 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 09 Mar 17 - 04:39 AM Jim, Nobody has ever argued that there are no antisemites in Labour - three maybes don't make a "serious problem" by anybody's calculations. It clearly does Jim because numerous Labour people including the NEC and leadership all agree that it is a serious problem, and as we have just read in the Guardian it is not finished yet! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Jim Carroll Date: 09 Mar 17 - 04:43 AM "That should be enough for anyone, or you could just google a bit of the text." Both you and Teribus are regular mis - and out of context quoters - the two of you have not long given us an example of your dishonesty You have just accused me of not linking to your on thousand year old smearing of the Muslim Culture. You seem to demand of others what you are not prepared to offer yourself Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 09 Mar 17 - 04:49 AM Jim, your "ongoing" link does not link to anything relevant to your claims. Both you and Teribus are regular mis - and out of context quoters - the two of you have not long given us an example of your dishonesty If that is true, quote the "dishonesty." You have just accused me of not linking to your on thousand year old smearing of the Muslim Culture. Another of your nasty, smearing lies. I have never, ever said anything critical of any religion, unlike every member of your little gang. Or will you produce a quote of me doing it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Mar 17 - 05:24 AM So, Keith, you never have to give links to the Guardian for the forum because Steve takes the Guardian. My, I AM flattered! 😂 Woke up to dense fog this morning but, contrary to the forecast last night, the sun's burned it off in the last twenty minutes. Drove to Truro and back yesterday, over a hundred miles, in thick fog and drizzle. It boggles the eyes. Glorious mud abounds but it's warm. Spring! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Mar 17 - 05:27 AM Hey Dave, my machine was called a Honda 50 and it had pedals. Not that anyone other then Hercules unchained could have pedalled it anywhere! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Dave the Gnome Date: 09 Mar 17 - 05:45 AM Yay - found one! Still wrong though. Most NORMAL people would call this pedal free version a Honda 50. You lose... :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 09 Mar 17 - 06:07 AM So, Keith, you never have to give links to the Guardian for the forum because Steve takes the Guardian. My, I AM flattered! I stated it was from "yesterday's Guardian" and quoted the text. That is why I thought a link unnecessary, but now you have it anyway. I note that you still deny, or are unable to recognise the anti-Semitism reported. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Raggytash Date: 09 Mar 17 - 06:15 AM Bless my soul, never seen one of those before. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Jim Carroll Date: 09 Mar 17 - 06:15 AM "If that is true, quote the "dishonesty."" You didn't link your Labour quote which missed the point of the article Teribus does it regularly - his unlinked quote on Labour's "support" for nuclear weapons was totally contradicted by what the article actually said You are both invererate liars - the major examples of yours are in denying what you have said and what you believe. said Your quoting of the marriage of Mohammed a thousand years ago in an argument about Muslim criminals was a deliberate attempt to link those crimes with the Muslim religion You are a racist sicko in the extreme So three possibes in a party of half a million make a serious problem - never mind what other people say How can that be vaguely possible Are they accusing Jews of blood sacrifice? You are a feckin' eejit Nobody has ever at any time said there is a serious problem, apart from those with a political axe to grind What they said that any accusation has to be treated seriously - it has, and so far, no serious problem haes been uncovered and until that so-called antisemitism is described and enumerated, it never will be. It is all in your tiny right-wing skull Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Mar 17 - 06:48 AM "I note that you still deny, or are unable to recognise the anti-Semitism reported." Oh, you "note," do you? Well, it would take me all day to regale you with the things I've "noted" about you. I'm bored over/with/about/of you, Keith. Yawnyawnyawnyawnyawn. Please force me to lose as quickly as possible. I reckon mine was called a Honda 50PC or PC50, Dave. Are you making a baseless, spittle-flecked assertion that it wasn't a moped, Dave? Typical liberal-elitist, leftie, blame-it-all-on-Maggie-Thatcher UKIP lie, Dave! