BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 06:56 AM

"If they exist, they are very rare indeed or we would have seen one."
The fact thay you have not seen one meas SFA
The fact that you call into question their ecxistence and choose to ignore the information putt before you makes you both bigoted and dishonest
Why won't you address the information that has been put up (rhetorical question - it is because if contradicts your bigoted opinion and stops you from winning points)
And still no "implant" quotes
Are you happy with the examples of your dishonesty you requested?
Suppose not!!
Go away Keith - I think we're well and truely done here
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 05:11 AM

I have not claimed they do not exist, just that they are not "common throughout Britain."

If they exist, they are very rare indeed or we would have seen one.

Jim, I said you lied about me and you did.
You claimed I defended the signs when I do not and never have.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 03:57 AM

""I do not claim there is not a single one."
You called my a liar and you said I had invented them
You lied and you continue to refuse to respond to the reports from charities I have put up
"I do not defend them. I am glad that they are extraordinarily rare if they exist at all."
And you continue to do so, despite those reports - comparing them to malarial mosquitoes is lying when you have been given full information of their existence.
That is straightforward lying Keith, whichever way you paint it and doing so is defending one of the most common and widespread prejudices - ostracisation - against Travellers today - as one of the reports say, "the last acceptable form of racism in Britain"
So there we have it - you have lied about not defending these signs and you continue to lie about your invisible army of "implant" experts.
THere seems very little need for me to look out any more examples of your dishonesty - that lot is enough to sink the Titanic
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 03:54 AM

But you did just question whether they do exist, Keith

if they exist at all


If you do not claim there is not a single one, why question why they exist? Just wondering like!

Glorious weather here today. Downside is it means I will have to now the lawn.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 17 - 02:50 AM

I made my position clear on the old 2013 thread.

"I do not claim there is not a single one.
That would be silly.
Someone could go out with a pad of Post It notes anytime.
But, the signs are not "common throughout Britain."

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 06:27 PM

if they exist at all

You may note, although not really care, that never in my argument with Jim on this did I ever say that they did not exist. I have no reason to doubt that you have never seen them, Keith, as I have not either, but I have no reason to doubt Jim either. He has seen them and spoken to many people affected by them. Why can you both just not accept that both are telling the truth and both are right from their own point of view? Is it so difficult?

Maybe we should just stick to music. Although, Jim, looks like you have declared war on melodeon players :-)

What do you call perfect pitch? Tossing a bodhran in a skip without it touching the sides.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 05:25 PM

Jim,
To deny them and to claim I made them up and to refuse to exept the documented evidence of their widespread nature is to defend them - as I said, you lied.

I do not defend them. I am glad that they are extraordinarily rare if they exist at all.
Malarial mosquitos are not common here either, and I do not defend them either. You lied.

I take it as you are going to ignore my request to be linked to your "implant" witnesses, you are accepting that you lied about that one too??

No Jim.
I did not and do not lie.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 04:18 PM

"The young lad is just 15 "
Plenty of time to grow out of the melodeon and take up a real instrument then!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 03:57 PM

It's been another glorious day out here on the Connemara. Last night the music was superb with my mate and his grandson on Melodeon. The young lad is just 15 an a fantastic box player just like his Grandad. It was a VERY late night, or a very early morning, not sure which and far too much Guinness ........... if there is such a thing!!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 01:48 PM

"your claim that I defended the signs when I do not and never have. You lied."
To deny them and to claim I made them up and to refuse to exept the documented evidence of their widespread nature is to defend them - as I said, you lied.
"How can they be common if no-one has ever seen them except a well known Mudcat liar?"
I take it as you are going to ignore my request to be linked to your "implant" witnesses, you are accepting that you lied about that one too??
That'll do nicely, thank you
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 10:55 AM

I find that deplorable.
I would criticise such dictatorial behaviour from anyone.

That's fine. You are entitled to your opinions. I am entitled to not really give a shit about them.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 10:45 AM

So Dave, you take it on yourself to choose what the mood of the thread should be, and then disrupt the discussion by swamping it with off topic posts.
I find that deplorable.
I would criticise such dictatorial behaviour from anyone.

Jim, a recent example of you lying was your claim that I defended the signs when I do not and never have. You lied.

