BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 03:40 PM

"Jim, you are over-reacting to an ironic reference to Travellers being over-represented in recent slavery cases."
You are a pair of racist scumbags and I'm grateful for the opportunity of showing you what you are
Bye---eeee
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 03:06 PM

Jim, you are over-reacting to an ironic reference to Travellers being over-represented in recent slavery cases.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 02:27 PM

"Sorry Jim but it was you who suggested that they adopted a low profile wrt the police because they knew they were acting illegally -"
And I specified exactly why
You are a racist twat and I'm grateful that you put this discussion into context
Must contact Fred West's neighbours and tell them they are all serial killers.
Mustn't keep you from your cross burning
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 02:01 PM

Sorry Jim but it was you who suggested that they adopted a low profile wrt the police because they knew they were acting illegally - NOT ME.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 05:23 AM

As you claim not to be a racist, can I assume that you dissociate yourself from Teribus's attempts to smear the Travelling community with the actions of a criminal group?
No?
Thought not!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 05:18 AM

Jim,

You are making a meal of this Keith and refusing to respond to all the other articles

No need. If they really were "common throughout Britain" we who live here would have seen one.
We still haven't.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 04:22 AM

You are making a meal of this Keith and refusing to respond to all the other articles -proof enough of your obsessive and dishonest hatred campaign in support of one of the most common forms of prejudice againt Travellers
Your mate joins you in attempting to smear Travellers with the actions of one criminal Traveller family
AArguing with you pair conjures up a pictire of hooded man and burning crosses.
Youa are a pair of blatant racists - and people with some authority on the forum wonder why I argue with you!!
The pair of you make me sick
Jim Carroll
This - from a review of our double album of Traveller songs by Geoff Wallis, issued bu Musical Traditions - the review is sitll available on their site

"It may be 2003, but the window of a pub just a couple of hundred yards from my front door still carries the sign 'Travellers by Appointment Only' and they don't mean salespeople from the snacks industry. In many other ways, however, the lives of Irish travellers in England have changed substantially since Jim Carroll and Pat Mackenzie made these recordings of their songs and stories between 1973 and 1985 (with the assistance of Denis Turner). As the collectors note, the ready availability of the portable television was already sounding the death knell for the fireside gatherings at which many of these songs were passed on."

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 03:22 AM

If the sign "Travellers Strictly by appointment" did not result in a prosecution by the CPS then it surely cannot be illegal.

The CPS can decide not to prosecute for any number of reasons as I am sure you know.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 03:14 AM

Jim,
Nowhere does he say he has never seen one - you made that up

It is ludicrous to suggest he had seen other examples and not mentioned it in that article.

If they really were "common throughout Britain" we who live here would have seen one.
We still haven't.

Rag, I doubt that travellers haul their caravans behind them to the pub.
"Hobby" is just a large German manufacturer of large caravans. Your signs refer to sites. Recreational sites are not all suitable as stopping places for travellers who will often want to run their businesses from the site.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Mar 17 - 02:22 AM

Keeping a low profile and not drawing police attention to yourself also becomes quite essential when you are engaged in human trafficking and slavery too Jim.

By the way Jim, if you put those signs up on your CD cover doesn't that make you as guilty as the landlord?

If the sign "Travellers Strictly by appointment" did not result in a prosecution by the CPS then it surely cannot be illegal. It is still the right of the Licencee to serve who he wishes to serve as he/she and he/she alone is responsible for his/her "house" being orderly.

I think the only signs ever seen restricting who could go into a pub concerned people wearing "team colours". Never ever seen one concerning Travellers - so not so common at all then Jim, and Keith's logic in relation the Traveller's priest is flawless.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 02:49 PM

Whatneeds to be remembered here is that because of the acute shortage of stopping places in Britain most Travellers live on the fringes of the law and rely on keeping a low profile because they are forced to camp illegally.
It is highly unlikely that Travellers will report discriminating pub landlords to the police for fear of drawing attention to themselves being stopped illegally - it is this that maked the Weatherspoon's case both unique and groundbreaking
Pretending that these notices don't exist really have repercussions far beyond being refused service.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 02:33 PM

The tricjk has become 'Travellers by appointment only" THere's a sign saying this to the notes of our Traveller CD on Musical Traditions)
Another is not to refuse them entry but to ignore then when they try to buy a drink
In Bristol, they put the signs inside the bar so they can't be sptted outside
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 02:13 PM

I refer you to signs saying "NO HOBBY CARAVANS"

Thankfully today people would be prosecuted if they displayed a sign saying "NO TRAVELLERS" although given that the CPS choose not to prosecute in the case cited by Jim that is not guarenteed.

