BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 05:10 AM

There was not mention of North America and Europe in that post though was there Teribus? It was a plain unequivocal "hate crimes directed against Muslims are but a fraction of those directed against Jews".

500 years behind practicing religious tolerance eh? Fancy that. I didn't realise that the the troubles in Norther Ireland were 500 years ago. I could have sworn I remember one religious cult or another blowing members of another up but, if it was 500 years ago, I suppose I can't have.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 05:17 AM

Jim,
Your shitty - "no decent nation..." shite as a defence of Israeli terrorism is as pathetic as it gets.

I was just pointing out that decent democracies, like Scandinavian and other EU states, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand do not regard Israel as any kind of "rogue" or "terrorist" state and do not accuse it of war crimes.
The countries that do are the nastiest regimes with the very worst records of human rights abuses themselves. And you of course Jim.

You described Muslims as culturally implanted to rape under-age girls -fact

Lie. I have never linked any religion with any kind of offending and always maintained that religion played no part in it. You even quoted me last week, in red ink, saying just that!

You invented a phantom army f supporters who you claim saidf the same thing, yet have consistently refused #to quote them - fact

Lie. I quoted five people at the time, all in a position to know, saying the offending derived from the culture.

You claim never to have attacked the Muslim religion yet, in the middle f a discussion on Muslim criminality, you put up as argument a thousand year old Muslim Child marriage as evidence that the Muslim religion = under-age perversion - fact.

Lie. I made a factual statement about one of the Prophet's (peace be upon Him) wives which was relevant to the discussion, but added that child marriage was legal here until recently.

At a loss to com up with examples of antisemitism in the Labour Party, you accused the Jewish members of Parliament of refusing to describe the antisemitism
I have put your quotes up to you on all of these claims and will continue to do so as lonng as you go on denying you have made them - fact

Lie.
They did not refuse to describe anti-Semitism.
They did not stay silent.
Just like those who complained of misogyny and homophobia they gave full details of their grievances to the Party to deal with.
If I have ever said anything different, THEN QUOTE ME, LIAR!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 05:26 AM

Steve,
If those US figures are true then hate crime against Jews in the western world's biggest nation is almost negligible!

Wrong Steve.
In the context of hate crime, Jews are overwhelmingly the most likely to be victims.

It may be true that hate crime is a tiny proportion of all crime, but Bobad was quite right to point out that Jews are disproportionately the victims of it.

Why do you feel the need to trivialise their persecution?
Have you any evidence whatsoever, however slight, to fuel your challenges?
If not, what is fueling them??

That persecution is driving Jews from Europe in a new mass exodus, while other minorities are striving to get in!
Are you happy with that?
In France and Britain Jewish schools, and only Jewish schools, require armed guards.
Are you happy with that?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 05:30 AM

Dave,
There was not mention of North America and Europe in that post though was there Teribus?

This whole discussion was and is specifically about hate crime in the West, and his post was made in that context.
If the context was changed he would have had to state that he was now referring to the global situation.

Your ruse to discredit his argument was just blatantly dishonest Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 06:03 AM