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Raggytash Date: 09 Mar 17 - 06:54 AM Did you wear sandals and cheesecloth when you rode it. The public DEMAND an answer !!! Feckle, spit rant, feckle, spit, rant !!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Dave the Gnome Date: 09 Mar 17 - 06:55 AM Bet you used to pedal it in your sandals as well. And naming it PC is typical of your bearded, guardian reading ilk as well. Bet it was not PC before you "liberals" came along. :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Raggytash Date: 09 Mar 17 - 06:58 AM Or should that be freckled spit rant? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: bobad Date: 09 Mar 17 - 07:02 AM I note that you still deny, or are unable to recognise the anti-Semitism reported. Of course they have to deny it Keith otherwise they would be admitting to their own. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Mar 17 - 07:03 AM I SAT on the cheesecloth to soak up the bumsweat on warm days. Those plasticated saddles were deadly when moist. Brake hard and you could slip forward a foot and do yourself a nasty. Mind you, my brakes were busted so it couldn't happen to me. I regarded having no brakes as an essential safety feature. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Mar 17 - 07:05 AM Hello, boobs! Is it OK if I call you "boobs?" After all, there did used to be a pair of you! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Raggytash Date: 09 Mar 17 - 07:28 AM I'm sure boobs (good name that) thinks there's logic in his post but I'm not certain I can fathom it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Mar 17 - 07:35 AM Humph. Knew I'd be shat on for revealing that it was a PC moped. Damn! My brother had one as well. Foolishly, he attempted to ride it home from Worcester, where he was at college, back to Radcliffe. I had to borrow me dad's car to go and rescue him from Tarporley in Cheshire. We couldn't get the bike into the Mk 1 Escort. Can't remember what happened to it now. It's probably still hidden in a hedge in Cheshire. If anyone finds one in that vicinity, we want it back. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Mar 17 - 07:38 AM "I'm sure boobs thinks..." ❓ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: bobad Date: 09 Mar 17 - 07:43 AM I'm not certain I can fathom it. There is not much you can fathom from what we see in your posts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Raggytash Date: 09 Mar 17 - 07:58 AM It's just that I can't think down to your level. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: bobad Date: 09 Mar 17 - 08:14 AM It's just that I can't think QED! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Dave the Gnome Date: 09 Mar 17 - 08:17 AM It's Do I now win the prize for silliest quote taken out of context from the original? :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Raggytash Date: 09 Mar 17 - 08:20 AM I Think that wins it .......... you lose ! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Teribus Date: 09 Mar 17 - 08:25 AM Hammond's budget yesterday was a bit boring apart from the two really good digs he got in at Corbyn & Labour: 1: 'They don't call it the last Labour Government for nothing!' 2: That Corbyn and Labour are in such a deep hole that even Stephen Hawking has given up on them. No need to thank me Gnome just "adding sweetness and light" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Dave the Gnome Date: 09 Mar 17 - 08:25 AM Damn you |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Dave the Gnome Date: 09 Mar 17 - 08:28 AM Well done, Teribus. You are getting into the swing of things at long last. Never let it be said that you can't teach and old sea dog new tricks. :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Raggytash Date: 09 Mar 17 - 08:36 AM I wonder ........... should we club together and buy him a bike? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Dave the Gnome Date: 09 Mar 17 - 08:51 AM I think it may be more useful getting on my bike and buying a club... :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Jim Carroll Date: 09 Mar 17 - 09:00 AM "Hammond's budget yesterday was a bit boring" Not to the Lewis's employees who have had their bonuses cut to make up for the Brexit uncertainty, or the rise in takes for the self-employed despite promises on not intending to do so Brexit is proving a real fuck-up in every sense and it is the less well off who is taking the flak How "boring" can you get http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/philip-hammonds-spring-budget-what-he-said-and-what-he-really-meant-a7618621.html Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Mar 17 - 09:11 AM Teribus can have my brother's old moped if he can find it. There are an awful lot of hedgerows in Cheshire, mind... