BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 20 Mar 17 - 06:35 AM

https://www.theguardian.com/observer

or from the web:-

Latest Observer news, comment and analysis from the Guardian, the world's leading liberal voice.
Bit like musketeers really

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Mar 17 - 06:13 AM

Referring to very low numbers of a category of crime is not "trivialising" the crime. I've said a number of times now that all hate crime is abhorrent, cloth-ears. The nature of a crime is not the same thing as the numbers of a crime. You ignorantly tried to make rape equivalent to hate crime against Jews by saying that they both affected a tiny proportion of the population. That is a complete misrepresentation, as rape and sexual assault affects hundreds of times more people than hate crime directed at Jews. I point to your deficiencies and you get all defensive. Tough.

The Observer is the world's first Sunday paper, founded in 1791. It joined the Guardian media group two hundred years later. It is an independent newspaper in its own right, with its own style and its own name and its own regular columnists and it has its own editor. It is completely inaccurate to refer to it as the Guardian on Sunday or Sunday's Guardian. Why you dig in like this when you are so blatantly wrong is anyone's guess.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Mar 17 - 04:32 AM

"The Observer - Official Site
https://www.theguardian.com/observer
Latest Observer news, comment and analysis from the Guardian, the world's leading liberal voice"

The Observer is the Guardian on Sunday, as we all know Steve.
Using that non-confusion to try and discredit a point shows how desperate you are to avoid discussing the issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Mar 17 - 04:24 AM

Jim,
Dave may have held that opinion but that's all it is - an opinion, which he put reasonably
It would carry weight if he offered evidence to support it.

He did. His own personal experience of hundreds of pubs all over Britain.
Those of us who live here know from our own experience that they are not "common throughout Britain" because we never see them.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Mar 17 - 04:21 AM

Steve,
However, I see you're still minimising rape and sexual assault (you now appear to be trivialising the latter...)

What a dishonest representation of what I said!

You trivialised the importance of hate crime because the victims form a small proportion of the population. You compared them to victims of lightning.
I chose a crime that none of us would trivialise but that also effects only a small percentage.
I could have chosen black unarmed victims of police shootings. However few the victims it is an issue that must be taken seriously, like hate crime.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Mar 17 - 04:12 AM

BTW, Jim, I am not saying anything has changed. I asked if it had, you answered that it had not. Seemples:-)

D.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Mar 17 - 04:03 AM

No, it isn't my case, Jim, and you are missing the point. From my point of view and from Keith's point of view the signs are not common because we do not look for the. So we are right. From the traveler's point of view the signs are all too common because they affect them and because you have direct contact with the travelers, you are right.

The point is the truth can be different if seen from different perspectives. Remember the old blind men describing an elephant tale? They all told the truth as they saw it. Sorry you are disappointed in me but the fact is that Keith is as right as you are. Neither of you is lying.

It does prove my other point though. We can strongly disagree without recourse to insults and invective. Thank you.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 09:56 PM

Dave, chilli is kind of the point of that dish! If Mrs G. is not a chilli fan, then it may not be the dish for you. But how can one live without frequent lashings of chilli! I am severely perplexed here, Dave!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 09:46 PM

"That was in 2004. Is it still going on 13 years later?"
Whhhat#s changed to stop it Dave ?
No sign of enlightenment regarding Travellers
Major recinded the Caravan and camping laws in 1994, leaving Travellers no legal right to stop anywhere.
We were in Bristol in 2004 and it was still going strong and the Witherspoon case was two years ago.
Far from being welcome by the settled community, the lot of Travellers has worsened.
This, from the Runnymede Trust report of 2015