"The point Keith has been making for months, is that there is a "culture" of Anti Semitism in the left of the UK labour Party."
He has failed miserably to make that point
The only evidence we have is that pro Israeli group received their instructions from Israel that they should smear the Labour Party with accusations of Anti-Semitism following Corbyn's statement that, under his leadership, they would back BDS- the date of that first meeting precedes the attacks by a few weeks.
Corbyn won overwhelming support of the rank and file of the Labour Party, so the New Labour crowd decided to jump on the Anti-Semitism bandwagon n order to rid the party of a leader thy considered a liability.
The makeup of the most vociferous of those attacks indicates this s the case, and the fact that no evidence has emerged other than unqualified accusations by one or other of the above groups.
You do not try people for murder without specif#ying who they killed, and what form the murder took - and then you go on to provide your evidence.
You don't try people for theft without specifying what they stole and how they stole it.
You do not accuse a party of "serious Antisemitism" without describing what form it takes and how many are involved - you certainly don't accuse a party with a track record of opposing bigotry and racism (even you, with your pathetic claims of being a "socialist" knows that)
All this is not just natural justice - it's common sense - making accusations without backing them up with facts is witch-hunting, pure and simple.
Despite this, Keith has persisted in his sickening campaign, refused to acknowledge the simple commonsense that YOU CANNOT FIND ANYBODY GUILTY OF ANYTHING ON THE BASIS OF ACCUSATIONS ALONE - YOU HAVE TO SPECIFY WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IN DETAIL - NO DETAILS HAVE BEEN FORTHCOMING - END OF STORY
So desperate was Keith to smear the Labour Party he let slip his own antisemitism by inventing a 'Jewish Plot', whereby all the Jewish Members of parliament decided to cover up the nature of Labour's Antisemitism in the interests of their party - how desperate can you get?
He has led throughout - he invented his invisible army yet still refuses to quote them - and he never will
No public figure would ever make such a horrendous statement publicly without not only losing their job, but also be prosecuted for inciting race hatred.
To suggest that an entire religious/racial community is culturally inclined to have underage sex is racist filth - that is what Keith has indulged in here
In the middle of his attempts to smear the Muslim people by quoting a thousand year old marriage - and clams he only did so before somebody else did - pathetic!!
Keith continues to insist that he quoted the people he claimed backed his "implant" theory – yet he continues to refuse to quote them
He now says that the Jewish members of parliament did describe the anti-Semitism that was taking place after having said that they had told Corbyn and left it in his hands, and made no statements publicly "for love of the party" – his inconsistencies have now gone ballistic
I brought this up again when he called me a liar and challenged me to produce evidence of his extremism – he has dug himself an deep hole which he would be well advised to climb out of and walk away from.
I have no wish to continue with this, but I will not be called a liar, nor will I let racism pass without challenging it – it does too much damage to people's lives and it destroys our society.
This is a decent forum which gives us the opportunity to express and share our ideas – I would certainly not with to be part of it if I were either a Muslim or a homosexual – the few extremists we have, have made certain of that.
Jim Carroll
"The point Keith has been making for months, is that there is a "culture" of Anti Semitism in the left of the UK labour Party."
He has failed miserably to make that point
The only evidence we have is that pro Israeli group received their instructions from Israel that they should smear the Labour Party with accusations of Anti-Semitism following Corbyn's statement that, under his leadership, they would back BDS- the date of that first meeting precedes the attacks by a few weeks.
Corbyn won overwhelming support of the rank and file of the Labour Party, so the New Labour crowd decided to jump on the Anti-Semitism bandwagon n order to rid the party of a leader thy considered a liability.
The makeup of the most vociferous of those attacks indicates this s the case, and the fact that no evidence has emerged other than unqualified accusations by one or other of the above groups.
You do not try people for murder without specif#ying who they killed, and what form the murder took - and then you go on to provide your evidence.
You don't try people for theft without specifying what they stole and how they stole it.
You do not accuse a party of "serious Antisemitism" without describing what form it takes and how many are involved - you certainly don't accuse a party with a track record of opposing bigotry and racism (even you, with your pathetic claims of being a "socialist" knows that)
All this is not just natural justice - it's common sense - making accusations without backing them up with facts is witch-hunting, pure and simple.
Despite this, Keith has persisted in his sickening campaign, refused to acknowledge the simple commonsense that YOU CANNOT FIND ANYBODY GUILTY OF ANYTHING ON THE BASIS OF ACCUSATIONS ALONE - YOU HAVE TO SPECIFY WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IN DETAIL - NO DETAILS HAVE BEEN FORTHCOMING - END OF STORY
So desperate was Keith to smear the Labour Party he let slip his own antisemitism by inventing a 'Jewish Plot', whereby all the Jewish Members of parliament decided to cover up the nature of Labour's Antisemitism in the interests of their party - how desperate can you get?
He has led throughout - he invented his invisible army yet still refuses to quote them - and he never will
No public figure would ever make such a horrendous statement publicly without not only losing their job, but also be prosecuted for inciting race hatred.
To suggest that an entire religious/racial community is culturally inclined to have underage sex is racist filth - that is what Keith has indulged in here
In the middle of his attempts to smear the Muslim people by quoting a thousand year old marriage - and clams he only did so before somebody else did - pathetic!!
Keith continues to insist that he quoted the people he claimed backed his "implant" theory – yet he continues to refuse to quote them
He now says that the Jewish members of parliament did describe the anti-Semitism that was taking place after having said that they had told Corbyn and left it in his hands, and made no statements publicly "for love of the party" – his inconsistencies have now gone ballistic
I brought this up again when he called me a liar and challenged me to produce evidence of his extremism – he has dug himself an deep hole which he would be well advised to climb out of and walk away from.
I have no wish to continue with this, but I will not be called a liar, nor will I let racism pass without challenging it – it does too much damage to people's lives and it destroys our society.
This is a decent forum which gives us the opportunity to express and share our ideas – I would certainly not with to be part of it if I were either a Muslim or a homosexual – the few extremists we have, have made certain of that.
Jim Carroll