Did I say "Ypou said I am yhe only person holding the view on Traveller signs." ?
The only person in the country or the world? I can not claim to know that and I do not believe I claimed it. Please quote me.

I did say that on or off Mudcat I have never found anyone else who has seen one, and that is proof that they are not "common throughout Britain" whatever you claim.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 07:38 AM

Do explain why you need to do that if not for the reason Steve does it.

I already have, Keith, on a number of occasions. I suspect that you do not read my posts properly. It is to lift the mood of the thread. And I do not need to do it. I want to do it. Please be more careful in your choice of words.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 07:13 AM

"You do, and usually about me.You do, and usually about me."
Prove it Keith - produce those lies - any moron can make such an accusation
Each time I have called you dishonest I have specified what you are being dishonest about
I've just given you an example
Ypou said I am yhe only person holding the view on Traveller signs yet I have given yuo massive documented proof that they are common and wides pread
What is that if it is not a lie
It dowesn't matter two farts which of the handful of Mudcatters hasn't seen the signs - I have and so havve thiose who wrote and campaigned on the issue - are we/they all liard because half a dozen people who have had no dealings whatever haven't seen the signs
A stupid, dishonest and very agenda-driven response on your part
The person who did see a sign, you dismissed as a troll and a liar because by the time you googled the pub it had been removed -- as happens with these signs when travellers move on.
"You don't even live here."
This is a mind-numbingly stupid, response to something that has detrimentally affected an entire community
I have lived in three of Britain's major cities and I have worked with Travellers in six - and in smaller towns - I saw the signs, I experienced our being refused servive in pubs - I even included a photograph of the sign in the notes to our CD
I do not lie - if I have, produce your examples.
The same with your claim that prominent people backed up your claimn of a cultural transplant - a hundredfold lie on your part
You have never produced a quote of anybody doing so, you have refused to link to the examples you claim you have put up, and when I sak you nowm, you will refuse to do so again
PLEASE LINK ME TO ANYBODY WHO HAS CLAIMED THAT MUSLIM CULTURE HAS IMPLANTED THE TENDENCY FOR ALL MALES TO DESIRE UNDERAGE SEX
Failure to respond to this request will confirm that the many dozens of times that you have made this claim have all been lies.
You have lied and distorted throughout aour arguments, the reason being that your aim has never been to share ideas and experiences, but to win arguments - I once counted up the number of times you have claimed to have "won" or we have "lost.
You are apparently the only individual on this forum who does that.
Now - let's have those "implant"quotes, if you have not been telling lies.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 06:50 AM

Dave, much as I love those things, they do not make for stimulating discussion.
If I did want to talk about them I would not do it on a completely unrelated thread just to impede that discussion.
Do explain why you need to do that if not for the reason Steve does it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 06:11 AM

Keith - How on earth does Steve saying that he does something confirm that I do it for the same reason? You really have lost the plot here.

BTW - I have an apology for you. When I said I would not want to debate with you it came across as quite harsh. Sorry if I offended you. I would be more than happy to discuss wild flowers, weather, holidays and all manner of things with you. Just not religion or politics.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 05:58 AM

Dave,

Keith - You do it to try to stifle debate that does not suit you.
It is just a ploy, and an increasingly frantic and desperate one.

No I don't. That is an unsubstantiated allegation.:-D

It was substantiated by Steve who admitted that it was a ploy to stop discussion.

Steve,
WE. WILL. DISCUSS. WHAT. THE. HELL. WE. LIKE. IN. ANY. BS. THREAD. WE. LIKE.

Sadly, no-one can stop you, but I will criticise your behaviour as much as I like and will not be bullied into silence by you and your little gang.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Mar 17 - 05:50 AM

Jim,
Can we get one thing straight here Keith
I don't tell lies

You do, and usually about me.
Just recently you stated that I "defended" signs barring travellers.
I do not, never have and never would. You lied. You did not and could not quote me doing it.
They are not common, and I am glad of that.

This is typical of your lying behaviour
I have mut up masses of documented evidence of the Traveller signs - from civil rights groups, from councils, from writes writing about Travellers, from groups like The Runnymede Trust..... dozens and dozens of examples of these signs - even to the Weatherspoons case - and still you write
"How can they be common if no-one has ever seen them except a well known Mudcat liar?"

