BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 12:05 PM

" you have supported a dishonest racist, bigot at every opportunity." - Raggy

Now then Raggy if you are going to spout such bile you must have substantive grounds for saying things. "Dishonest" how, where show us all. "Racist" where? show us examples. "Bigot" in what way bigoted show us clear examples? You have decided not to do so, primarily because you can't. You know that, I know that, damn near everybody who reads this forum knows so your last post is just another in a long line of meaningless, baseless accusations.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 12:03 PM

300 criminals in Britain prove an over-representation

In the particular crime of on-street grooming there is a massive over-representation of one demographic.
That is a fact Jim.

Guardian,
"Because a disproportionate number of them are British Pakistani – just like me."
So there is an over-representation.

Guardian,
"of the 68 recent convictions involving child sexual exploitation, 59 were of British Pakistani men,"
They are less than 2% 0f the population, so the over-representation is massive.

Dave and I were right and you are wrong Jim.
You lose.
Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 11:55 AM

Credit where it is due Terrikins, you have supported a dishonest racist, bigot at every opportunity.

This obviously says as much as about you as it says about him.

I honestly dislike this phrase but I relucantly will use it anyway ..... .... you l....

Nah can't be bothered

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 11:25 AM

So far, as far as I can see, the only people who have really shown themselves up on this thread have been Steve Shaw and Jim Carroll who have both been exposed as liars guilty of baseless smears who when offered clear evidence they persist in their lies and falsehoods.

Meanwhile Raggy the little hyena-like lightweight hanger on chips in with nothing of any consequence, bleating about there being no gang while timing his pointless interjections in support of his "mates" to demonstrate that clearly there is a "gang" or even a "cabal" Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 11:05 AM

"Nobody knows how Corbyn's objectives are regarded as a whole by the British people - they've hardly been debated openly in the press - certainly not in bumwipes like the Daily Mail and The Times." - Jim Carroll

From Dan Hodges again (Same article) how Labour were regarded by the electorate in Copeland:

"In Copeland, Labour suffered what respected BBC analyst John Curtice said was the worst result for an Opposition 'in the whole history of post-war British by- elections'. Which, if anything, understates the scale of the defeat.

Faced with the possible closure of a local maternity unit, Labour distributed leaflets warning that if voters didn't back Corbyn's party they would die. The people of Copeland opted for death.

You just couldn't get a clearer demonstration Labour having held the seat for how long??

Note once again Shaw and Carroll attack the messenger they do not address the message.

The Conservatives have made no impact North of the Border?? Are you serious Jim?? They have made so much ground that they now are the main opposition Party North of the Border.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 10:42 AM

Frankly professor the only loser on here is yourself, a pathetic racist, bigoted little nobody.

I should feel sorry for you, don't I can't raise that much interest in your childlike postings.

You really are a sad little man.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 10:23 AM

"You lose."
Two peaple decide 300 criminals in Britain prove an over-representation from a statment of someone referring to the situation in Saudi Arabia.
You sad, sick man
Not that it is important, Khaled Diab is a pro-Israeli blogger campaigning to persuade the Palestinians not to press their demands on land return or the return of Exiles to their homes.
NOT SOMEONE I WOULD WISH TO CONSULT ABOUT BRITISH MUSLIMS !!
For christ's sake Keith - end this nonsense before you humilaite yourself even further.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 10:11 AM

Believe me, Keith, you don't need anyone else other than your good self to discredit you, though your own pack/mafia/gang/coterie/co-conspirators/mob/team/clique/faction/set/cabal do a damn good job too.

Coo, "cabal." Now why didn't I think of that one before!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 09:36 AM

Jim, you decided to dredge this thing up.
You hoped to discredit me with it.
Even with your whole gang helping you failed.
Even though the mods allowed it to run to a conclusion, you failed.
You had to lie to make a case against me.

Dave and I both recognised the over representation.
Dave and I both said it could be the culture that makes them do it.
No-one denies that we are all implanted to an extent by ur culture.
You have no case against me.