"The point Keith has been making for months, is that there is a "culture" of Anti Semitism in the left of the UK labour Party."
He has failed miserably to make that point
The only evidence we have is that pro Israeli group received their instructions from Israel that they should smear the Labour Party with accusations of Anti-Semitism following Corbyn's statement that, under his leadership, they would back BDS- the date of that first meeting precedes the attacks by a few weeks.
Corbyn won overwhelming support of the rank and file of the Labour Party, so the New Labour crowd decided to jump on the Anti-Semitism bandwagon n order to rid the party of a leader thy considered a liability.
The makeup of the most vociferous of those attacks indicates this s the case, and the fact that no evidence has emerged other than unqualified accusations by one or other of the above groups.
You do not try people for murder without specif#ying who they killed, and what form the murder took - and then you go on to provide your evidence.
You don't try people for theft without specifying what they stole and how they stole it.
You do not accuse a party of "serious Antisemitism" without describing what form it takes and how many are involved - you certainly don't accuse a party with a track record of opposing bigotry and racism (even you, with your pathetic claims of being a "socialist" knows that)
All this is not just natural justice - it's common sense - making accusations without backing them up with facts is witch-hunting, pure and simple.
Despite this, Keith has persisted in his sickening campaign, refused to acknowledge the simple commonsense that YOU CANNOT FIND ANYBODY GUILTY OF ANYTHING ON THE BASIS OF ACCUSATIONS ALONE - YOU HAVE TO SPECIFY WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IN DETAIL - NO DETAILS HAVE BEEN FORTHCOMING - END OF STORY
So desperate was Keith to smear the Labour Party he let slip his own antisemitism by inventing a 'Jewish Plot', whereby all the Jewish Members of parliament decided to cover up the nature of Labour's Antisemitism in the interests of their party - how desperate can you get?
He has led throughout - he invented his invisible army yet still refuses to quote them - and he never will
No public figure would ever make such a horrendous statement publicly without not only losing their job, but also be prosecuted for inciting race hatred.
To suggest that an entire religious/racial community is culturally inclined to have underage sex is racist filth - that is what Keith has indulged in here
In the middle of his attempts to smear the Muslim people by quoting a thousand year old marriage - and clams he only did so before somebody else did - pathetic!!
Keith continues to insist that he quoted the people he claimed backed his "implant" theory – yet he continues to refuse to quote them
He now says that the Jewish members of parliament did describe the anti-Semitism that was taking place after having said that they had told Corbyn and left it in his hands, and made no statements publicly "for love of the party" – his inconsistencies have now gone ballistic
I brought this up again when he called me a liar and challenged me to produce evidence of his extremism – he has dug himself an deep hole which he would be well advised to climb out of and walk away from.
I have no wish to continue with this, but I will not be called a liar, nor will I let racism pass without challenging it – it does too much damage to people's lives and it destroys our society.
This is a decent forum which gives us the opportunity to express and share our ideas – I would certainly not with to be part of it if I were either a Muslim or a homosexual – the few extremists we have, have made certain of that.
Jim Carroll
"The point Keith has been making for months, is that there is a "culture" of Anti Semitism in the left of the UK labour Party."
He has failed miserably to make that point
The only evidence we have is that pro Israeli group received their instructions from Israel that they should smear the Labour Party with accusations of Anti-Semitism following Corbyn's statement that, under his leadership, they would back BDS- the date of that first meeting precedes the attacks by a few weeks.
Corbyn won overwhelming support of the rank and file of the Labour Party, so the New Labour crowd decided to jump on the Anti-Semitism bandwagon n order to rid the party of a leader thy considered a liability.
The makeup of the most vociferous of those attacks indicates this s the case, and the fact that no evidence has emerged other than unqualified accusations by one or other of the above groups.
You do not try people for murder without specif#ying who they killed, and what form the murder took - and then you go on to provide your evidence.
You don't try people for theft without specifying what they stole and how they stole it.
You do not accuse a party of "serious Antisemitism" without describing what form it takes and how many are involved - you certainly don't accuse a party with a track record of opposing bigotry and racism (even you, with your pathetic claims of being a "socialist" knows that)
All this is not just natural justice - it's common sense - making accusations without backing them up with facts is witch-hunting, pure and simple.
Despite this, Keith has persisted in his sickening campaign, refused to acknowledge the simple commonsense that YOU CANNOT FIND ANYBODY GUILTY OF ANYTHING ON THE BASIS OF ACCUSATIONS ALONE - YOU HAVE TO SPECIFY WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IN DETAIL - NO DETAILS HAVE BEEN FORTHCOMING - END OF STORY
So desperate was Keith to smear the Labour Party he let slip his own antisemitism by inventing a 'Jewish Plot', whereby all the Jewish Members of parliament decided to cover up the nature of Labour's Antisemitism in the interests of their party - how desperate can you get?
He has led throughout - he invented his invisible army yet still refuses to quote them - and he never will
No public figure would ever make such a horrendous statement publicly without not only losing their job, but also be prosecuted for inciting race hatred.
To suggest that an entire religious/racial community is culturally inclined to have underage sex is racist filth - that is what Keith has indulged in here
In the middle of his attempts to smear the Muslim people by quoting a thousand year old marriage - and clams he only did so before somebody else did - pathetic!!
Keith continues to insist that he quoted the people he claimed backed his "implant" theory – yet he continues to refuse to quote them
He now says that the Jewish members of parliament did describe the anti-Semitism that was taking place after having said that they had told Corbyn and left it in his hands, and made no statements publicly "for love of the party" – his inconsistencies have now gone ballistic
I brought this up again when he called me a liar and challenged me to produce evidence of his extremism – he has dug himself an deep hole which he would be well advised to climb out of and walk away from.
I have no wish to continue with this, but I will not be called a liar, nor will I let racism pass without challenging it – it does too much damage to people's lives and it destroys our society.
This is a decent forum which gives us the opportunity to express and share our ideas – I would certainly not with to be part of it if I were either a Muslim or a homosexual – the few extremists we have, have made certain of that.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 06:05 AM