Not lying Jim. You can not expect me to deny the evidence of my own eyes to believe your claims. You don't even live here.
In my life I have never seen one, nor has any Mudcatter except you, so they can not be "common throughout Britain."
You are wrong about that.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 05:05 PM

💩💩💩

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 04:44 PM

Read my lips and an awful lot of other people's lips once and for all, Keith. WE. WILL. DISCUSS. WHAT. THE. HELL. WE. LIKE. IN. ANY. BS. THREAD. WE. LIKE. You do not get to dictate what we chime in with and I suggest you don't even suggest it. If you don't like it, complain to the mods and see where it gets you. The reason we do what we do is that your postings are in turns boring, repetitive, one-sided, hectoring, tedious, negative, lying, pointless and interminable. There is no end to any of it, Keith, and it poisons the air around here. We are leavening the bread, Keith. You simply steamroller the flatbread even flatter.

Yes------WE!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 04:32 PM

My mate Mike used to work near the tripe works in Monton. When I asked him how he coped with the smell he said it was Ok and he was down to only throwing up twice a day - Honestly!

I love tripe too - the real stuff, not what you get on these threads :-) Mrs G does in in milk with onions as well. She has also been known to cut it in strips then batter and fry it - Also very nice but very messy to do. Not had Robbies mild for yonks. I was never keen on the light but the Robbies dark in the Queens Head in New Mills was to die for.

Keith - You do it to try to stifle debate that does not suit you.
It is just a ploy, and an increasingly frantic and desperate one.

No I don't. That is an unsubstantiated allegation.:-D As to You just want to prevent debates you can't win. Well, firstly, don't kid yourself that I would want to debate with you but, if I did, it would not be on here. As has been pointed out this is not a debating forum, it is a discussion forum. Debates have rules and you break every one of them. If it were a debating forum you would have been banned years ago.

We just try to bring a little cheer to your otherwise mundane and tedious threads and you even complain about that. Sad.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: MikeL2
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 03:39 PM

Hi Dave

<" That wasn't snow, Mike. It was t'fallout from t'tripeworks...">.

LOL......oh so that's what it were; I thought it were snow cos it weren't half slippy to walk on.

If I'd known it were tripe I would have taken some home. My old mum loved tripe and onions,,,,tripe cooked in milk.

It pissed down all day yesterday so I put out a jug....thought it might be raining Robinsons' Mild...

Cheers

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 02:45 PM

And before you ask me for an example of your lying - I've just given it
Explain that one away
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 02:45 PM

And before you ask me for an example of your lying - I've just given it
Explain that one away
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 02:42 PM

Can we get one thing straight here Keith
I don't tell lies - I have told no lies on this forum ye you ahve accused me of doing so many dozens of times
You have never caught me out in a lie - you have dishonestly resorted to responding to everything you ahve no answer to as claiming it to be a lie - that is the spineless little creep you ar.
If you call me a liar again I will trawl through this forum (the way I did with Teribus''s insults) and I will put them up - every time you have denied not saying something than had it put up again and have gone on to defend it - you lie consistently by denying things then you prove yourself a liar by defending it all over again

This is typical of your lying behaviour
I have mut up masses of documented evidence of the Traveller signs - from civil rights groups, from councils, from writes writing about Travellers, from groups like The Runnymede Trust..... dozens and dozens of examples of these signs - even to the Weatherspoons case - and still you write
"How can they be common if no-one has ever seen them except a well known Mudcat liar?"
What about all the people whose evidence I put up.
You are the liar here Keith - you have now become a habitual liar
DO NOT CALL ME A LIAR AGAIN - I DO NOT TELL LIES
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 02:31 PM

Rag, if that was really what you and Dave wanted to discuss you would be on the "Spring Is Here" thread.

You just want to prevent debates you can't win.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 01:31 PM

Much better than regurgiating the same old line that is prevelant from some boring old farts of the right wing on here.