"We have also repeatedly highlighted our concerns over the inequalities faced by the Gypsy and Traveller community. We have published a number of research reports, produced guidance to raise awareness of their legal rights and undertaken strategic litigation – including recent wins not just against pubs (for unlawful refusal of service) but also against Government (for unlawful discrimination in recovering planning applications)."
If you are arguing that things have changed (they certainly hadn't four years ago), then you have to show when and how
The only thing that has changes is the Travellers have become more organised and aware of their rights and have won support to challenge this racist behaviour.
The articles I have put up date as follows; 2014, 2014, 2009, 2015, 2012, 2011, 2015
If things have changed, what exactly and when
Both yours and Keith's case rest solely on your argument that you haven't seen them - had you seen them in the past and they suddenly disappeared, or is it that you have had no contact with Travellers ever?
Where did this enlightenment suddenly come from since 2004?
who cares about Travellers now?
ACCORDING TO THIS ARTICLE, NOT MANY
OR THIS
OR EVEN THIS
Sorry Dave - doesn't make sense - not from you anyway.
I expected a little more from you
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 09:36 PM

That's the website, boobs. There is no "Sunday's Guardian." The fact that you referred to such a thing demonstrates your total lack of reliability, as if we didn't already know. Do try to check your facts before posting, old chap.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 09:19 PM

the guardian

Don't tell me you weren't warned about Corbyn
Nick Cohen

Sunday 19 March 2017 00.04 GMT Last modified on Sunday 19 March 2017 10.03 GMT

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 08:34 PM

There is no Sunday Guardian, boobs. There is also no link in your post. "Sunday's Guardian" simply shows that you are out of touch.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 08:24 PM

Don't tell me you weren't warned about Corbyn
Nick Cohen

Sunday 19 March 2017 00.04 GMT Last modified on Sunday 19 March 2017 10.03 GMT

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 08:04 PM

There is no "Sunday Guardian," boobs. Jeez, don't you and keef ever check anything? 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 06:29 PM

So, not being awkward Jim but I know it will be asked anyway. That was in 2004. Is it still going on 13 years later? If so someone in authority needs a slap.

Steve - Sounds wonderful. Will a very small quantity of chilli do? I like it but Mrs G can only take a bit. Funny thing with me and chilli. Most sorts are fine. Others can set off my asthma. Usually Thai dishes and the oddest one of all was chilli ice cream in Whitby some years back. I seem fine with Mexican food so I guess it is some sort of regional chilli that sets it off.

Talking of making love I found out how to do it back to back some years ago.

Invite another couple...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 06:25 PM

Nick Cohen tears a layer of skin off of Jeremy Corbyn in Sunday's Guardian: Don't tell me you weren't warned about Corbyn

The Tories have gone easy on Corbyn and his comrades to date for the transparently obvious reason that they want to keep them in charge of Labour.

In an election, they would tear them to pieces. They will expose the far left's record of excusing the imperialism of Vladimir Putin's gangster state , the oppressors of women and murderers of gays in Iran, the IRA, and every variety of inquisitorial and homicidal Islamist movement, while presenting itself with hypocritical piety as a moral force. Will there be 150, 125, 100 Labour MPs by the end of the flaying? My advice is to think of a number then halve it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I accept that among you there are true far leftists who won't care. You want, and may get, a "radical" Labour party that will spend decades in opposition waiting for the glorious day when voters realise their mistake.

I don't think your imaginary victory is worth waiting for. You don't have a radical programme that a 20th-century Marxist or any other serious thinker would recognise. All that's left of the far left is a babble of sneers and slogans. But, let me be fair, by your own lights you have a strategy, and are not complete fools.

The majority of Corbyn supporters are another matter. Labour MPs are biting their tongues now and letting Corbyn show himself for what he is.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 06:03 PM

One more time
British Anti-Discrimination Legislation and
its Protection for Gypsies and Travellers
'…Gypsies and Travellers are still experiencing
discrimination of the most overt kind:
'No blacks, no Irish, no dogs' signs
disappeared decades ago, but the 'No Travellers' signs,
used intentionally to exclude Gypsies and Travellers,
are widespread indicating that discrimination against these groups
remains the last 'respectable' form of racism in the UK.'
Legal Action Group (2004)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 06:03 PM

As I've been mildly horrible to you today, Dave (and let's face it, the bingo episode, bitter taste though it leaves in the mouth, is in the past - more or less), I'll make recompense by informing you of a superb dish made with a type of pasta that I have only been able to obtain in Morrisons (bearing in mind that I live in the boondocks). I did mention it earlier, but it turned out so well that I feel that the whole planet needs to be regaled with it. The pasta is chitarra spaghetti, thicker than ordinary spaghetti and square in cross-section. Proceed as follows. You need 250g pasta.

