israel.
The two quotes make it very clear that you do, but it is so bizarre that you should clarify your position.
Will you Jim, or like Diane Abbott are you ashamed to reveal what you think?
Please do not duck this one.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 09:31 AM

Steve,
Well we can all come up with "possible reasons," can't we. But, Teribus, "possible reasons" are not proven causes.

It was the reputable CST report that concluded that Labour's anti-Semitism probably contributed to the rise in such attacks.
Such a thing is not capable of proof, any more than it can be proved that Brexit contributed to racist attacks, but Jim made a big issue of that!

But you and Keith are obsessed with just one "possible reason,"

No. We acknowledged the other possible reasons but this thread is about Labour.

and you seem to wish to eliminate from consideration all the other "possible reasons"

No. We just highlighted the one that was relevant to this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 10:54 AM

I'm sorry, but, if you wish to continue to try to pin the blame on Labour for the alleged rise in hate crime, then all the other possible reasons are highly-relevant to this thread, and you are not going to dictate to us what we can and can't include. Were it not for you bringing this up as a blame-Labour issue yet again we wouldn't even be discussing those other possible reasons, would we? And your calling the CST "reputable" in order to dignify your claims (do you ever do anything honestly?) is highly debatable. Jenny Tonge didn't think so, and, though I'm no fan of hers, I'd take her opinion over yours any day of the week.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 11:29 AM

Repeat after me...

DON'T
FEED
THE
TROLLS

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 11:47 AM

I agree Backwoodsman, Keith should stop feeding the trolls.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 12:18 PM

"I asked if YOU believe that THIS politician lies against his OWN PARTY on behalf of the government of Israel."
You are loading this question by ignoring every other fact concerning this man
He is a right wing opponent of Corbyn who has demanded he resign - he would certainly bend the truth at acheive that, as would very other right winger
He is a career politician who has been discovered fiddling expenses - he, and every other politician of his ilk would lie in their teeth to preserve his job
He is a member of Friends of Israel and has led two sponsored delegations there - nice work, if that's what turns you on.
He is opposed to BDS and has been cited in the Israeli press for his support for the Regime's cause.
He is a politician - lying is a recognised part of the job description
Of course he would lie if it served his agenda and his personal interests – does the Pope wear a frock?
Corbyn gives all the appearance of being an honest, principled politician – it says what needs to be said your politics when you are prepared to put in so much time and effort to denigrating such a man
Haven't we had enough shitty, dishonest politicians?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 12:28 PM

"It was the reputable CST report that concluded that Labour's anti-Semitism probably contributed to the rise in such attacks."
No it was not - it never accused Labour of antisemitism - it only said there had been accusations - and that is all there have been
There is no evidence that these accuastions are true and it would underline the entire report if it had suggested there was
The exact wording was "high profile allegations of antisemitism in the Labour Party; "
I ask again
The report accuses both Brexit and Trum of being the cause of the rise in Antisemitism - do you agree with this
PLEASE DO NOT DUCK THIS ONE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 12:41 PM

Steve,
I'm sorry, but, if you wish to continue to try to pin the blame on Labour for the alleged rise in hate crime

Continue? I never have and never would. Made up shit instead of argument again Steve.

What do you mean " alleged rise in hate crime?"
Are you denying the fact?

Were it not for you bringing this up as a blame-Labour issue yet again

Made up shit instead of argument again Steve.
I did not play any part in the compilation of the report that implicated Labour's anti-Semitism. I just posted about it because it was completely relevant to this discussion.

And your calling the CST "reputable" in order to dignify your claims (do you ever do anything honestly?) is highly debatable.

The police, BBC, Independent and Huff Post regard it as reputable.
No-one except you has defended what Tonge said about them.

Jim,
The report accuses both Brexit and Trum of being the cause of the rise in Antisemitism - do you agree with this
PLEASE DO NOT DUCK THIS ONE

Duck it? I have already acknowledged it, and more than once.
Your wording is wrong though. The report does not "accuse" anything of being the "cause."

There is no evidence that these accuastions are true

Well, the Party leadership have recognised Labour's anti-Semitism problem, so your denial of it is worth nothing.

Now Jim, do you believe that Watson tells lies against his own Party?
If so, what is his motivation?
Please do not duck this yet again!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Feb 17 - 01:02 PM

Yes, alleged. I know that the only reason you wish to consider is "Labour's serious antisemitism problem," so in your blinkered state you neglected one of my other potential reasons, which was that you'll get more reports if you fish for them. Alleged means I'm not convinced, though I'm not dismissive, as yiu seem to think. And you seriously gave yourself away apropos of the rest of your denial bullshit when you referred in your post to "Labour's antisemitism problem." Perhaps, if you don't want to be accused of obsessive bias, you should do what I did and consider using the word "alleged."

Can you prove that each of those organisations called the report "reputable?" Can you prove that I'm the only person in the world who agrees with Jenny Tonge? As a matter of fact, the report is nowhere near as supportive of your cause as you seem to think. Nuance in language is not your strong point, as you proved with your Wheatcroft fiasco. Go and have another read. Do take your time.