Dead from the neck up and the naval down, as my old man used to say.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 01:23 PM

Humph. It's been peeing down here all afternoon and it's damn nippy. Still, it's alleged that spring is on its way!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 01:11 PM

Another glorious day out on the Connemara, brilliant sunshine, nicely warm and more music tonight in a fabulous pub. Myself on Guitars my good lady on Concertina and Bodhran and a mate on various Melodeons. Lots of Guinness, whiskey and hospitality. Who could want more !!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 12:51 PM

"But you denied believing that on 8th December,
No I didn't -I did not say they were Loyal to Israel - I said they were using Israel's call for BDS to unseat Corbyn
It may well be that they believe Israel to be right, but your distortion makes my suggestion that they were working for them
Crooked pricks like Watson work only for themselves - that is where their loyalties lie.
Stop distorting what I say
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 12:34 PM

Dave,
You said "Nothing is stopping you criticising the government except your frantic preoccupation with trivia."

Nothing is stopping you criticising other parties, but all you want to do is discuss nature, but not on the thread about such things.

Far better than boring old politics any day!

Then why go on politics threads and avoid nature threads?
You do it to try to stifle debate that does not suit you.
It is just a ploy, and an increasingly frantic and desperate one.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 12:15 PM

Dthe G. It might work for plants but I fail to see how yet more Sh*t can help labour.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 11:09 AM

Yes, I know poobad. Treat them with plenty of manure...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 11:08 AM

The daffodils and croci are similar to the labour party. Here today and likely gone tomorrow.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 10:39 AM

💩💩💩

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 10:37 AM

Crocus corms and daffodil bulbs sit under the surface in a dormant state in summer. It's an adaptation to hot, dry conditions or the lack of light in dense woodland when the trees are in full leaf. It's called aestivation, sort of the opposite of hibernation. In spring the leaves build up a food store. Crocus leaves are fine and narrow and grass grows in between, so there isn't much of a bare patch when they die back. Daffodil leaves will leave a temporary bare patch if the daffs are growing in big clumps, but the grass soon spreads back.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 10:18 AM

💩💩💩

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 10:14 AM

Update on Lister Park in Bradford - Crocuses are all gone only to be replaced by daffodils. When they have gone it will look like plain grass. How do they do that, Steve. You will know. Are there just hundreds of bulbs below the grass that flower in the spring? When they are gone and the grass is mowed, how come it seems just like grass and is not full of bald patches? Or is it and I am too far away to notice?

D.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 10:01 AM

That tactic is becoming increasingly desperate and frantic, as I said.

That is not what you said at all. You said "Nothing is stopping you criticising the government except your frantic preoccupation with trivia." You accuse me of not making myself clear and then you change your words so they have a completely different meaning. Very dishonest.

Different morality
Different language
Different planet

On the other subject I really could not give a shit how many people my views are shared with. I have no need to go for the populist vote but I do actually care that people are suffering needlessly.

Now, can we get back to something interesting instead of your usual linguistic bollocks?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 09:57 AM

My "views" are they, Keith? They are facts! 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 09:44 AM

Jim
Because he aworked for a foreign power to smear his Party

But you denied believing that on 8th December,
"What about Jim's claim that the Labour Party has been infiltrated by "Quislings" secretly loyal to the current Israeli government"
THat was not my claim - you are lying again"

Dave, there is no evidence that your views are shared by more than a small minority and poll and election results that are evidence they are not.

You have posted extensively here and on other political threads about the weather and nature, but on the current "Spring" thread devoted to the weather and nature you have not posted at all.
That tells me that you are not truly interested in talking about such things, it is just a tactic to stifle discussions you do not like.
That tactic is becoming increasingly desperate and frantic, as I said.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 08:49 AM

The evidence of people on the breadline and those relying on food banks. The evidence of the less able bodied in despair because their benefits have been slashed. The evidence of the NHS and schools in disarray because they cannot manage on their reduced budgets.

And Keith, there was absolutely nothing frantic in the post you use as an example nor is mentioning an event that had already been discussed a preoccupation. I take it it was another one of your misrepresentations that we can ignore.

Different morality
Different language
Different planet

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 08:34 AM

Jim,
Because he was forced to tender his resignation forr fiddling his expenses

Most MPs did that, so no more a crook than most.

Because he aworked for a foreign power to smear his Party

Did he? That is a most serious charge that you have just made up Jim!