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Mar 17 - 09:18 AM The Insitute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) has blown the Tories' cover. I'm rubbish at doing links but have a google at this: 'IFS: Growth in UK living standards worst in 60 years" Hands up all those who think Brexit will help! And there was a Tory on the wireless at dinner time STILL blaming the last Labour government! 😂 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Teribus Date: 09 Mar 17 - 10:21 AM 👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Dave the Gnome Date: 09 Mar 17 - 10:24 AM I think Teribus wants to give us a hand. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 09 Mar 17 - 10:59 AM Jim,, Your quoting of the marriage of Mohammed a thousand years ago in an argument about Muslim criminals was a deliberate attempt to link those crimes with the Muslim religion No it was not. You made it look like that by editing out everything I said before and after. I said, "It is nothing to do with Islam. " and "Child marriage was accepted here until recently." You can only make a case by lying and by careful editing of what I really said. You didn't link your Labour quote which missed the point of the article ?? What did I not link to that I should please? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Raggytash Date: 09 Mar 17 - 11:01 AM My Honda 50 was registration No ELG81B then moved on to bigger and faster machines. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Jim Carroll Date: 09 Mar 17 - 11:21 AM "My Honda" Do you know the story of the Japanese man who told his doctor that he suffered from flatulence. The doctor replied that this may be embarrassing but it was not a major problem - many people do. "Ah - this is different" - He bent over and farted, and out came a loud "Honda" The doctor examined him closely and finally said, "You have an abscess". "What difference does that make", the man asked? "Well", replied the doctor, "in Britain, we have an old saying - abscess makes the fart go Honda" Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Jim Carroll Date: 09 Mar 17 - 11:43 AM This is your what you were directly responding to Keith Lox "They do not represent Islamic attitudes to women." "So, why not Irish gangs? Chinese? The muslim communty does not encourage its girls to have relationships. Marriages are usually arranged, and usually with partners in Pakistan. Their unmarried young men must abstain or find sex outside their own community, but not have lasting relationships. Paedophilia is not endorsed, but the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) took a child bride." You were replying to a point about the sexual abuse of children and you chose to link it to Muslim culture and threw in a touch of religion "peace be upon you" for good measure "This particular crime, dubbed street grooming, is the domain of male muslim gangs according to the people in a position to know. There is lots of other dreadful crime for which other groups are responsible, but let us accept that this is a crime that the culture (not the religion) of the Pakistani community is largely responsible for." Your argument, a massively contradictory as it was, was aimed totally at Muslim culture – then you specified a thousand year old marriage to back up your claims against a 21st century community The spiteful 'mock-Muslim' manner in which you framed your accusation "(peace and blessings be upon him) " only underlined your contempt for Muslims End of story Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Mar 17 - 12:37 PM Gotta tell me mum that one, Jim. My moped's reg was NNF41H. Wasn't overly keen on the NF bit of that! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Dave the Gnome Date: 09 Mar 17 - 01:25 PM The only full registration I can remember was my first. Lambretta GT200 - BBA46B. When I first set of on it I rode it into a wall! Low speed I am glad to say. Never fell off it again after that :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Jim Carroll Date: 09 Mar 17 - 03:00 PM "Gotta tell me mum that one, Jim." She told me it Steve!!! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Steve Shaw Date: 09 Mar 17 - 03:31 PM I'm not surprised, Jim. I've always had you down as her type, though she could give you a year or two! