BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Jul 17 - 05:39 AM

Dave said,
"Everyone already knows what was actually said and the have the full context and circumstance."

He was right about that at least.
Apart from your funny foursome here, everyone knows what has been reported in all the media, that she said and meant what I posted.
That is where I got it from.

You have seen it reported by the BBC and the Guardian.
There is plenty more out there. It was reported everywhere.
You have produced nothing to support your case, because there is nothing.
(Or will you produce something now? Ha ha ha!)

She did advocate the transport of Jews with her comment on the graphic of Israel transposed to USA.
She admitted it.
The Guardian confirms that she did. (See Bobad's Guardian link.)
We were right about it, and you were wrong.
Sorry.
You lose.
(Dave, I bet you do regret raising this again!)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jul 17 - 07:30 PM

"You lose."

You've lost it. All you have to do is go back to the statements she made. It's so easy to see that you are lying in order to resurrect your sorry one-track anti-Labour agenda. I've had enough of this. Persist away, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Jul 17 - 03:42 PM

Dave, I bet you wish you did not raise the Shah issue again!

Sorry, you lose.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Jul 17 - 12:25 PM

She did not call for the transportation of Jews out of Israel as you claimed she did.

Yes she did, with her comment on the graphic of Israel transposed to USA.
She admitted it.
The Guardian confirms that she did. (See Bobad's Guardian link.)
We were right about that, and you were wrong.
Sorry.
You lose.
(Dave, I bet you wish you did not raise the Shah issue again!)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 13 Jul 17 - 08:16 AM

"Labour MP Naz Shah admits to the Guido Fawkes blog she wrote a Facebook post arguing for Israel's population to be "transported" out of the Middle East to America."   The Guardian




This is the message written beneath the image titled "Solution forIsrael-Palestine Conflict" posted by Shah:


Israelis are most loved by Americans. Americans will welcome Israelis with open arms into their homes.

America has plenty of land to accommodate Israel as its 51st states.

Israel can have a real safe Jewish state surrounded by friendly states.

America will no longer have to spend $3 billion tax payer money per year for Israel's defense.

The transportation costs will be less than 3 years of defence spending.

Palestinians will get their land and life back. Middle East will again be peaceful without foreign interference.

Oil prices will go down, inflation will go down, whole world will be happy.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Jul 17 - 07:38 AM

My prediction skills astound me at times

Me, 13 Jul 17 - 01:53 AM

It is only the odd few point scorers and those who cannot stand to lose that keep trying to change it to their advantage.

Keith 13 Jul 17 - 05:33 AM

I was right.
You lose.

Gnostrodamus the Gnome :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jul 17 - 07:25 AM

Dishonest, dissembling, disreputable, disgraceful. You are not in the least addressing what I accused you of doing. It's very simple. She did not call for the transportation of Jews out of Israel as you claimed she did. Either address that or just shut up about it is my advice to you. You're dead right, Dave. This idiot simply isn't worth bothering with.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Jul 17 - 05:33 AM

Steve, you actually called me a liar for repeating what she said about her own comments.
When she said "Problem solved" about that graphic, she was clearly advocating the removal of the Jews and she admitted she did.

You are clearly incapable of recognising blatant anti-Semitism, perhaps because of your own position.

The Labour Party denounced her comments as anti-Semitic, and suspended her for them.
The Tory and Lib-Dem Parties agreed that the comments were ant-Semitic.
She herself accepted that her comments were anti-Semitic.
I was right.
You lose.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Jul 17 - 01:53 AM

I suggest you just wind it up as well, Steve. Everyone already knows what was actually said and the have the full context and circumstance. It is only the odd few point scorers and those who cannot stand to lose that keep trying to change it to their advantage. You are right. They are wrong. Anyone important knows that. Don't give them the oxygen they need. Just my 2p

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 06:16 PM

Go to hell.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 06:14 PM

LOL, Shaw would have us believe that what Naz Shah suggested is that the country that is Israel should be dug up and transported holus-bolus to the U.S. It's noteworthy that she has recognized her anti-Semitism, too bad that Shaw isn't man enough to do the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 05:10 PM