I hope you have learned the lesson and will not make these tired old false accusations against me again.
You lose.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 09:01 AM

"Touché, Keith!"
Never mind Keith - toy have the God of the Trolls on your side
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 08:49 AM

Touché, Keith!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 08:42 AM

"Jim, what is your verdict on Dave?"
I've suggested you let this thread move off this circular argument - you wish to continue use it to promote your racism
I certainly have no intention of participating in your spiteful attempt to pit one member against another
Take your disgusting behaviour elsewhere
You really are the pits
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 08:09 AM

Ain't no "pack" either.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 08:07 AM

Interesting post of Dave's, from six years ago, you came up with Keith. I thought I remembered him as being a reasonable sort before he started running with the pack. Just goes to show the susceptibility of some to peer pressure.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 07:47 AM

Jim, what is your verdict on Dave?

"Maybe just by saying that any group leans towards any sort of poor attitude I am showing my obviously right wing, racist attitudes."

Is that your view of him Jim?


Maybe this goes some way to expaining the over representation of certain people in this crime?

So he, like me, is prepared to accept that they might be doing it because of their culture.

We are all implanted by our culture, so his views were identical to mine on this.

Why have you not been hounding him over that for the last six years as you have me Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 07:34 AM

Dave, in this post you suggest that the over-representation might be due to the cultural attitude to females.
Same as me then.

Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 01 Apr 11 - 04:44 PM

At the risk of becoming tarred as a Muslim hating racist I came across this article by Khaled Diab, a Brussels based Egyptian (I think) journalist who often contributes to that bastion of right wing hatred, The Guardian.

I found it interesting that the piece states quite clearly -

So, which Arabs have the most negative views of western women? Well, probably those from the most conservative societies. "From my personal experience, the worst Arab men I found were the ones from Saudi Arabia," a journalist with a leading Portuguese newspaper told me. "They think that all foreign women are prostitutes and they try to treat them like that."

Maybe this goes some way to expaining the over representation of certain people in this crime? Maybe it doesn't. Maybe just by saying that any group leans towards any sort of poor attitude I am showing my obviously right wing, racist attitudes. Or maybe I am just saying that some people have the wrong idea and need to be educated. How should I know? I am pretty sure reading most posters on this thread won't educate me...

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 07:34 AM

well its ten years since I was in Boston, but what people were saying is that there was no point in reporting crimes because the police never did anything.   they were overwhelmed, but of course its like in education - no one ever admits to a problem - because the bosses always turn it round and say that's cos your crap at your job. Its an easy out.   far easier to say to say theres no problem.

Before you keep ballsing on about everybody I talked to being a racist, dave. has it ever occurred to you to go to the town where they had the highest turnout in favour of Brexit in the country.

Just go there. tell them they're all talking bollocks.

This bloody finger pointing and casting the first stone is SO easy on mudcat. And it has buggered up this once wonderful site. Certainly it has made rational debate - in this case on a subject I care deeply about - the party I have voted for all my life totally impossible. Self righteous hypocrites have turned this once wonderful crossroads into a wasteland.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 07:33 AM

Coooeee, your fetid imagination is working overtime again the is no "gang" or "little gang" or "clique" or "mob" It's all in your head.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 07:33 AM

Yes, that's correct Teribus, The Labour Party have no longer a constituency......and the fault lies with the M P's, they have alienated what was left of their core vote by cosying up to the media and ignoring the debris of industrial re-organisation......they have lost the grass roots, who just like in America, feel no connection to a well off "liberal" elite preaching social equality.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 07:32 AM

This thread seem to be moving out of this never-ending circle of denials Keith
Please don't wreck it with more.
"Dan Hodges" is writing in The Daily Mail, a newspaper which, along with several other Tory mouthpieces, has set out to wreck any efforts to introduce principled politics into the Labour Party from day one.
What else is he going to write.
Nobody knows how Corbyn's objectives are regarded as a whole by the British people - they've hardly been debated openly in the press - certainly not in bumwipes like the Daily Mail and The Times.
The malaise of cynical disinterest in British politics is now a permanent reality; what the "people think" is now a convenient slogan for those who are happy to keep things as they are.
It remains to be seen whether the North will vote Conservative - the Tories haven't made much headway in Scotland and Brexit has not only made the future uncertain for the British economy, but it still stands to see off both Scotland and Northern Ireland leave the Union - a breakup Britain.
It is already doing massive damage to the Peace Process in the North - yet more violence in the offing
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 07:30 AM

Ah yes. The Dan Hodges who's in and out of Labour like a yo-yo, who voted for Boris for mayor even when he was in the party, who never misses an opportunity to undermine Corbyn (he supported Yvette Cooper in the leadership election! 😂), who writes for such enlightened organs as the Spectator, the Telegraph and the Mail On Sunday, the archetypal Blairite who ran near-naked through Westminster after losing a bet. That Dan Hodges. Your kind of man, eh, Teribus!😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 07:13 AM

Dave,
Keith is not denying that he thinks British Pakistanis are culturally implanted to rape underage girls.

