BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

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

While I was typing, Steve has made another post.

Nothing about any of the issues, just another comment about me.
That is what we have to expect now on Mudcat if we dare say anything without their approval.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 19 Jul 17 - 02:47 PM

Just calling her a prat is an inadequate response.......

It is the equivalent of saying about Adolph........"oh, he was just a prat".

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Jul 17 - 03:16 PM

But I never said anyone was 'just a prat' did I poobad? Remember. Just half a dozen posts ago?

From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 19 Jul 17 - 01:57 PM
...
Again, I never quoted you as saying "just."
That was my word for your position.


So, there you have in black and white, from Keith himself. I never said anyone was just a prat. That was Keith's (mis)interpretation.

Good job that some people don't actually read what is going on isn't it Keith. If no one read it then you would get away with things like

From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 18 Jul 17 - 03:56 AM

(Quote from me) When your so called evidence is questioned you cry abuse and bullying.

(Your response) If I have ever done that, QUOTE ME DOING IT, LIAR!

Followed closely by

From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 19 Jul 17 - 01:50 PM

...
This is just a pedantic vendetta by a gang of would be bullies to try to discredit me because you have no answer to my actual case.

And

From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 19 Jul 17 - 01:57 PM
...
Just pedantic nit picking because you have no reply to my actual case.
A nasty would be bully who will tolerate alternative views being expressed.

No wonder decent people will not express political views on this forum.
They know the will be hounded by a whole gang of bullies if they dare to antagonise any one of them.

But unfortunately for you people do read what is being said and what is more they can remember what happened more than 2 posts back.

You are quite right, Steve. You couldn't make it up :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Jul 17 - 05:25 PM

The only person who wants to make this about you, Keith, is you. That much is clear/blatant.

It's Adolf, boobs, not Adolph. Do try to at least get your friends' names right if nothing else. 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 03:42 AM

Dave,
But I never said anyone was 'just a prat' did I poobad?

No. I said it about you and you objected.
But it was a fair comment.
You said she was a prat, but nothing more. Just a Prat.
You equated Shah with Morris, who used one offensive and unacceptable word in an otherwise innocuous statement while Shah spoke of "Jews rallying" and advocated the final cleansing of Jews from the Middle East!
Appalling, blatant racism which you appear not to take seriously.
Do you even acknowledge it?
Both Steve and Jim deny it is anti-Semitic at all!
You of course never actually commit yourself.

When your so called evidence is questioned you cry abuse and bullying.

But none of you could question the evidence.
My "so called evidence" was quotes from Shah herself, BBC, Guardian and all Parties including Labour.
Instead you went for me personally.
Not that I care. Not for myself anyway. I get off on standing up to bullying intimidation. That's why I am always taking you people on.
I recognise your defeat when you abandon all pretence at argument and resort to personal attack.

I do not "cry abuse and bullying" as part of my case or in defence of myself. Quote me if I ever have, liar.

But you people are destroying debate on this forum. That is why I highlight it.
We used to get all shades of opinion on political threads before they were dominated by you bullies.
Now people stay away because normal decent people, unlike me, do not want to be subject to personal abuse by a whole gang of nasty bullies.

Steve,
The only person who wants to make this about you, Keith, is you.
Blatant lie.
I always object to you attacking me instead of my arguments.
All your attempts to smear me as a person by misrepresenting things said in unrelated, years old threads.
The accusations.
The name calling.
I seek none of it and always object to it, only to have Dave say I "cry abuse and bullying."
I do not.
I just object to it. I want to discuss the issues not defend myself from all your smears.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 04:10 AM

Just to annoy you all, let's return to the actual discussion.
Shah advocated the transportation of the Jews from Israel, but Steve said it was a lie and me a liar.

I quoted the Guardian, BBC and Shah herself saying she did.
I was right and Steve was wrong.
Steve produced nothing but a series of personal attacks falsely accusing me of lies. Nothing on the actual issue.

Have any of you found anything yet?
Steve?
Dave?
Greg?
Jim?
Rag?

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

More excuses, word twisting and wriggling from the master. No more to say. You have shown yourself up over and over again, Keith. Feel free to continue but I don't think I need to do any more to demonstrate what you are like. If you are so insecure that you feel the need to 'win' something I can compliment you on your mastery in making things seem other than they are. Most can see though it but you are really very good at it.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 05:51 AM

Just personal stuff aimed at me and as usual, and as usual not a word about the issue.

Do you have anything to support Steve's assertion that it is all a lie and me a liar Dave?