I'm losing patience with you here, Keith. NAZ SHAH DID NOT SUGGEST THE TRANSPORTATION OF JEWS OUT OF ISRAEL. That's what you said she said. That is not what she said, nothing like. Please do not tell any more of your lies. We are not stupid and we know what your agenda is. Get back to the source, Keith, remind yourself what she actually said and apologise to all the people on this forum who you mistakenly take for fools.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 04:46 PM

My last post noting the gross errors in the professors previous post has been deleted.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 01:42 PM

Whatever, Keith. I am not going to go round in circles again. I have put my point. You have put yours. Anyone interested can decide which is nearer the truth.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 01:37 PM

BBC,
"Naz Shah: My words were anti-Semitic"
"Labour MP Naz Shah has said the comments which saw her suspended from the party were anti-Semitic.
Ms Shah apologised in April for online posts, including one suggesting Israel should be moved to the United States.
Labour has now reinstated the Bradford West MP, who in her first interview about the controversy blamed her "ignorance".
"I wasn't anti-Semitic, what I put out was anti-Semitic," Ms Shah told BBC Radio 4's World At One. "

"The MP said that when she looked back she thought "how stupid I was and how ignorant I was".
"The truth is that some of the stuff I have since looked at and understood, I didn't know at the time," she said.
Ms Shah said she now understood the connotations involved in the words she used.
"The language I used was anti-Semitic, it was offensive," she said. "What I did was I hurt people and the language that was the clear anti-Semitic language, which I didn't know at the time, was when I said, 'The Jews are rallying.'"

"Ms Shah said she had been on a learning journey in recent months and had received "amazing compassion" from the Jewish community.
"I didn't get anti-Semitism as racism," said Ms Shah. "I had never come across it. I think what I had was an ignorance.""
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-36802075

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 01:30 PM

She did NOT call for the transportation of Jews out of Israel

She said what I said she did.
Her meaning was clear and she admitted it herself.
I have not lied.
I would take her word about her own statement over yours any day.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 01:24 PM

I repeat. She did NOT call for the transportation of Jews out of Israel and no amount of fudging from you can hide the fact that you have LIED about her remarks in a most scurrilous and smearing way. The whole episode is online for all to read about, so who do you think you're trying to fool, Keith? And no Labour Party member has been found guilty of racism. You are living in a racist, bigoted fantasy world of your own. You are a total disgrace to yourself and to this forum. Don't post any more until you decide to start telling the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 01:23 PM

1939 Greg.
The N word was also in the title.
The last time it was reprinted in UK under the original title was 1977, and in Australia 1980.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 01:14 PM

When was that Christie novel published, Professor?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 01:09 PM

It comes as no surprise to see you supporting Morris, Keith.

I comes as a surprise to me!
I do not and have not defended her.

Use of the N word in any context is indefensible and I think she should be sacked and probably will be.

I would say the same for Shah had she not admitted the anti-Semitism she spouted and made her peace with the Jewish community.
I do say the same about Livingstone and others guilty of racism.

That is a plain lie,

No, it is a plain fact that she herself owned up to, so what is your opinion of it worth?
"Problem solved" she said about a graphic of Israel transposed onto USA.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 12:59 PM

And Naz Shah did NOT "advocate the transportation of Jews out of Israel." That is a plain lie, and, what's more, you've stripped the remarks she made totally out of context. It seems that there are no depths to which you won't stoop. And stop taking us for fools. We have better memories than you seem to think. And go and tell your lies to the people of Bradford West who elected her with one of the biggest majorities in the country.

"The expression appeared in an Agatha Christie novel and no-one objected at the time."