I think no such thing Dave.
I do think that we are all implanted to an extent by our culture.
Your view?
I do note that a lot of very credible people ascribe the over-representation of one demographic to the culture, and when that was the only theory around I believed them.
Did you not believe them? Why not?

But you and I discussed all that in 2011.
Why rehash it now Dave?
Just to be one of the gang?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 07:07 AM

This today from Dan Hodges:

"the idea that once Corbyn goes, Labour's problems go with him. The shadow Shadow Cabinet – Chuka Umunna, Dan Jarvis, Lisa Nandy, Clive Lewis, Yvette Cooper – are now playing an elaborate game of Ring A Ring O' Roses. Just hide and wait and pray for the plague to pass.

There is no evidence it will. On Friday the extent of the Parliamentary Labour Party's reaction to the Copeland catastrophe was a series of hand-wringing statements that 'the country needs Labour'.

But that is the point. The country has decided it doesn't. Voters see a party that has no coherent policy on Brexit. That has not had a coherent economic or fiscal policy for decades, and as a result has no coherent policy on public service provision. That adopts stances on defence, law and order and immigration that are not just incoherent, but overtly provocative.

And the country has decided something else.

Until Friday morning, Labour MPs believed that they had one thing to fall back on – their Northern safe zone.

Time and again I have been told: 'People in my area hate Corbyn but they hate the Tories even more. Ukip might be a problem. But they won't vote Conservative.'

Northern voters will vote Conservative. Corbyn has not just helped complete the toxification of the Labour brand, he has also begun the process of detoxifying the Tory brand, a process the Prime Minister fully intends to finish.

The virus is not on the doorstep, but is coursing through Labour's system. There is no antidote. There is no cure."

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 07:05 AM

Sorry Dave old chap but you are once again dancing around the question put to you but that is the little game of misrepresentation the pack plays so well, isn't it. Anyway I shall not keep you from your terpsichorean diversions any longer so dance on my friend, my point has been made.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 05:45 AM

"I do not have to rely on opinions, the statistics speak for themselves."

Statistics never "speak for themselves." They require careful interpretation by a real live intelligent human being. So, in your case, better hope for the best and just let them speak for themselves. 😂

"What backs your argument? a couple of dusty tomes on the weeds you insist on babbling on about to make up your daily quota of postings?"

A weed is a plant in the wrong place. It gets in the way of and detracts from the worthwhile plants around it. A nuisance with no value. A total undesirable, fit only for the compost heap. Might even poison the whole crop. The best thing to do is to cut it down or remove it altogether.

You're a bit of a plant of that sort, aren't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 04:44 AM

"Better trade in your sandals for some hiking boots,"
Your Independent link was "not found" Iains - maybe it doesn't like your smug arrogance either!
Interesting to see you've abandoned your back-slapping thread - maybe you'll put up some real arguments instead of your usual insulting hit-and-run pronouncements this time, though you haven't started too well !!!
The Labour Party has been an echo of the Conservatives to one degree or another since the days of Wilson - 'New Labour' was an official announcement that it had cut itself off from its roots and abandoned all its principles
Having a potential war criminal like Blair at its head was a sign that it was prepared to adopt current Parliamentary standards.
There is little point to a Labour Party that echoes Tory Party policy - if that's what turns you on, you may as well vote Tory - they've been exploiting and conning the people for far longer.
Corbyn offered a return to the Labour principles that rebuilt Britain after the war and made the lot of all British people better - he won a majority for that policy despite massive internal attempts to sabotage his efforts (not to mention foreign interference in the shape of lying accusations of Antisemitism)
I have never been a supporter of Labour policy - my first opportunity to vote was for my Labour candidate, Harold Wilson - I did so in the hope that Labour would fight in Parliament for all people and not just the better off - any hope of that gradually eroded away and the Party became a crypto-Tory Party, either in office or in waiting, to a greater and greater degree - in essence, a one-party system of two parties fighting for the same thing.
The only hope for a future for any Labour Party is if it is prepared to become a genuine opposition to the status quo rather than a career-move for people with no interest in the well-being of all the British people - sort of like The Church or The Civil Service.
It is interesting to note what has happened to the Labour Party here in Ireland.
It broke it's back (literally) trying to get seats in The Dail, abandoned all its principles and in doing so, self-destructed at the last election - if the British Labour Party has any sense, it will take note of that lesson.
Luckily, over here, we have a P.R. system that enables the maintenance of some semblance of democracy rather than the first-past-the-post sham.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 03:47 AM

Syeve.