For two people. Put three tablespoons of EV olive oil in a frying pan. Finely slice two cloves of garlic into the cold oil. NEVERNEVERNEVERNEVER use a garlic crusher. Throw it away. Take 250g of the best cherry toms you can get your hands on and cut them in half. You also need a small glass of decent white wine, dried chilli flakes, a half-teaspoon of sugar (Italian chefs' secret weapon), a teaspoon of salt or less (to taste) and a big handful of wild rocket, roughly chopped.

Gently sautée the garlic. After a few minutes add a goodly pinch of chilli flakes. The amount you add is entirely your responsibility, but the dish does need to be spicy. After another minute, add the toms and salt and turn up the heat. When they start to soften, add the wine and let it bubble. Turn down the heat and simmer uncovered for five minutes or more. Meanwhile, boil the pasta in plenty of salted water. I found that it took 15 minutes. It will be less if you use ordinary spaghetti or linguine. Two minutes before you reckon the pasta is done, throw the rocket into the sauce.

Drain the pasta, not too fastidiously, but keep a bit of pasta water just in case it's a bit dry (it probably won't be). Throw the pasta into the sauce. Stir it around. Whack it into two bowls, drizzle a bit more EV olive oil on top, eat, then make love. No cheese. Definitely no cheese, no matter what your instincts tell you. It sounds like it shouldn't work, but it's a sensational dish. Cheers to Gino for the inspiration.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 05:00 PM

It wasn't me making equivalence, boobs. It was Keith who stated, utterly incorrectly and without checking his facts, that both rape and hate crime affected only "tiny" proportions. So who's making the equivalence, boobs? Me or him? And who was it who provided the comparative statistics? Me or him? Jayz, I was even polite enough to use yours!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 04:59 PM

rish Travellers win discrimination case after Wetherspoon's pub refuses them entry
They said they were turned away because they had come from the Traveller conference which was being held next door.

Nov 17th 2016, 8:39 PM 43,473 Views 9 Comments Share37 Tweet Email2

Image: PA Archive/PA Images
A GROUP OF Irish Travellers has won a discrimination case against a Wetherspoon's in London which didn't let them in.
The Traveller Movement, along with its 18 co-claimants, brought the case to court after a delegates from a conference were refused entry to the Coronet Pub on Holloway Road, north London, five years ago.
Wetherspoon's has settled the case and has apologised to everyone affected by the incident.
The firm also agreed to pay the legal costs of all claimants.
Stereotype
The judge in the case said the manager of the pub adopted "the stereotypical assumption that Irish Travellers and English gypsies cause disorder wherever they go".
Chairman of Wetherspoon, Tim Martin, said more is being done to make sure an incident like this doesn't happen again.
He said: "This is the first time in our 37 year history that a case of discrimination for refusal of entry to a Wetherspoon pub has gone to court. I apologise to those who were not allowed in the Coronet pub and we have put in place improved training and management systems to try to prevent a recurrence."
Yvonne MacNamara, chief executive of the Traveller Movement and one of the claimants in the case said she hopes the judgement sends a message to publicans that they cannot judge people because they are travellers or gypsies.
She said:
This is a real David vs Goliath story and with any luck will show that no matter how big a company you are, you cannot get away with discrimination.
"We are absolutely delighted that the case is finally settled and I sincerely hope this will be serve as a firm warning to pubs and other service providers across the country that discrimination against gypsies and travellers will no longer be tolerated."