No ruse and no dishonesty, Keith. The statement said nothing about the west. Anyone reading it would assume it was global. I was attempting to rectify that situation and have now done so.

Your ruse to discredit my statement is just blatantly dishonest Keith

Talking of eggs and ruses I wouldn't mind trying Oeufs à la Russe. Anyone got a good recipe?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 06:05 AM

Whoops
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 07:14 AM

Armed guards in British schools? Are you sure of that Keith. I can find no mention of gun toting security guards in the UK. What I did find was an interesting comment by Amber Rudd, reported in the Telegraph, though

The Home Secretary said she was forced to act after receiving 924 reports of anti-Semitic incidents, including 86 violent assaults, last year.

Ms Rudd warned against the "increasingly sophisticated" tactics of far-right extremists in the wake of the murder of Labour MP Jo Cox.

She said that groups were becoming better at harnessing the use of social media for promoting their cause and hauling in new members.

Hardly pertinent to a discussion on the Labour party is it? May as well talk about wild flowers...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 07:23 AM

"Whoops," Jim? Has somebody trod on a duck? Floated off an air biscuit?? Cut the cheese???

Burble on, Keith. Thou talketh ordure and you'll get no more ebb and flow from me (wasn't that a cartoon once? Eb and Flo? Train of thought here: cartoon? Eb and Flo? Keith? Mickey Mouse? Teribus? Cap'n Pugwash? Any more for any more?)