"
Well, what a good job your opinions aren't very important, let alone gripping, Iains. Don't worry, mate. Trump will always give succour to people like you."


I do not have to rely on opinions, the statistics speak for themselves.

What backs your argument? a couple of dusty tomes on the weeds you insist on babbling on about to make up your daily quota of postings?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-jeremy-corbyn-polls-general-election-performance-1935-worst-80-years-a73333

Better trade in your sandals for some hiking boots, the next socialist party is way over the horizon.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Feb 17 - 03:46 AM

I can see that, Steve, so this will be my last word on the subject. Yes, I can disprove the claim very easily.

"A survey carried out by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) in 2008 found no evidence for suggestions that eastern Europeans were responsible for any crime wave. Peter Fahy, the chief constable who co-authored the report, noted that "you get misunderstandings, you get rumours"."

From This article.

There are plenty more where that came from but why should I be disproving a statement someone else has made? Surely it should be up to them to prove it and anecdotal evidence just does not wash.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 06:34 PM

Sorry, Al, it was not me that brought it up and started to pick at old scabs.

The scabs are on Al and not you, and nothing you have brought forth refutes what I posted.

Now, would anyone care to tell me how that can be interpretted as anything but saying that east Europeans bring lawlessness where they go.

A total misinterpretation of what Al wrote - you're learning well from your pack. Al did not say that, he said that there had been an increase in lawlessness in Boston. You are lying. Can you disprove his claim? If not, STFU.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 06:23 PM

Still, not my gig.

Lol.....but I am compelled to make it so by some unseen power, must be them dastardly Jews again.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 06:13 PM

For chrissake, Dave, don't indulge bobad. He has an agenda and is totally blinkered. I can't understand why he's still there, frankly. Still, not my gig.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 06:03 PM

I simply said that you called Al a racist for describing the looters as eastern European and what I posted proves me right, dance however you might.

Yes, you are right. That was ONE of the reasons. Seeing as you think I cannot provide any further evidence here is the same comment I was complaining about from the same thread that you C&Pd the other one from. You seem to be very selective in your quotes but that does not surprise me.

Sorry, Al, it was not me that brought it up and started to pick at old scabs.

Subject: RE: BS: The Return!....of....New Labour!!!
From: Big Al Whittle - PM
Date: 15 May 15 - 05:18 AM

People in my home county Lincolnshire are very. upset at the influx of Eastern Europeans, and the lawlessness they have bought to towns like Boston.

Now, would anyone care to tell me how that can be interpretted as anything but saying that east Europeans bring lawlessness where they go. But of course this adds nothing to any discussion on the Labour party and even though I will be accused of bringing it up, reading back through the thread will provide evidence I did not. But well done for steering the thread away from its point and probably pputtingh the final nail in its coffin.

DtG

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 05:49 PM

You're totally screwed up, mate. You need to study wild flowers a bit more. Not one person is going to come here and support what you've just said. In fact, I challenge them so to do!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 05:39 PM

Ah, I see Shaw is home early from his Labour friends of Hamas and Hezbollah meeting tonight. Tell us, what was on the agenda this evening Shaw, was it the "Israel" lobby and its control of world governments or perhaps the Jews' extraordinary powers to have Labour Party members make anti-Semitic statements. Inquiring minds would like to know before they succumb to the effects of their Saturday night imbibing.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 05:06 PM

That one was directed at akenaton, Al, as I'm sure you realise!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 05:03 PM

Well you know who to vote for then, don't you, Mr Socialist? 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 05:02 PM

yes i think you're right there Steve. its about personalities. John Smith just seemed to come from nowhere. he transformed labours profile - which had looked unelectable for close on 14 years,

a skilled debater and orator. his attacks from the front bench were so much more assured and ministerial.

lets hope we don't have to wait so long. in the meantime if Corbyn could take some much needed presentation skills.....