Simply saying "NO HOBBY CARAVANS" is sufficient to deter travellers from trying to use a site but stays within the law.

Same meaning just different wording.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 12:59 PM

"That makes it clear and obvious he had not seen one before.!No it does not
He is a prison chaplain for Travellers - he is bound to be aware of them
He merely expresses his surprise to see one openly displayed in central London now thet=y are illegal - a relatively new thing
Nowhere does he say he has never seen one - you made that up
Your whole defence of these has been a confused string of lies from start to finish
You say you are not denying that they existed yoe you write
"How can they be common if no-one has ever seen them except a well known Mudcat liar?"
If you don't deny them why accuse me of making them up?
You are a squalid racist Keith - Travellers are only one of your targets.
Nasty little man
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 12:54 PM

He goes on to say,
"I was surprised that in multi-cultural London a sign like that could remain in the open for some time"

It is not his experience that "No Traveller signs are common throughout Britain."

He was "surprised" to see one.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 12:50 PM

"Yes, and in all his life he only saw one sign."
Does he say that - must have missed that one.

You missed this.
"You couldn't get away with putting up signs like that now.
That's what I thought." ....until he saw that sign.
That makes it clear and obvious he had not seen one before.

You have provided conclusive proof that such signs are not "common throughout Britain" as you stated.
Thanks again.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 11:36 AM

"Yes, and in all his life he only saw one sign."
Does he say that - must have missed that one.
You have had masses of information and you nit-pick on someone who reportd seeing a sign to the police who, contrary to your excuse, did nothing bout it.
Your only defence of these signs is that yo have never seen one - pathetic even by your pathetic standards.
The longer you continue defending these signs, the more you confirm both your racism and your dishonesty in claiming you are not defending them
You lie whan you claim you are not doubting their existence - what is this if it is not casting doubt on their existence "If they exist at all"
Or comparing them to malarial mosquito
This is the second thread on which you have defended this racist shit - you produced nothing but "I haven't seen one in the past and you have produced nothing now
Face it Keith - you are a bigoted racist and one sick cookie
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 11:19 AM

Jim,
"He would be highly aware of discrimination issues involving Trvellers, and must have been working with them for some time."
In other words he knew what he was talking about because he knew Travellers and worked with them

Yes, and in all his life he only saw one sign.
Conclusive proof that they are not "common throughout Britain!"
Thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 11:15 AM

Butter Pie for us tonight, a recipe I learnt from my Grandmother.

Thinly slice and softly cook onions, par boil sliced potatoes and when cool layer them up on a pastry base, potatoes, onions, salt pepper, butter, potatoes, onions, salt, pepper, butter and finally potatoes, cover with a crust and bake.

Grandmother did it because it was cheap, I do it because I love it.

I suppose the addition of a touch of cream or creme fraiche could enhance it but my Grandmother was a fantastic cook and if the original was good enough for her it's good enough for me.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 05:52 AM

I do know that you take an interest in such things, as witness this discussion

A passing interest. No more. Far more interested in things that matter like food, drink and the beauty all around us than in discussing politics with people who will never agree and who speak a different language.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 04:49 AM

"That's what I thought. Or really, what I thought was that nobody, even if they were racist, would be stupid enough to erect signs like that and attract the attention of the police.
I was wrong. And I was wrong on two counts. Firstly, because there are people stupid enough to put up the signs. Secondly, because I assumed that the police and the CPS would pursue these people under race relations legislation."
From the same article

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 04:45 AM

"He would be highly aware of discrimination issues involving Trvellers, and must have been working with them for some time."
In other words he knew what he was talking about because he knew Travellers and worked with them
You do neither and you don't see the signs - I wonder why!!
This is the first time you have responded to a single piece of evidence on this subject, and that is to dismiss it out of hand
You have no comment that despite your claims that anybody putting up signs would be "in a heap of trouble" - the police did nothing
You are making unqualified assumptions on one case and still refusing to comment on the rest
You area a racist, you have always been a racist and you always will be a racist
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 04:25 AM

Dave,
How do you think Labour will do Dave?
Why ask me? Do I look like a pollster?

I do not know what you or pollsters look like.
I do know that you take an interest in such things, as witness this discussion, and thought you might have formed an opinion on Labour's
current popularity.

Leading opposition parties usually do well in such elections, but I fear that Labour this time will not.
That is my non pollster's opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 04:20 AM

Jim, that piece was written by Conn Mac Gabhann, Manager of the traveller project at the Irish Chaplaincy in Britain.