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 04:39 PM

The problem is, Jim, that evidence for the lack Of something is impossible to furnish so my opinion is all I have to go on. My opinion is that from my point of view these notices are not common. From the traveler's point of view they may well be. I have asked before and don't recall getting an answer. What do you mean by common? How many pubs would you say display such notices? Help us out here!

In the meanwhile, has anyone noticed that the complainants about little sojourns into the pleasanter things of life are happy to move off topic to argue about other things? Wonder why that is?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 04:39 PM

The problem is, Jim, that evidence for the lack Of something is impossible to furnish so my opinion is all I have to go on. My opinion is that from my point of view these notices are not common. From the traveler's point of view they may well be. I have asked before and don't recall getting an answer. What do you mean by common? How many pubs would you say display such notices? Help us out here!

In the meanwhile, has anyone noticed that the complainants about little sojourns into the pleasanter things of life are happy to move off topic to argue about other things? Wonder why that is?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 04:12 PM

So I see Shaw is trying to make some bizarre equivalence between rape and anti-Semitic hate crime - scraping the bottom of the barrel in desperation.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 03:36 PM

"but in my mind such notices are not common."
Where are your historians of yesteryear Keith
Dave may have held that opinion but that's all it is - an opinion, which he put reasonably
It would carry weight if he offered evidence to support it.
Please respond to what has been put up
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 03:33 PM

I was using the stats that bobad provided and you know it. I've made it clear in several posts that I'm sceptical about those puzzlingly-low numbers. However, I see you're still minimising rape and sexual assault (you now appear to be trivialising the latter...) in favour of your narrow, blind agenda which involves talking up Jews as victims at all costs. You're up shit creek without a paddle on this one, Keith. Be thankful that most people on this forum aren't reading your posts in this thread. I'd change the subject sharpish if I were you.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 03:33 PM

"but it is a lie to state that they are common throughout Britain.
Uttre madness
Why will you not respond to what has been put up if it isn't because of your insane hatred for minorities
Whee is your evidence that they are telling lies?
Nutty as a bag of cashews
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 03:28 PM

Dave,
Keith - Yes, you were right and I hope after all I said above that you will realise that Jim was also right. But I guess that, sadly, you will try to spin that to your own agenda as well.

No spin.
You said I was right. You certainly did not say that Jim was right!

You said, "but in my mind such notices are not common." contradicting his claim that they are "common all over Britain"!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 03:23 PM

Steve, you attacked my statement, "Hate crime effects a tiny proportion Steve, and so does rape."

You stated, "173,610 victims of rape or sexual assault," (USA)

But, "The FBI is charged under the Hate Crime Statistics Act with compiling statistics on hate crimes. In its most recent report, for 2013, it counted 5,928 incidents resulting in 7,242 victims. That was a decline from 2012, in which the FBI tallied 6,573 incidents. "

Taking the lowest figure, that is only 24 times less, and as rape is a smaller subset of all sexual assaults it is much less than 24 times and broadly comparable with hate crime.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 03:18 PM

Steve - :-D

Jim - Exactly what I was expecting, and a good answer. Thanks. Your point about imperialism is quite right. However, I am half Polish, class myself as British and I do not think I am particularly racist. Yet I was brought up in suburban Manchester in the 1950s when racism was endemic. Life is not black and white, if you will excuse the expression given the topic! Anyway, my point about not stereotyping a nation as racists, when there are demonstrable exceptions, is also right. So we are both right in different ways.

This is what I have trouble getting across to people like Keith and, although in the past I have put this down to myself, I now know it is not all me. I think, even if we disagree on this point, we are on a much more similar wavelength and can agree to disagree. Something that can never be achieved in certain quarters.

I don't want to get too bogged down in this so I will just make the point that any discussion is as much about attitude and how you treat other people as it is about facts and evidence.

BTW, I do not think the rise in racism is a predominately British thing. The far right seem to be gaining ground all over the world.