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 04:59 PM

I think Mrs May will make a good job of the Brexit negotiations and will walk the next two or three general elections.
The economy will continue to grow for a period and provide funds to instigate a nationwide retraining programme.
20 years of comparative prosperity will ensue, but the age old problems of capitalism will still be there to be dealt with.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 04:38 PM

We are stuck with Jezza until a rising star shows the ability to unite a horribly split party. If he's still in post in 18 months I'll be (a) surprised, (b) disappointed, (c) expecting doom. At the moment there isn't anybody. And the people who have undermined Jeremy the most are the two-time loser Blairite/Brownites. If anyone ever replaces Jezza, it won't be one of those.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 04:30 PM

He's not worth it, Dave. Saturday night is imbibing night. To employ a word I bloody hate, chillax!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 04:29 PM

all right lets admit - it says a lot = me and keith believe all Asians have breast implants that make them desire white women.

your character analysis is faultless. breathtaking in its brilliance.

seriously though - what can we do to get another labour politician in number 10.

a conservative administration will hurt the poorest and most disadvantaged people in this nation as long as it persists,

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 03:52 PM

I simply said that you called Al a racist for describing the looters as eastern European and what I posted proves me right, dance however you might.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 03:47 PM

That was just one of the exchanges bobad. I am happy to dig the other out if you want to persist.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 03:40 PM

But that is not what I was referring to anyway. He said crime increased when east Europeans moved in.

I think you've misremembered Dave:


Subject: RE: BS: The Return!....of....New Labour!!!
From: Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 16 May 15 - 11:28 AM

i just tell you something i saw and you say i'm a racist.

No, you didn't, Al. You said you saw some east European immigrants looting a shop. You never told us how you knew they were east European immigrants. If you only assumed they were east European because they were looting then, yes, you are being racist. I always think the best about people and have always found you honest and open before so it was with great regret that I had to condemn the comment as racist. Tell us how you know they were east European and prove it was not a racist comment or accept that it was and apologise for it. Seemples, as the east European animals taking over our TV say...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 03:24 PM

Well, what a good job your opinions aren't very important, let alone gripping, Iains. Don't worry, mate. Trump will always give succour to people like you.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 03:01 PM

Big Al Whittle. Sadly Corbyn is not leadership material. Diane Abbot
continuing as an MP will likely drive away potential supporters, and the damage done by Blair will probably take a generation to repair. The entire party requires a rebranding, a massive credibility injection, and some well reasoned policies that Joe public finds attractive. I am afraid my study of the tea leaves predicts failure on all counts.
There is also the problem with many modern mps as to why they exist? Is it to serve their electorate or themselves? For many it would seem to offer a future stepping stone to the nearest revolving door that brings power, wealth and privilege by way of the Lords or industry.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 02:49 PM

In my case because I'm bothered that you're bothered, Al. I don't remember calling you a racist. And you are a respectable bloke. There's a list of four or five here to whom I wouldn't accord that accolade. OK?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 02:39 PM

Al said he witnessed a theft or robbery by persons he recognized as being of eastern European extraction by their appearance and accents. You immediately branded him a racist and other members of the pack joined in lecturing him on his purported racism. I myself am of full blooded eastern European extraction and I saw absolutely nothing racist in what he said.

Bobad. My Father was Polish and had just dies when the exchange happened. He did not know they were east European and said as much. But that is not what I was referring to anyway. He said crime increased when east Europeans moved in.

Al has not denied that.

Keith is not denying that he thinks British Pakistanis are culturally implanted to rape underage girls.

Says a lot doesn't it?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 02:35 PM

i suppose Ake, Keith and me - we've got racism and fascism - a bit like some houses have got woodworm.

i'm surprised you dignify our posts with a reply.

i mean i suspect what we are so inherently evil that we dwell in dark regions where all civilised debate is polluted by our evil intentions
.
no doubt about it - we are the baddies! complete stinkers!

however none of this answers the problem, as to what the bloody hell are we going to do to make the labour party electable?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 25 Feb 17 - 02:00 PM

lets face it, we're all 'potential' perverts.

as william wordsworth said, breathes there a soul so dull, he hasn't tried on his wife's knickers?