He would be highly aware of discrimination issues involving Trvellers, and must have been working with them for some time.

He found a sign in one back street London pub and expressed surprise to see such a thing. He had clearly never seen one before, and in the absence of a more recent outburst he has not seen one since.

That proves beyond any shadow of doubt that the signs are an extreme rarity, and not "commom throughout Britain" as you claim.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 Mar 17 - 03:44 AM

"There is no reference to date 29th February 2012, "
The date is there, if you bothered to read the posts that were put up, a larger version of the article was included - what you obviously picked up on was my reaping the statement in response to Keith suggesting that putting up signs would lesd to police action - the repeat and your cut-'n-paste are both in quotation marks - has nobody ever explained what they mean?
"25 Mar 17 - 02:36 PM "
I put up a whole series of examples of these signs being referred to
No - I didn't link to any of the quotes on that occasion - but they are all there and totally ignored by you pair of racists - Kieth has refused even to acknowledge they exist.
All are perfectly traceable - I thought i had linked to them all as I usually do.
As you refuse you qualify any of your statements, produce no links whatever and just make things up on the spot, you have little grounds fro complaint.
Now - you have the statement, you have another photograph and you now hane dozens of examples - here an on previous threads, of these signs
Ihave plenty of personal experiences of police behaviour towards the Travellers - thirty years worth.
"Five effin' years ago"
This argument has been going on for a few years - Keith is claiming that these signs are rare because he has never seen one.
J D Weatherspoon's was successfully sued by Travellers less than two years ago
I didn't realise that there was a statute of limitations on this discussion
Signs against Travellers, beggars and itinerants are part of a long history going back centuries and they continue - and your name-calling arrogance proves only that you are a bullshitter with no evidence to show they don't.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 09:39 PM

Total bollocks. Total football. Johann Cruyff. Let's all get total!

Jaysus, Bill, go to bed. We don't want you waking up dead in the morning. I'm off.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 09:10 PM

Jim Carroll - 27 Mar 17 - 06:33 AM

"it would just take an anonymous call to the police to get one removed and the perpetrator in a heap of trouble." - Keith A presumably.

From the evidence you have chosen to dishonestly ignore Keith]
"It is in the interests of the police and society that they pursue these cases of discrimination, otherwise Travellers will rightly feel aggrieved and disconnected.
Yesterday, I received a phone call from Islington Police Station. The CPS have decided not to pursue any action against the pub."
Jim Carroll

What link Carroll??? There is no reference to date 29th February 2012, no reference to the "Left Foot Forward" website and no reference to Conn Mac Gabhann. Your post reads as though the incident happened recently (It didn't), and that you had received a call on the 26th March, 2017 from Islington Police Station (You didn't) - If that isn't total misrepresentation Carroll I do not know what is. Having said that though Jim it is up to par with your usual line in total bollocks (To use the term as defined by Steve Shaw).

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 09:05 PM

Go to bed, Bill. The nurse will start fretting very soon.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 08:59 PM

This from faithful "little Sir Echo":
Raggytash - 27 Mar 17 - 11:50 AM

"There is a very obvious reason for the Islington police to contact Jim regarding this and that is that he is the person to have made the initial compliant. The complainant is told the result of the CPS deliberations.
Given his interaction with the travelling community it would seem a logical assumption."

Then all becomes clear when Jim produces the link from the "Left Foot Forward" website FFS!!

"Yesterday [28th February, 2012], I [Conn Mac Gabhann] received a phone call from Islington Police Station. The CPS have decided not to pursue any action against the pub."

So Raggy, Jim had absolutely S.F.A. to do with this. His contention that today in the UK Anti-Traveller Signs are common has to be backed up by a single instance from Five effin' years ago. By the way with your posting record I would suggest you refrain from using the word logical about anything you assume.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 07:20 PM

Thirty years ago to this day (the 27th (I may be a few minutes late!), we had been in our current house in Cornwall for six weeks. That day, we had the most ferocious wind we'd ever experienced. It stripped dozens of slates from our roof, wrecked the guttering at the front of the house and demolished our 18'x12' greenhouse. Having been used to town life all our lives, we were too scared to go outside that day. Roof slates were flying everywhere! A bloke who was a teacher at my new school, who I hardly knew, spent a whole day helping me to pick up broken glass from the greenhouse. Some of it was fifty feet away. He's a lifelong friend now, his eldest son being the same age as my son, then in the same class at the local primary school. I still find bits of glass in my garden from that event.