Keith - Yes, you were right and I hope after all I said above that you will realise that Jim was also right. But I guess that, sadly, you will try to spin that to your own agenda as well.


DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 03:07 PM

I haven't forgotten the lost bingo ball fiasco and those photocopied cards of yours, Dave. We didn't fall out about it, though, did we? Mind you, it was hard not to. Damned hard. Thank God those pensioners in Dewsbury couldn't afford a lawyer...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 02:45 PM

Dave,
Give it up. I know it sticks in your throat but this time Keith is right.

That is what you said at the time, and your meaning was clear.
Yes, one notice is too many, and I abhor them however rare, but it is a lie to state that they are common throughout Britain.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 02:14 PM

"Would you care to join me in demonstrating how we can disagree without rancour"
Bit difficult with someone who calls you a liar and refuses to respond to facts Dave
Keith Chooses to expose himself to attacks with his obsessive hatred of minorities - don;t know how to deal with that one
"If I was to say to you that your comments about the British being racist are in themselves a racist statement, how would you react"
As I have4 in the past Dave - WITH EVIDENCE
I have attempted to qualify my statement by putting it in both a historical and social context
I believe British Racism stems from out Imperial past when to be foreign was to be inferior and exploitable - I'm old enough to remember this actually taught in schools and used as an excuse to not let go of our colonies - "They aren't ready to govern themselves" was regularly used to oppose independence.
We even sang hymns in school which talked about being foreign as being "in errors chain" (see 'From Greenland's Icy Mountains')
Since then, politicians have used the presence of foreigners to cover up their own failures and more recently, to win elections - Brexit and the U.S. Presidential Election were fought an an anti-foreigner ticket, and Ukip had no policy other than getting out of Europe and stopping immigration (thankfully - that party appears to be dead in the water).
Racism in Britain tends to be largely passive, only surfacing at ties of hardship and recession.
The worrying thing is that racism appears to be hardening, particularly against immigrants
During my lifetime Britain was accepting refugees from Europe who were fleeing Nazism - now many seem happy to see dead refugee children carried from the sea and still refuse to recognise the plight of people that we have helped to cause
You want an immediate example - go look up the sharp rise in racist incidents following Brexit
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 12:58 PM

Oooh. Jim, Just the man! Would you care to join me in demonstrating how we can disagree without rancour and even have strong words without them leading to a war of attrition?

If I was to say to you that your comments about the British being racist are in themselves a racist statement, how would you react? Oh, and you may want to confirm that this is unplanned, unrehearsed and we have had no private contact.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 12:45 PM

"Don't worry Keith they will never intimidate you while the rest of the forum watches their atrocious behaviour."
From an extremely safe distance in your case Ake
Have you no courage to back up your claims
Keith chooses to expose himself as a bigot and a liar - perhaps you might help him out rather than cheering him on from the safety and comfort of the sidelines
No?
Thought not
Not your style
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 12:43 PM

Ake Dave is just being his twisted trolling self, denying what he himself posted......the creature has no shame.

Once again you post stuff that to anyone with half a brain is ludicrous. I suggest you post examples of me denying what I posted or it becomes apparent that you are making it up again. Unless of course it is some sort of demonstration to keep your job as village idiot. In which case, feel free to carry on until you get the thread closed. Again.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 12:43 PM

There was a large number of "Traveller" families in our area during the last few decades (West of Scotland). I work extensively throughout the area and never once saw such a sign.

Most of these "travellers" have now taken up residence in Social housing, since the closure of their encampment...which has been discussed here some time ago.

I have never seen a "No Travellers" sign anywhere in Scotland.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 12:37 PM

Absolutely, Keith. Jim and I have had this conversation many a time and always remained on civil terms. I think he understands that when I disagree with him it is only from th epoint of view of my experience and I always accept that the experience of others may be different. I have said, twice now but as you seem to be ignoring it I will try a third time, that to those looking out for them, such as travelers, they will be more common than they should be. Unlike you who insist that they do not exist at all.