Steve, those may be your views, but few hold them according to all recent polls and by-election results.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 08:00 AM

💩💩💩

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 07:55 AM

Not taking us to hell in a handcart, Keith? A blundering Tory idiot who is now history, who was certain that he could win the referendum, has managed to get us bundled out of the EU on the back of a pack of lies. In nine months the pound has collapsed, inflation is roaring ahead, there's no prospect of pay keeping up with it, there's talk of removing the triple lock on old-age pensions (which are among the worst in the EU already) because there's no money to pay for it, leaving millions of pensioners vulnerable to inflation, the NHS has gone in a few short years from the best it's ever been to a complete basket case, we can't afford care for our elderly any more, millions have been forced into bogus "self-employment" or zero-hours contracts, productivity is shite, there is no prospect of a decent trade deal with the EU or anyone else, half a million Brits in the EU are living on drastically-reduced pensions thanks to the collapse of the pound and there's every prospect that their pensions will be frozen and that they'll lose the reciprocal healthcare agreement, millions of EU citizens living here, people who we sorely need to keep the NHS, care services and agriculture afloat, feel threatened by the new hostile-to-foreigners atmosphere, the Scots may well be on their bikes, nobody seems to have given a thought to the brexicated bloody mess that would be visited on Northern Ireland...the handcarts are parked in a long row outside the house, Keith, but all you can do is look upwards out of the top half of the window and see the sunshine and the fluffy white clouds. You always were good at missing the point, weren't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 07:49 AM

"Why call Watson a Crook? "
Because he was forced to tender his resignation forr fiddling his expenses
Because he aworked for a foreign power to smear his Party
Take your pick
"What is going on in Labour is not normal."
Who wants "normal" as things stand at present
Why not address the situation as it stands instead of putting up meaningless media quotes
Your historians now appear to metamorphosed into press journalists
Do they sell their papers in "real" newsagents?
You and your mates have been quick enough to dismiss or ignore the Guardian when it doesn't say what you want it to
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 07:36 AM

Jim,
They want the same old same old Tory policies because that suits their own personal positions - and crooks lik to Watson head the pack

Why call Watson a Crook? All parties have wings and factions which push for policies that suit their own position. That is normal politics.
What is going on in Labour is not normal.

As the Guardian columnist just said, "Does anyone inside Labour have any idea how ludicrous this all looks?"

Do you Steve, or are you still pretending to be asleep?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 07:30 AM

Dave,
I am in a minority in thinking that the current government is not doing a good job? A pretty large minority I should think.

Why do you think that? What evidence?
You are ignoring the evidence of recent by-elections where there was a swing to the Tories which is almost unheard of for a governing party mid term.

What frantic preocculation? I hope you can come up with some evidence that I have a frantic preoccupation with anything.

Yesterday you posted on this political thread,
"That was probably the one I remember, Raggy. Some cars on our street were damaged. We had a Reliant Supervan III at the time - Just like Del boy's but in turquoise rather than yellow. Being fibreglass it suffered no dents :-)
Far better than boring old politics any day!"

You have posted ad nauseum on off topic trivia in what Steve says is a tactic to drive political opponents away. That campaign has become increasingly desperate and frantic in recent days on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 06:55 AM

"Who is trying to force him out of office?"
Don't be stupid Keith - this is what it has been about from day one
The right may have failed in this particular battle but it doesn't mean that they are not still at war
They want the same old same old Tory policies because that suits their own personal positions - and crooks lik to Watson head the pack
"That is your view, but it is a minority one."
It is a fact - no industry, a loss of a say in the workplace, a rapidly widening gap between haves and have nots, an unstable economy
People do not vote for this, they vote for what will suit them in the present circumstances - go look at those who take no part in the elections and don't vote at all - only 66% voted in the last election - the party that got by far the majority of votes is the "you are all a shower of bastards and I wont vote for any of you Party"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Mar 17 - 06:42 AM

I am in a minority in thinking that the current government is not doing a good job? A pretty large minority I should think.

What frantic preocculation? I hope you can come up with some evidence that I have a frantic preoccupation with anything. Otherwise I think we can assume it is another one of your misrepresentations.

Different morality
Different language
Different planet

:D tG