Dave, get the bloody joke right! Ahem:

Q. Why does a Frenchman only have one egg for breakfast?

A. Because to a Frenchman one egg is un oeuf!


You don't have to like French jokes, of course. After all, one man's fish is another man's poisson... Whaddam I like! 😂

What is the Western World? Why, anything the other side of the old panhandle, of course! Wyatt Earp, Cisco Kid, Duke Wayne, the Loan Arranger -- there, that should cover most of it...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 07:45 AM

At the risk of seeming flippant in this already far too light-hearted thread, I wish to say that, in my opinion, very few hate crimes are directed at people because of their religion as such. It's a matter of attacking "the other" just like it always was with "religious wars" in the past. The Crusaders were not fighting for their better God, were they? That was a ruse to justify their quest for power, wealth and expansion of empire. A conspicuous Cross on your battledress to distinguish you from the heathen you were conquering looked good back home too. If there were really a God he'd be bloody angry at anyone using his name to justify hate crimes.

And as for us being 500 years more "advanced," try telling that to the women being hassled by Christian hypocrites outside abortion clinics.

Not trying to egg anyone on, you understand....

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 07:45 AM

"Armed guards in British schools? "
Keith is using a single attack by a single nutter in Toulouse to show a 'rise in antisemitism, v#carefully omitting to mention that at the same time the attacker also targeted French Muslim soldiers, killing seven and wounding fiv
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 07:47 AM

Yeahhh - Captain Pugwash. I have a perfect contender for that role. We just need to decide who is Seaman Staines and Roger the cabin boy now...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 08:39 AM

Jim,
I have no wish to continue with this, but I will not be called a liar, nor will I let racism pass without challenging it –

Then stop telling lies about what I have said.
If you want to challenge something, quote what I really said.
I too will not let racism, including anti-Semitism, pass without challenging it.

Dave,
No ruse and no dishonesty, Keith. The statement said nothing about the west. Anyone reading it would assume it was global.

They would not.
The statement did not need to specify the West because that had been established as the subject of discussion.
He would only need to specify if he was changing the subject from the West.
Your ruse to discredit his point was blatantly and knowingly dishonest Dave.
Different morality.
Different language.

Jim again,
"Armed guards in British schools? "

And French schools but only Jewish ones.
Deny that?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 08:50 AM

Today,
"Labour Cllr Barry Henley (Brandwood) said: "These are clearly anti-Semitic postings. In my view there should be a Labour Party investigation into Ms Gove-Humphries membership and suitability to be a candidate and in the meantime a new candidate should be put in place."
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/call-labour-hall-green-candidate-12743989

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 09:13 AM

I see Dave has gone over to the dark side with the liars, cheaters and dissemblers who, unable to confront facts that destroy their ideological positions, try to divert from them with phony counter arguments that are so obvious as to be pitiful. So keep it up Dave, I'm laughing at you as you flounder in the muck with the rest of your pack.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 09:21 AM

But, but, but, Keith, you said "In France and Britain Jewish schools, and only Jewish schools, require armed guards." This means that Jewish schools in France and Britain have armed guards. Are there any armed guards in British schools? Do you have any evidence of that?


And -

Anyone reading it would assume it was global.

They would not.

Well, I did. Some I guess that other people would.

Different morality
Different language
Different planet

Glad you are getting to see that as well. Unlike you however I will not say that either is shit. Just different.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 09:33 AM

So keep it up Dave, I'm laughing at you

To be laughed at by someone of your ilk is a compliment of the highest order poobad. It is when you begin to agree with me I will worry.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 09:40 AM

Here's the exchange Gnome:

1: Greg F. - 14 Mar 17 - 02:32 PM

"Good article on the poison of anti-Semitism raging through Europe today in the The Atlantic "Is It Time for the Jews to Leave Europe?" (bobad).

Interesting. Have they also got a good article on the rampant Islamophobia raging thru Europe and epecially the U.S. & in the age of Trumpism, is it time for Muslims to flee the United States for safe sanctuary elsewhere? Mexicans ditto?

Greg F's question to bobad - How did you miss the "rampant Islamophobia raging thru Europe and epecially the U.S. Gnome?

2: bobad responded to Greg F's question about "Islamophobia" I Europe and the U.S.A. as follows:

bobad - 14 Mar 17 - 03:39 PM

"Have they also got a good article on the rampant Islamophobia raging thru Europe and epecially the U.S" Greg F's question.