In one of the posts you have copied you have emboldened some passages. We all know by now that your understanding of what I intend is flawed at best so your emphasis is entirely driven by your agenda. Whatver that may be. Also, you have not highlighted the following

Yet I am still willing to accept the premise that they are more common than they should be and, were I a traveler, I would notice them more.

This is the reason that you rub people up the wrong way, Keith. You are so insistent that your view is the only one that is right. I have, as you have clearly demonstrated, been willing to listen to others and accept their point of view even when it is outside my experience. On rare occasions even you have some valid points and, when you do, I said so as you demonstrate.

As to anyone being racist, yes, anyone who tars an entire nationality with a particular trait is being racist and I have said the same to Jim many a time. Yet we have remained friendly and civil about it. You may want to ask yourself why. If you like you can ask Jim as well and he will tell you the same.

But I doubt you will.

So much for your 'little gang' theory as well eh?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 12:25 PM

"it is a fact that they are not common."
Then why have documents like The Anti Discrimination Legislation described them not only as common, but still existing as acceptable iscrimination.
I don't give a shit that you or whoever have not seen them - how many of these people have worked with travellers
So far, your entire defence of your bigotry is that you have never seen them - nothing else.
You've had a small section of the large number of links dealing with these signs - you refuse even to acknowledge them
Are you thick enough to believe that one sign on one pub makes me a liar
Perhaps you might address what Dave has written
"It is not a lie, Keith. I said "to travellers who do see the signs they are more common than they should be". What is so difficult to understand? You are right. Jim is right. "
Is he a liar too?
"Here he also says that you are "racist" and plain stupid."
One of your nastiest traits on this forum is to try to set one member against the other - you are a truly appalling individual
That is exactly what makes you the racist and dishonest bigot that you are
You reject other peoples findings because it doesn't fit your bigoted agenda.
I ask you again to have the good manners to address the links put up - are they lying - are they mistaken - did I invent them..... what?
The same with your incredible stupid and arrogant statement about "politics not religion".
You have been given examples of the anti catholic motivation of the "sectarian" marches (the clue is in the title - not left or right, but catholic and protestant) yet you dismiss the fact that the dispute in the North is religion driven.
I have pointed out in the past when discussing Ireland, that I com from an Irish background, I have a lifelong interest in Ireland and I've seen the results of the Catholic/Protestant divide first hand.
I even have family who were driven out of Derry after having their home burnt over their heads because they were the "wrong" religion.
You are a mindless, arrogant and extremely bigoted individual - they most extreme I have ever encountered.
This is over - you stand convicted of your lying bigotry
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 12:20 PM

Talking about rare, you make a big thing of hate crime against Jews then say that rape affects only a tiny proportion of people. Rape and sexual assault in the US affects 238 times as many people as hate crime affects Jews. In the light of this, I'm having difficulty getting my head round your concepts of tiny, uncommon and rare. There appears to be a degree of elasticity around them that, shall we say, doesn't exactly inspire one with confidence.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 12:14 PM

Well good to see the gang are running true to form.

Steve compares the number of sexual offences against ALL women in the US with the number of hate crimes against Jews.....typical idiocy.
I suppose he will plead ignorance and he HAS grounds, but on this occasion I think desperation is nearer the mark.

Dave is just being his twisted trolling self, denying what he himself posted......the creature has no shame.

Don't worry Keith they will never intimidate you while the rest of the forum watches their atrocious behaviour.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 12:00 PM

Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 02:10 PM

Nobody has proffered the information as to what contact they have had with Travellers, whether they have spoken to any of them, whether they live in the proximity of a Travellers site, whether Travellers move through their area regularly; just that they have not personally seen them - no context, no background information, just that.

Very disingenuous of you Jim. For the record I proffered the information that not only was there a Gypsy site in proximity of the Morning Star but that my Uncle had close dealings with the travelers themselves. But, in case you missed that, I can also update and add to that.