We had fixed up the buildings insurance but hadn't even paid the first premium, but they still paid up! We had more wind damage in the October 1987 storm, the Burns Day Storm in 1990 and in another big blow two weeks after the Burns Day Storm. Since then, some entertaining storms and a few slates blown off, but nothing like in them good ol' days!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 05:58 PM

I am humbled. Or is it humbugged?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 05:29 PM

Got three of those recipes printed out. Mrs Steve is a genius with the wireless printer. Definitely got more than nine, Jim, including all three bonus ones on works of art. Tough do tonight, though. Semi-finals can't be made too easy!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 04:10 PM

What a bizarre coincidence. Night in watching TV and on the tablet if you hadn't gathered. Flicked over to "Foyle's War" and the background is Jewish student talking about the Palestinian issue and being attacked by fascists! Set just after WW2. Churchill just described as a "Jew lover". Serendipity?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 03:57 PM

Did Mary just say 'wok could be easier' in reference to a stir fry?

D.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 03:42 PM

Now watching Mary Berry and getting hungry looking at the food! She has just made a lasagne type dish with aubergines but I missed what it was called. Looked delicious:-)

D.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 03:40 PM

"Or did I imagine it?"
You did not - that was a defining moment fr the North
I got nine tonight - I always astound Pat with my interplanetary and biblical knowledge - all down to my wasted youth reading Asimov and watching Life of Brian
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 03:32 PM

Well, got 4 answers right on university challenge tonight. White, the Peak district, the Yorkshire Dales and I have forgot the other! Anyone remember a contest back in the 70's I think, where Salford disgraced themselves good and proper. Or did I imagine it? It was the 70's after all :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 02:44 PM

Anything so say about my sanity Ake?
No?
Thought not, you spineless little creep
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 02:11 PM

THEER YOU GO YOU BUNCH OF MORONS - COMPLETE WITH PHOTO
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 01:57 PM

"Bullshit if ever I heard it"
You've been given the link - from a clergyman
Have you people nothing to offer yourselves other than denials and the support of out tame homophobic racist?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 01:27 PM

Was dull most of the day here but the sun has come out again now. Just found out we are having the grandsons some of next week so hope to spend some time with them around the countryside. 'Adventures' they call them and who am I to contradict :-) Took the eldest up to Lund's tower and Cowling pinnacle last Easter so it's the youngest's turn this time. He has his priorities right and has already picked what he wants on his sandwiches :-) If he manages that OK I may take them both round Ingleton Waterfalls over the weekend. Should be a lot more flora around than when I last went in February!

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 01:23 PM

I can top that Steve, we went for a drive round the Aughrus Peninsula (very beautiful area) the temperture did not drop below 19 degrees, far warmer in sheltered spots. The last I fear for a few days though.

Spring in springing out all over the place, lambs, foals and calfs in many fields ............. it's good to be alive.

A stunning guitarist last evening, and I mean really, really stunning. With any luck, if I can stand another night out, there will be even more music tonight !!!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 01:14 PM

How do you think Labour will do Dave?

Why ask me? Do I look like a pollster?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 12:59 PM

We had 18⁰︎C here today. Glorious. Ate too many chips sitting outside Rosie's Kitchen in Bude at lunchtime so we went for a long walk down to Bude canal then back along the cliff path. We heard two skylarks - first this year! Celandines and primroses in huge drifts, blackthorn in full bloom, chiffchaffs and robins singing their fierce courtship rants (aka beautiful birdsong), black sedge flowering along the canal, all senses engaged, all things universal...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 11:50 AM

There is a very obvious reason for the Islington police to contact Jim regarding this and that is that he is the person to have made the initial compliant. The complainant is told the result of the CPS deliberations.
Given his interaction with the travelling community it would seem a logical assumption.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 10:48 AM

I honestly fear for Jim's sanity. Maybe time to ease up a wee bit Mr T?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 10:16 AM

Yet another glorious day here on the Connemara, the last two days have seen a profusion of yellow primroses blossom, they are ubiquitous along the hedgerows and verges, such cheerful blooms.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 09:51 AM

Yesterday, I received a phone call from Islington Police Station. The CPS have decided not to pursue any action against the pub."
Jim Carroll

Bullshit if ever I heard it, why the police in Islington would refer and report on the matter to some delusional "bampot" parked out on the West coast of Ireland I haven't the foggiest notion - do the Met run everything related to alleged discrimination cases past you do they Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 09:41 AM

I think that Reuters misjudged the significance of the City election, and the UK media got it right.
I watched Corbyn on Peston yesterday, and they did not think it worth mentioning either.
The real local elections are next month. How do you think Labour will do Dave?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 27 Mar 17 - 09:25 AM

💩💩💩