Bwahahahaha!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 12:36 PM

They both said stupid things for which they were both suspended. The biggest difference is one is Labour and one is Tory. It comes as no surprise to see you supporting Morris, Keith. Everyone else has now seen the hypocrisy so my work is done.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 12:07 PM

Your posts are becoming ever more pathetic, do yourself a favour and stop.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 11:34 AM

"United Kingdom
In the UK in recent years, the occasional use of this phrase by public figures has normally been followed by an apology.[5][6][7]
2007, Bedfordshire County counciller Rhys Goodwin, stepped down as chairman of the environment and economic development committee: "...During a debate on heavy goods vehicle traffic in the county, he wanted to argue that a particular problem in Bedfordshire is the amount of trucks on the roads connected with quarrying. But he used the unfortunate figure of speech before sheepishly rephrasing his point.'[8]
Goodwin, who was 74 at the time, said: "There was no racist intent at all. For 50 years of my life that was common parlance, with no more a derogatory connotation than the symbol on a jar of marmalade."[9]
2008, Lord Dixon Smith, Conservative frontbencher, used the phrase in a debate on the Housing and Regeneration Bill: "Of course, the nigger in the woodpile, as the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, has already pointed out, is that it still incorporates what I call the hangover of the new towns legislation." He immediately apologised to the House. His Lordship, also in his seventies, later commented to journalists that the phrase had been "in common parlance when I was younger".[10]
2009, Dick Denby, of Dick Denby Transport uttered this phrase on the BBC Radio 2 Jeremy Vine show (Tuesday, 1 December) during a discussion on the merits of 83 foot long HGV's. To his credit he did say that perhaps he should not have used said phrase. Jeremy Vine agreed he should not have used it and later apologised to Radio 2 listeners who might have been offended.

Ireland
In November, 2007, in relation to a debate on the Gaelic Players Association, Fine Gael Senator Paul Coughlan asked "Can the leader kick it into play and give members an update? Who is the nigger in the woodpile?". There was no call for an apology.

Australia
David Lord, an ABC News Radio presenter was forced to apologise after using the expression. On 22 February 2007, Alan Jones, another radio presenter, was heard to use the same phrase.[11] There was no call for an apology."

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 11:29 AM

For **** sake Agatha Christie died in 1976!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 11:25 AM

The expression appeared in an Agatha Christie novel and no-one objected at the time.
In current editions it has been changed.

Wiki,
"Commonly used in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, usage has declined since then, and use of the phrase by public figures has often been followed by criticism over the offensiveness of the term "nigger"."

It probably became unacceptable in US earlier than here.

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

Just how far do you have to go back to find that using the "N" word was not considered racist, certainly before I was born over 60 years ago.

Clutching at straws just doesn't come in to it. Displaying your own racism certainly does.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 11:12 AM

Putting it in perspective, it was not said in a racist context, and it was just one person's gross stupidity.
So, pretty much on par with Naz Shah's comments?

No.
Her statements were anti-Semitic in context, advocating the transportation of the Jews out of Israel.
I am slightly shocked that you can not see that racism.

Morris in her stupidity used an expression once not considered racist here but now is because of the N word.

Steve,
Keith, you're clutching at any straw once again.

I am not and never have.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 09:30 AM

Interesting correlation between the right wing press and racism in this article. Something that has been previously denied on here.

We need to make sure that Murdoch, at least, does not get his way and take over the whole media. Sign the petition.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 06:46 AM

Oh, that's the sixth time a Tory has used that racist expression and we have only her word and the word of her fellow Tories that she's not a racist. Then there were those Tory sex parties for which underage boys were hired. I suppose there was no bullying there then! Then Andrew Mitchell with his plebgate... Keith, you're clutching at any straw once again. You'd have thought by now that you and your fellow Tories would have learned that people don't want to hear smears and negativity any more. The approach has just managed to lose May's majority for her. Cast out your Tory planks before you worry about Labour splinters. You need to change your obsession to telling us what your own tawdry side are going to do. So far, due to a multitude of Tory balls-ups and a distinct lack of vision, your side have left the country rudderless, at the mercy of a bunch of sectarian thugs and with brexit going down the pan. You have better things to do than to hang on to sore-loser Yvette's sour grapes.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 06:33 AM

Putting it in perspective, it was not said in a racist context, and it was just one person's gross stupidity.

So, pretty much on par with Naz Shah's comments?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 05:20 AM

Anne-Marie Morris's use of the N word was deplorable, and the Party expressed its disgust at once.
Could it have been handled better?

Putting it in perspective, it was not said in a racist context, and it was just one person's gross stupidity.