Any of you?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 07:02 AM

All three of your posts this morning are - guess what - all about you, Keith. 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 08:06 AM

Keith, they are ideologues, ideologues don't discuss issues that challenge their ideologies they simply reject any fact that doesn't fit their internal belief system and turn on anyone who dares oppose it. Very little difference them and religious zealots.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 08:09 AM

The number assigned to this post (unless some swine swoops in with a quick bit of cross-posting) is the same as the height as Scafell in feet. Now that is, at long last, something interesting in this thread.

Or is it Scafell Pike...🤔

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 08:10 AM

Damn. But how appropriate! 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 10:51 AM

Er ........ professor, could you point to my definition of "shameless" I can't recall posting such.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 11:35 AM

My favourite mountain of all the UK ones I've climbed is The Saddle in Kintail which is 3310 feet. I'll remember that when we get to post 3309 in this thread, then I'll bag it (what you call being an armchair Munro-bagger). That is, unless some swinish prat blatantly gets in before me again.

Or is it Penyghent... 🤔

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 11:40 AM

An Orca Killer Whale was washed up on the shore close by a couple of day ago. Local opinion seem to be that more Orcas are need to control the seal population which is devastating he fishing locally.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 11:49 AM

Penyghent is my all time favourite but the height (2,277 ) was passed by the count of this thread long ago. Drove past it today! It's Mrs G's birthday and I also picked up my new old car this morning - Another C-Max. We had a lovely drive out up Wharfedale then down Bishopsdale to West Burton. Contemplated going via Hubberhome and Langsthrothdale but I really fancied lunch at the White Lion just so we went via the lower road instead. Never been in before. Lovely pub. Food was quite expensive but well worth it. Went up Wensleydale to Hawes. Had a mooch round there including calling in my favourite village store - Elijah Allans - Then back via Ribblehead, Horton (hence Penyghent) and Settle. I would highly recommend it to anyone suffering from PMD (Post Mudcat Disorder)

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 12:01 PM

For village shops try Hunters in Hemsley, a FABULOUS shop, I spend a small fortune every time I visit.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 12:44 PM

Ha!
Silence from all of them on the actual issue.
They have no argument, and never did.
They just tried to dominate the discussion with false personal accusations and bullying again, but this time, they failed.

Let's try again.
Shah advocated the transportation of the Jews from Israel, but Steve said it was a lie and me a liar.
I quoted the Guardian, BBC and Shah herself saying she did.
Do any of you have anything to say in support of Steve's claim.



(Rag, I can't recall you defining "shameless" or anyone saying you did.
Anything on the actual issue Rag?)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 03:25 PM

Having spent the day in one of the most beautiful of places I know we were pretty much on a high when we got back. Should I go to the gym? Nah. We had a walk through the local woods (Lyndhurst Wood)) ending up in our local for a couple of drinks. The Black Sheep bitter in there is to die for. Back home for a simple tea of assorted cheeses with various chutneys on toasted Polish bread. Yum!

I must say I do feel sorry for Keith but I will soon get over it I suppose.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 06:30 PM

What a great drive, Dave. God's own country. I've been hacking at my overgrown hedges for two days and getting big shoulder muscles. Looking good though.

What was that again, Keith? 🤠

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Jul 17 - 09:20 PM

I have Wainwright's Pennine Way Companion and I've never forgotten what he said about Penyghent after his oft-tedious journey from Edale to the Dales: "A real mountain at last!"

The first time I went up Penyghent was with Vicar Shaw of Oldham, no relation, one of the finest field botanists who ever lived. He was 77 by then. When I was in my twenties he was a good friend of mine and, a damn sight more famously, was a friend of Roy Lancaster. I had the good fortune to meet Roy a few years ago and we had a great banter about our reminiscences of Vicar Shaw. A year or so later, Roy made a lovely half-hour Radio 4 programme about the vicar which, to my chagrin, I failed to record. The time we went up Penyghent, Vicar Shaw was after one thing only, the sight of Saxifraga oppositifolia, the purple saxifrage. It's an arctic-Alpine flower that's rare in England though slightly commoner in Scotland. Its location on the limestone cliffs high on Penyghent is famous. You have to go in April or May to see the gorgeous rosy purple flowers. The vicar was amazingly fit for a 77-year-old and easily made it to the cliffs. He spent a good few minutes in private admiring the saxifrage and taking pictures. We were only a short step from the summit and eventually I asked him if he was coming to the top with us for the view. "What the bloody 'ell do I want to do that for! I've seen what I've come to see and I'll see you lot in the car park!"

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 03:46 AM

Another post about me Dave.

You raised the case of Shah and have no regrets, but you will not say if you think her comments were anti-Semitic or not!