"Yes, there is Islamophobia in the world today but hate crimes directed against Muslims are but a fraction of those directed against Jews even though there are some 1.8 billion Muslims in the world as compared to 16 million Jews. Why do you think that is? Why are Jews leaving Europe in record numbers, for their safety, while Muslims are arriving in Europe for theirs? Anti-Semitic incidents in Britain are at levels never before seen while in Germany attacks on German Jews have increased by 200%. Why is this happening?"

Direct question responded to by an honest and accurate answer.

3: YOU then jump in Gnome, selectively quote what was said out of context and completely ignore the boundaries set by Greg F:

Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 14 Mar 17 - 04:28 PM

Another strange assertion

"but hate crimes directed against Muslims are but a fraction of those directed against Jews" - bobad

"Have you the remotest idea how many Muslims have been killed in hate crimes against their religion? How many Shia have been killed in Jihads by Sunnis? How many Sunni Muslims killed by Shias? Just because they believe a different version of the same fairy story. Or, because it is Muslim killing Muslim, is that OK?

So tell where in the USA or in Europe Sunni and Shia Muslims are killing one another. Nice try at a diversion Gnome but you're not getting away with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 09:49 AM

Oh sorry Gnome forgot to address your last point. If you think that the "Troubles" in Northern Ireland had anything whatsoever to do with religion then you are deluding yourself. But there again I forgot that your lot do tend to believe in out dated and clichéd stereotypes - when it suits your purposes.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 09:53 AM

Just off to Waitrose as they are the only shop round here that sells this new cheese I've discovered. It's French, semi-soft and it's called Vallage. Sublime! See you later!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 09:55 AM

"Then stop telling lies about what I have said."
Then address what I have said - any moron can accuse somebody of being a liar without providing evidence
I have given you your statements - did you make them or have I conjured them up from thin air?
Did you not claim an "implant"?
If your answer is no, I will put it up again
Have you consistently refused to put up examples of anybody else doing so?
If so, either put them up again or at least link us to them
No response and you are lying.
Did you not put up thousand year old shite about child marriage to prove Muslims were inclined to paedophilia?
My response will be as before
Did you not claim that the Jewish members of Parliament reported the antisemitism to Corbyn yet did not take it further because of their loyalty to the party?
Your antisemitsm started when you accused me and other critics of the Israeli regime of being antisemitic for our criticism - that is against the last item in the then accepted definition - Israel has since made nonsense of any definition by declaring openly that CRITICISM OF ISRAEL IS ANTISEMITIC
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 10:04 AM

If you think that the "Troubles" in Northern Ireland had anything whatsoever to do with religion then you are deluding yourself.

And yet you say that antisemitism or the situation in the middle east has something to do with religion?

Different morality
Different language
Different planet

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 10:05 AM

"And French schools but only Jewish ones.
Deny that?"
You deliberately missed out that the perpetrator of the attacks also killed Muslims - deny that?
Those attacks were randomly carried out by a nutter - not antisemitic - unless you consider Muslim soldiers Semites
More distortion and lies Keith - you seem to have no limits to the depths you plunge?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 10:08 AM

Dave the Gnome - 15 Mar 17 - 07:47 AM

Yeahhh - Captain Pugwash. I have a perfect contender for that role. We just need to decide who is Seaman Staines and Roger the cabin boy now...

I forgot that your lot do tend to believe in out dated and clichéd stereotypes - when it suits your purposes. Your belief in falsehoods, myths and misrepresentations is truly heartening.

Bit of info for you Gnome about Captain Pugwash

Seaman Staines?? - No such character ever existed
Roger the cabin boy?? - The cabin boy's name was Tom.

Oh and no Master Bates either.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 10:19 AM

Gnome the connection between "the Troubles" and the situation in the middle-east is what?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 10:20 AM

Funnily enough Teribus, I did know that. Surprised that you did though considering that you do not believe in dealing in trivia. There may be hope for you yet!

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 11:00 AM

the connection between "the Troubles" and the situation in the middle-east is what?

The middle east being 500 years behind in terms of tolerance is the connection that I think was mentioned by either you or poobad. Not sure which, you all sound the same.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 11:12 AM

Just taken a drive round the coast and then back across the Bog Road, stunningly beautiful, gorse abounds in an array of shades of colour from vivid yellow to almost golden orange. Hyacinths, white flag Lillies and Daffodils of every hue, waves breaking along the shoreline.