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 10 Mar 17 - 05:13 AM Jim, Whenever I referred to the Prophet I added "peace and blessings be upon him" out of respect for their faith. Unlike you I never disrespect any faith or its followers. Throughout that thread I stated that religion played no part in that crime. You just highlighted in red me saying, "but let us accept that this is a crime that the culture (not the religion) of the Pakistani community is largely responsible for." Culture not religion! I had no knowledge of it but I quoted several prominent left wing people who did and who had all been quoted in all the media attributing the offending to that culture. No alternative theory had been put forward. As I said at the time, that was the only reason I believed it. Why didn't you Jim? Dave did, and Steve never challenged it at the time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Dave the Gnome Date: 10 Mar 17 - 05:50 AM Dave did I accepted that there was an over-representation. I questioned the reasons for that. Please try to get these things right, Keith, and do not try to give the impression that I agree with your cultural implant theory. DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Jim Carroll Date: 10 Mar 17 - 05:55 AM "Whenever I referred to the Prophet I added "peace and blessings be upon him" out of respect for their faith." You liar Keith You set out in the previous sentence to show that Islam = pedophilia, which is what you spent the entire thread in doing - go and look If you didn't mean it as a smear - why put up a marriage that took place a thousand years ago? It had no reason to be in an argument about Muslim criminals guilty of sexual crimes other than to back up your disgusting claims of a "cultural implant that has to be resisted in order to stop Muslims raping under-age girls" We really have been here before Keith You were foremost in those quoting the Quran, trying to prove in inbuilt evil of the religion - I responded with quotes from 'The Evil Bible' showing the stupidity of taking these fairy stories literally (I seem to remember you objected strongly to the fact that Bible quotations used the term "Israel" traditionally - you appeared to think I was taking a pop at your favourite terrorist state. Once again, yo are lying - you have never once quoted anybody supporting your "cultural implant" theory - not ever Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Steve Shaw Date: 10 Mar 17 - 06:00 AM I very likely didn't challenge it because I was as bored with your hectoring then as I am with your hectoring now. This forum is voluntary. Don't assume that silence means agreement with you. That's another one of your little ploys. Well some of us are not quite as thick and unobservant as you seem to think. And it's another reason why I'd rather talk about flowers and things. Indeed, it's a lovely spring day this end. Mrs Steve and I may or may not get the MX5 soft top down and head off to RHS Rosemoor this affy. I will, if course, keep you posted! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 10 Mar 17 - 07:32 AM Dave, you posted this , The question of why there is an over-representation is the one that can be subject to racist conjecture. The suggestion is, I guess, that simply by quoting the figures, it displays a racial motive? I don't accept that premise in all cases I am afraid. While I would suspect that certain right wing politicians, who shall remain nameless here, do have that hidden agenda, why should I suspect that Lord Ahmed or Jack Straw are acting in the same way? Ahmed and Straw were two of those I quoted as claiming a cultural explanation. Steve, I very likely didn't challenge it because I was as bored with your hectoring then as I am with your hectoring now. No Steve. You were posting away quite happily but never challenged the over-representation or the cultural explanation for it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 10 Mar 17 - 07:43 AM Jim, "Whenever I referred to the Prophet I added "peace and blessings be upon him" out of respect for their faith." You liar Keith I can prove it Jim. I posted this before the post you refer to. Keith A of Hertford - PM Date: 21 Jan 11 - 01:21 PM Correct greg, but the difference is in how non believers are tolerated. It is much more prevalent among Muslims to believe they have a duty to punish a non believer who by stating his belief blasphemes against Mohammed (peace and blessings be upon Him), or a Muslim who converts, or just a non believer. If you didn't mean it as a smear - why put up a marriage that took place a thousand years ago? I put it up to pre-empt anyone else doing it. There were Islamophobes posting who might well have muddied the waters with that false argument. That is also why I had to keep restating my view that religion was not an issue in the offending. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Raggytash Date: 10 Mar 17 - 07:44 AM The primulas in my garden have been flowering all winter and last November the Rhododendrons were flowering on the Connemara ! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 10 Mar 17 - 08:16 AM Jim another example from 2006!! Keith A of Hertford - PM Date: 22 May 06 - 04:16 AM Just 40 days in the wilderness Dianavan, and that hundreds of years before Mohammed, peace be upon him. |