The anti-Semitic nature of her comments are recognised by Shah herself and all the Parties including her own Labour Party, but not by Steve.
Where do you stand Dave?

Steve,
What was that again, Keith?

Shah advocated the transportation of the Jews from Israel, but you said it was a lie and called me a liar for referring to it.
I quoted the Guardian, BBC and Shah herself saying she did.
Do you have anything to say in support of your claim and accusation?

You have a record for making claims and assertions you can not justify.
Is this another?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 04:46 AM

No, but I wish Dave wouldn't make baseless assertions about mountain heights. According to my map, drawn up by a living cartographer and bought in a reputable mapshop, Penyghent is 2273 feet, not 2277. He's added four feet. Dave, you're NOT supposed to include your own height as you're standing on top. You lose.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 05:13 AM

Nice one Steve :-D

Where do you stand Dave?

I though that was pretty bleedin' obvious. I like to stand at the top of Penyghent :-)

I have come to the conclusion that there is no point in making any comments about anything that Keith is involved in. Any comments that disagree with his already set mind will be ignored, called lies or twisted to suit his agenda. If anything like that is mentioned, the second line of defense is to call everyone who disagrees bullies with shitty moralities who are just getting at him. Makes a mockery of any decent discussion.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 05:26 AM

I'll claim 3560, a figure I found for Snowdon, I have walked up that one (probably up the railway track and down the miners track). Mountain walking was never particularly my thing but Pip (mum) was very keen. I believe she knew the Peak District well and used to hitch from Brum where she trained as a physio (before I was born) and stop at places like Edale. If she could pick her own "God's country" though, it would be the Carneddau

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 05:34 AM

Next one to be reached will be Ben Vorlich at 3232.

Good game and we can do it in Metres for the earlier posts!

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 05:59 AM

If you will not comment on the issue, why do you people come to the thread at all?

If you have no opinion, or are afraid to express one, why post here?

It appears that your motive is just to dominate the thread and stop certain views being expressed, by bullying and intimidation.

As Joe said, you are "bullies who dominate almost every political thread here."

Steve, can you support your view that her comments were not anti-Semitic, and calling me a liar over it?

Dave, where do you stand on Shah's comments? Do you agree with Steve, or with Shah herself and the political parties including her own, the Labour party?

If you refuse to speak, will you at least tell us what you are afraid of?
What is your problem?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 06:02 AM

See post of 21 Jul 17 - 05:13 AM

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 06:11 AM

Dave, there is no reason given there for your refusing to state your view.
Do you agree with Steve or not?
Why won't you tell us?
Claiming to be afraid of what I might say is hardly convincing, and if you do not want to debate, why post at all?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 06:26 AM

See post of 21 Jul 17 - 05:13 AM

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 07:25 AM

You're making a tit of yourself, Keith. Perhaps the Pap of Glencoe, on the slopes of which my brother claimed that he lost his virginity.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 07:29 AM

I did Dave.
As I said, there is no reason given there for your refusing to state your view.

Your gang is dominating the thread with its presence while refusing to enter discussion.
Your excuse that you are afraid of me is pathetic.

Your group behaviour is not conducive to friendly discussion on this forum. I hope someone is taking note of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 08:32 AM

Keith

As I said, there is no reason given there for your refusing to state your view.

That is a perfect example of my description. My exact words in case you really did miss them are

I have come to the conclusion that there is no point in making any comments about anything that Keith is involved in. Any comments that disagree with his already set mind will be ignored, called lies or twisted to suit his agenda. If anything like that is mentioned, the second line of defense is to call everyone who disagrees bullies with shitty moralities who are just getting at him. Makes a mockery of any decent discussion.

A perfectly good reason to not state my view. In this case you have ignored it.

And damn you - You got to Ben Vorlich :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 09:24 AM

Who needs to worry about what politicians said when we have wonders like this to behold

Heavy rain brings Long Gill, near Ingleton, back to life

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 09:33 AM

I'm curious of the name Penyghent. Perhaps I'll look it up further (other than briefly finding it is Yorkshire dales and a Wiki article which suggests Cumbric) but the name would otherwise to me look Welsh (I don't speak it, only know a few words) or at least pen y would amount to "top of the". Wiki suggests "ghent" as similar to "gwynt" so "top of the wind". How do those of you who have walked there read it?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 09:50 AM

I believe it's a mystery, and I've read about that Welsh suggestion before. Another thing is that I always write it as a single word, unhyphenated. At one time the Ordnance Survey got into hot water for adding a superfluous "hill" after the name.

Nearby there's another favourite of mine that's a "Pen-," namely Pendle. I believe that it's incorrect to refer to it as Pendle Hill.