On Friday in my local after the St Patricks Day Parade there are three gigs starting at 4 this the afternoon , then Ireland V England rugby on Saturday and on Saturday night out to a mates pub for a very late session, we'll probably still be playing at 3 in the morning.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 11:16 AM

you all sound the same.

That would be because facts is facts and truth is truth - something you and your pack are unable to see through the blinders of your ideology.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 11:26 AM

Someday Dave, you may develop the wit to answer a simple and direct question. Teribus asked what is the connection between NI and the situation in the Middle East and you had not the balls to answer the man. I'm sure you know bloody well there is no connection but you always prefer obfuscation...don't you?

Classic Passive Aggressive troll!......the very worst variety.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 11:38 AM

I did answer it. Someone claimed tolerance was 500 years behind in the middle east. I used the troubles as an example of how wrong they were. Seemples.

You have made that claim before and always failed to provide any substance to the claim. I have no reason to believe it will be any different this time. If you have any issues with my posts you have a number of options

1. Mention them in thread so I can laugh at you
2. Complain to the moderation team so they can laugh at you
3. Just be yourself so we can all laugh at you.

Any will do.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 11:55 AM

Your problem is cowardice Dave....It is patently obvious to anyone who studies the issues that the Troubles in Northern Ireland have absolutely no connection to the factional slaughter amongst different branches of Islam.
You know you are in the wrong but cannot bring yourself to admit it.

I think it's time for you to waffle a bit about nature?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 12:26 PM

Your ignorance of the troubles in Northern Ireland is frankly astonishing.

Could I suggest you take a trip to Derry, at one end of the town the kerb stones are painted Green, White and Gold the other end Red, White and Blue.

Sectarianism is still rife, fostered in some part by both catholic priest and protestant vicars alike.

None so blind as they that will not see.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 12:33 PM

"Gnome the connection between "the Troubles" and the situation in the middle-east is what?"
Only that in both cases, politicians have used religious differences to divide groups and communities to offset attention to heir own activities.
The similarities of how the Unionists held power in the north and how Assad managed to turn a protest for an end to repression into a civil war are uncanny.
That can be repeated and an example wherever an established church has influence beyond its religion.
Nothing unfathomable about that
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 12:48 PM

Well I'm back from the cheese-buying mission! Success! I have mucho Vallage! Hey, did you hear that? Three languages in a four-word sentence - "I have mucho Vallage!" Whaddam I like! Cor, and I used an eight-quid money-off voucher AND GOT ANOTHER EIGHT-QUID MONEY-OFF VOUCHER!!!   And while I've been gone we've been called blind ideologues and strangers to the truth by a bloke who secretly and dishonestly posted as two people at once! You couldn't make it up! Teribus has gone all po-faced at the mention of a cabin boy and akenaton - AKENATON fer chrissake - has accused Dave of being sans wit and sans cojones! What jollity we are enduring here! Let's all go ride bikes! 🚴🏻‍♀️🚴🏿🚵‍♀️🚵🏿🛴🚲🏍🛵

I'm making an avocado dip for tonight to go with crudités. Not crudity, mind, as I have to wait for Whit Friday for that! Geddit? Nod nod, wink wink!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 12:49 PM

Jim,
Did you not claim an "implant"?If your answer is no, I will put it up again

No. I said that I believed the people who said that culture was to blame. I made no claims and admitted having no knowledge of it.

Have you consistently refused to put up examples of anybody else doing so?

No. At the time I quoted 5 people with intimate knowledge saying culture was to blame.

Did you not put up thousand year old shite about child marriage to prove Muslims were inclined to paedophilia?
My response will be as before

No. I made a factual statement relevant to the discussion.
I actually repeatedly refuted the suggestion that religion was an issue. Deny that Jim?

Did you not claim that the Jewish members of Parliament reported the antisemitism to Corbyn yet did not take it further

Yes, as did those complaining of misogyny and homophobia.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 12:54 PM


Could I suggest you take a trip to Derry, at one end of the town the kerb stones are painted Green, White and Gold the other end Red, White and Blue.