There is a travelers site not 10 minutes walk from where I live - here. and plenty of support for the traveling people from our community. My local is one of the nearest pubs to the site but there at least a dozen or more others in close proximity and not one of them has ever turned a traveler away let alone had such a notice.

Over the years I have traveled the length and breadth of the country myself - Not stopping in a caravan but hotels and B&Bs for my job and I always make sure I visit a local pub and, if possible , try the local ale. I estimate that I must have visited upwards of 500 pubs over the years and never seen such a thing. I can only comment about the proximity to traveling communities where I know, as I have said, but in my mind such notices are not common.

Yet I am still willing to accept the premise that they are more common than they should be and, were I a traveler, I would notice them more. You, however, seem to be working on the basis that if it does not fit with your dogma than it must be wrong. You will not commit to a figure that is agreed as common - 1%? 10%? 20%? What? The only evidence you provide is anecdotal and hearsay and yet everyone that disagrees with you is a racist bigot! Come on, man. Give it up. I know it sticks in your throat but this time Keith is right.

Oh, and you never did supply the responses you promised after my last note.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 11:55 AM

Here he also says that you are "racist" and plain stupid.

Nooooooh, really...............lolololol!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 11:48 AM

Jim,
You defend the signs by saying tehy are not common

That is not defending them, and it is a fact that they are not common.

Dave said he had only ever in his whole life seen a "travellers welcome" sign (on a pub) and never a "no travellers" sign.

Here he also says that you are "racist" and plain stupid.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 12:24 PM

I can honestly say that I have heard of such things but only ever seen the exact reverse. On the door of the 'Morning Star', Wardley, some 20-30 years back there was a big sign saying 'Travellers Welcome'! There was a temporary camp on the 'Moss' at the side of the Star and the landlord made so much cash during the time it was there he managed to retire early!

All anecdotal and personal experience of couse and, therefore, completely invalid in this so called argument.

What is neither anecdotal nor personal to me is the obvious fact that someone here is a racist. Anyone who can tar the whole Brotish nation as racist based on the acts of a small mimority is applying th every stereotypes he reckons he is so against.

Ironic? No. Just plain stupid.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 10:54 AM

We use a couple of farm shops round here occasionally. They tend to be uncheap as they cater for the tourist trade a fair bit. We had a good rare breeds farm that sold his own meat but it went years ago. There are some organic farms that sell meat round here but their stuff costs an arm and a leg, and their arms, legs and shoulders can be a bit on the titchy side. I like big hunks of meat only for roasting. Free-range chickens that weigh at least two kilos, shoulders of lamb on the bone no less than six or seven pounds, that sort of thing. Our butcher produces superb lamb and beef on his own farm, not pork unfortunately. I like long, slow cooking except for chickens. I never weigh joints of meat before I cook 'em. After last night's superb chops we're going veggie tonight, chitarra pasta with tomatoes, rocket and chilli. Just off to work on that hole now. Gotta smash up some stuff for hardcore and riddle some chippings to get the soil out. then I'm watching Man City vs Liverpool. I'll have earned a glass or four of that lovely Morrisons Signature Nero d'Avola after all that. Have you 'ad a word yet, Dave? Up the reds!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 07:26 AM

Bit of light relief to brighten your day, Steve. After mentioning Booth's earlier I also realised that we have a farm shop very close by that does lots of good stuff. On that tack I thought I would look up stuff around your area and found https://www.cornwalls.co.uk/food/farmers

They may all be crap and you may have tried them already but for speciality meats and the like would they be worth a try?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 07:18 AM

"Steve,
So tiny a proportion of the populations of countries mentioned, according to your stats, Keith, that I have to wonder what the song and dance is about"

Hate crime effects a tiny proportion Steve, and so does rape.

It is still a serious issue worthy of serious concern.
You only suggest dismissing it because the main victims are Jews.
You did not make that argument when hate crimes against EU citizens following Brexit were discussed here, or when Islamophobic crimes have been discussed.