Anyway, they're both lovely and they're both in God's own country!

What group behaviour, Keith? We're all rugged individuals here!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 10:22 AM

Dave, it was you who raised the issue of Shah on the thread again.
You have no reason for refusing to state, yes or no, if you think Shah's comments were ant-Semitic.

No-one could twist that, so you are being dishonest about your reason for not doing so.

It is not that you do not want to discuss it. You could just stay away.
It is because you do not want it discussed.

Your presence here in force is to deter anyone who might want to.

Your tactics are despicable and I hope it is being noted by someone and something done to save the forum from you domineering bullies.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 10:53 AM

I always understood Penyghent to mean 'hill of wind'. Which it certainly is after a night at the Golden Lion in Horton.

Keith - I have told you my reason. That you refuse to accept it is neither here nor there. Furthermore, after my road to Domestos moment at 21 Jul 17 - 05:13 AM, I think we will fare a lot better if I do not discuss anything of importance with you again. But I am more than happy to talk about my beloved Yorkshire Dales if you like.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 11:09 AM

Keith 10......the Gang of bullies Nil.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 11:13 AM

Oh dear. Looks you've got a mountain to climb with us lot now, Keith. Hope you're not have a fit of peak over it. If it's not one thing it's summit else with you.



Whaddam I like! 🤡

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 12:59 PM

I really hope someone is someone is noting some of the responses and will take action as well, Keith. How does it feel to only have ake in your corner?

Steve, I hope you are not going to slope off after that posting? I thought down in your neck of the woods you would have been tor-n between posting it and reaching your pinnacle first.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 01:05 PM

OK, I know the sun's been strong but I don't want to hear any jokes about Brown Willy...

Anyway, I must take a shower now as Mrs Steve is complaining that MacGillycuddy reeks...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 01:21 PM

Interesting to hear that this mild, gentle bit of harmless and non-combative thread-drift is being put down to a gang of domineering bullies (especially when you consider that Keith's currently-missing regular ally is Teribus 😂). Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. In any case, none of this amounts to a hill of beans. Definitely not what you'd call over the top. I reckon Keith needs to seek alp.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 01:26 PM

Dave,
Keith - I have told you my reason. That you refuse to accept it is neither here nor there.

Of course I do not believe it. No-one would!
It makes no sense and is unbelievable.
Do you believe her comments anti-Semitic, yes or no?
How can that be " ignored, called lies or twisted?"

It can not be.
You are being dishonest.

It is not that you do not want to discuss it. You could just stay away.
It is because you do not want it discussed by anyone.

Your presence here in force is to deter anyone who might want to.

Your tactics are despicable and I hope it is being noted by someone and something done to save the forum from you domineering bullies.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 01:30 PM

Had a great last night in a bar right on the West coast, you can see the Atlantic from the window, you can't miss it, it's just across the lane.

The landlord Ritchie is a great guy, plays Guitar, Banjo, Mandolin and sings all very well, his good lady Bernie is a delight, there was Eugene on Box (very, very good) Eamonn on Bodhran, me and my good lady on guitar and vocals, a couple from Huddersfield both on Guitar and vocals, another English lass on vocals .........

I think we left there about 2 in the morning !!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 01:32 PM

Has anyone else noticed there is an echo on this thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 02:22 PM

Face it, Keith. If everyone who no longer wanted to discuss it with you stayed away, you'd be talking to yourself. You're a forum pest, Keith. You've flogged your dead horse for so long that it's probably thoroughly tenderised by now. It's boring, Keith. There's a lot to discuss about politics. But your sick obsession with non-existent Labour antisemitism is belly-up. Gone to meet its maker. Dead in the water. Gone to join the choir invisible. Rung down the final curtain. It's an ex-topic, Keith. This is a late issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 06:02 PM

I am just not prepared to discuss anything with a devious sociopath who will stop at nothing to win imagined points. Is that clear enough?

I don't think it is an echo, Raggy. Someone farting maybe?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 06:30 PM

Farting? Maybe he tried to eat that hill of beans...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 06:50 PM

O dear... I'd best stay out after this and will attempt to do so but to try to get back on purely the OT drit...

A question for those who like Penyghent. Is is quiet?

I ask this as I mentioned Snowdon and my mothers preference for a particular section of Snowdonia. I guess reasons could include easy access (in crude terms, from our then Conwy/Llandudno area, just drive down the right side of the river a bit, turn right and you could, eg, be in Cwm Egiau) but one big one was that it was quiet. Snowdon literally had trainloads of people but I believe some of her walks were of the type, at least then, where you might only meet a couple of others in a day.