The bullying I posted about is a much wider and more serious issue than a one off comment by one MP in an unguarded moment.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 12 Jul 17 - 03:06 AM

I was being uncharacteristically sensitive to save the delicate sensibilities of our right wing colleagues...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jul 17 - 05:45 PM

Damned asterisks. The only place I've seen the word she used spelled in full was in the Guardian.

It was "nigger," by the way. 😉

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Jul 17 - 05:37 PM

No good bringing that up lads. It's just a n****r the woodpile...

Whoops!

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jul 17 - 05:29 PM

Plenty of grist to the mill in that Indie piece, Keith! Then there's Boris and his piccaninnies...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 11 Jul 17 - 04:10 PM

Thw view from the Independent

And I would also question how much of a punishment withdrawing the whip is. I suspect she will continue to follow any whip anyway so Mrs May is unlikely to be too worried about it eating the majority and as no timescale has been given she can be welcomed back into the fols whenever suits.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jul 17 - 03:46 PM

Yeah, so let's spend a year discussing the Tory party's "serious racism problem."

Kick it off, Keith. We know how you love balance.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 11 Jul 17 - 02:35 PM

I see another conservative MP has blotted their copy book, using racist terms.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jul 17 - 01:28 PM

Labour MP Jess Phillips has criticised Left Wing abuse of Yvette Cooper, which she warned is part of a wider campaign to bully and intimidate female MPs.
Ms Phillips wrote on Twitter: 'This can no longer be seen as individual incidents, this is targeted to control isolate and manipulate.
'It has to stop.'

Corbyn promised a kinder and gentler politics, but there is no sign of that from his supporters.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jul 17 - 06:11 AM

Get real, akenaton. The EU's top priority is to hold itself together. It is not going to give an easy ride to a dissident country which has threatened the whole edifice by voting to leave. That applies both during the coming negotiations and after we leave. We will still be trading with the EU big-time.

If we ever leave. It's looking doubtful.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jul 17 - 02:36 AM

By what was said in the Commons yesterday, it appears that Mr Corbyn is more interested in making political capital than assisting in seeing through the Brexit negotiations to a satisfactory conclusion.

A bad move in the long term, a statesman would have taken the chance offered to prove himself. I also note his delivery has altered since the election to the hectoring manner that he once despised.

I really hope that he is not just another jumped up agitator.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 10 Jul 17 - 03:38 PM

"They cannot damage or blackmail us any further once we are out"

What !

Do you live in cloud cuckoo land ?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jul 17 - 12:32 PM

We must work within "the possible" "D" and our options are limited due to the EU red line on FOM....I think we must be prepared to walk away and leave it to the remaining nations to put forward THEIR terms.
They cannot damage or blackmail us any further once we are out and today Australia has promised a huge trade deal after Brexit allied to Donal John's promise of good terms from America.
Mr Corbyn can raise his political stature and profile by putting the country first, and to be honest he really has no alternative.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Jul 17 - 12:30 PM

No apology needed! The biggest problem with internet forums is that you never really know the people you are talking to you. I never purposely hide anything from anyone but unless something like this crops up we don't think of giving out information. I guess we sort of assume that people do know us but that is often not the case.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 10 Jul 17 - 12:13 PM

My apologies, O Dave of Gnomic fame and also to the other names I mentioned. The names were 'for illustrative purposes only' and were not intended to single you out specifically.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 10 Jul 17 - 10:59 AM

Hate to disillusion you Dave but I know people who only like traditional folk music, sung by men in white woolly jumpers, who have their finger stuffed in an aural orifice. Conversely I also know people who detest that sort of format.

I somehow doubt if we could all agree on folk music.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Jul 17 - 10:54 AM

I am pretty amenable when it come to compromise. I have no idea if the others mentioned are but on the basis that we are all the same under the skin I don't see why everyone cannot come to some agreement. We have one commonality at least - We all like folk music!

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 10 Jul 17 - 10:33 AM

Ake. One view of student debt:

Some may never repay it

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 10 Jul 17 - 10:16 AM

Hmmm, well of course it is easy to work together if one side gives in entirely which a little how that reads, ake.

But that isn't the challenge: It is to find things you agree on. So it is possible? Can ake or Teribus make a Brexit proposal - not for everything but one small corner - that they genuinely think Steve Shaw and Dave G could support? And vice versa?