Those colours have political not religious significance.
The sectarian divide is the political one of NI being part of Ireland or UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 01:16 PM

Your problem is cowardice Dave

Your problem, ake, is that you have not got a clue what you are talking about on any level. For example...

You know you are in the wrong but cannot bring yourself to admit it.

How is that, in any way shape or form, related to cowardice. Or are you going to use your usual "quotes" around a word that has a different meaning to you that to the rest of the world?

As to waffling, yes, it is about time for something more pleasant that trying to communicate with someone who obviously has no intention of reciprocating. (Big word I know - Look it up or make something up as usual. :-) )

And Keith, I will make the same point to you as I did to Teribus. The troubles in northern Ireland were political under the guise of being religious. So is the power struggle in the middle East.

Now, waffle time. I am not fond of waffles but whenever we visit Whitby I always make sure I get something from The Whitby Waffler. Something about fried sugar and seaside that gels.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 01:46 PM

"Those colours have political not religious significance."
Religion has been a ploy for keeping the state divided ever since it was declared thet the six counties would be a Protestant State
"No surrender to Papism has been a rallying cry since independence.
"Those colours have political not religious significance."
What an unbelieveably STUPID statement
You continue to lie - you have had every opportunity to produce your invisible army
Each time you claim to hav =e dione I will ask you to link us to it.
PLEASE LINK US TO IT NOW KEITH
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 02:42 PM

Jim, the opening two sentences of your linked article,
"Segregation in Northern Ireland is a long-running issue in the political and social history of Northern Ireland. The segregation involves Northern Ireland's two main voting blocs – Irish nationalist/republicans (mainly Roman Catholic) and unionist/loyalist (mainly Protestant)."

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 02:43 PM

Dave,
So is the power struggle in the middle East.

We are discussing anti-Semitism in the West!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 02:53 PM

...amongst other things :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 03:30 PM

Keith likes to set the agenda. His agenda. You're not "discussing" anything, Keith. You're haranguing people with your favourite obsession. Right. Monaco vs Man City on BT Sport in a minute, with avocado dip, crudités and Vallage cheese washed down with Morrisons' Nero d'Avola. See you later!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 04:03 PM

"Irish nationalist/republicans (mainly Roman Catholic) and unionist/loyalist (mainly Protestant).""
And both of those represent he two religions
Stop taking things about of context again
The Unionists declared a Protestant State and the Catholics became second rate citizens - inferior voting rights and propertty ownership was the meing cause of contention.
The Troubles started when Catholics demanded equal rights
For Christ#s sake Keith - http://www.historyireland.com/18th-19th-century-history/the-men-of-no-popery-the-origins-of-the-orange-order/
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 04:12 PM

I know, Steve, I know.

I have decided that a couple of weeks off the beer will do no harm and I am getting to play the accordion more. Trouble is my music room is also the study with the computer so I keep getting distracted by nonsense on here. Having a go at Lads a' Buncham / Young Collins on the Morris On album here but too fast for me. I reckon the dancers would be pretty knackered too.

Wonder if Morrisons have ever used anything from Morris On? Must make some enquiries at work. :-)

Enjoy the match. How do you fancy Leicester's chances in the 1/4 finals?

D.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 06:00 PM

"I have decided that a couple of weeks off the beer will do no harm and I am getting to play the accordion...."

Christ, Dave, what a terrible sentence...😱


😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 17 - 06:04 PM

Well, I have punished my liver enough. It is the turn of my ears now:-)

D

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 05:34 AM

Jim,
We were not discussing Israel or Irish history.
"Irish nationalist/republicans (mainly Roman Catholic) and unionist/loyalist (mainly Protestant).""
And both of those represent he two religions

No they do not.

The Unionists declared a Protestant State and the Catholics became second rate citizens - inferior voting rights and propertty ownership was the meing cause of contention.

Not true.
Start a new thread and I explain it all to you again.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 05:58 AM

Returning to the issue of anti-Semitic hate crime in the West, Bobad was right and you were all proved wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 06:11 AM

So, just what was everyone proved wrong about, Keith? Links please

What about City last night, Steve? Can't say I follow any team in particular but City is the closest. Glad I didn't watch it. Just Leicester left to carry the torch now. Good job the little Englanders on here don't get involved in that. I can imagine the invective against all those furriners taking over our sport...

:D tG