173,610 victims of rape or sexual assault, US, (2013)

730 victims of hate crime of an anti-Jewish nature, US, (2015)

Would you now care to review your exceptionally ignorant comment about rape? And I haven't "dismissed" anything. I've said at least twice that all hate crime is an abomination. What a disgraceful post, even by your gutter standards.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 07:05 AM

It is a simple lie to claim that they "are common throughout Britain"

It is not a lie, Keith. I said "to travellers who do see the signs they are more common than they should be". What is so difficult to understand? You are right. Jim is right. Maybe I should add different perspectives to my mantra?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 06:21 AM

You defend the signs by saying tehy are not common
Unless you cross posted you are still defending those signs by saying they are not common
Would you like to comment on the statements you have been offered or do you suggest that those who say they are common are lying?
I claim no deep knowledge of Traveller experience but thirty years gives me an insight you don't have - nor, I suggest, does most people
Why do you continue to insist that they are uncommon when the evidence proves they are not- unless you are a bigot?
Jim Carrroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 06:06 AM

You said you never saw the signs

So did Dave, and every one else on that old thread.
It is a simple lie to claim that they "are common throughout Britain" and a blatant lie to say that I defended such signs.
If it is not a lie, QUOTE ME SAYING IT!!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 05:41 AM

More denials and attempts to open up new arguments Keith - just as I predicted
You said you never saw the signs - I say Pat and I worked with travellers for thirty years, we saw hundreds, I photographed dozens as part of a campaign run by a London solicitor who was voluntarily working on behalf of the Travellers, we included one in our CD notes, you were given articles about court cases involving them - presumably you still insist that they are rare and that I have lied which makes you the bigot you are
I don't suppose for one moment you will apologise for any of this -you are a bigot andf your behaviour proves beyind doubt that you have lied
Jim Carroll

This is a tiny sample of reports of these signs - plenty more to choose from and far too numerous to blue clickie
Since John Major repealed the Caravan and Camping act leaving Travellers with no right to stop other than the totally inadequate handful of official stopping places, and since the spitefulness of Dale Farm, things have not improved, if anything, they have deteriorated under governments that favour the wealthy rather than the needy - thanks to bigots like Keith

https://hospitalitylaw.co.uk/large-awards-for-travellers-refused-entry-to-pubs/

http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/Operators/Other-operators/Pub-manager-sacked-for-no-travelers-sign


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2086098/Ice-rink-accused-inciting-racial-hatred-putting-sign-banning-travellers.html

http://travellerstimes.org.uk/Blogs--Features/No-Travellers-No-More-say-lawyers-.aspx

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/jd-wetherspoon-to-pay-travellers-over-refused-service-in-london-1.2872396

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/114652/Racial-warning-for-jeweller-who-banned-gypsies-from-shop

http://www.bbc.co.uk/kent/voices/prejudice.shtml

From Wrexham Borough Council document 'Making Links'
10. Prejudice
The Commission for Racial Equality report 'Common Ground' 2006 identified widespread evidence of public hostility in Britain towards Gypsy and Irish Travellers. Examples included:
• Illegal 'No Travellers' signs in shops and pubs;
• Gypsy and Irish Travellers experiencing great difficulty in getting planning permission for private sites;
• Gypsy and Irish Traveller children being bullied and harassed at schools by other pupils; and
• Growing numbers of reports of racist graffiti and attacks.

From
"British Anti-Discrimination Legislation and its Protection for Gypsies and Travellers"
'…Gypsies and Travellers are still experiencing
discrimination of the most overt kind:
'No blacks, no Irish, no dogs' signs
disappeared decades ago, but the 'No Travellers' signs,
used intentionally to exclude Gypsies and Travellers,
are widespread indicating that discrimination against these groups
remains the last 'respectable' form of racism in the UK.'
Legal Action Group (2004)