BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 07:08 PM

"and my mothers preference for a particular section of Snowdonia"

(different section of)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Jul 17 - 08:40 PM

Penyghent is a fair old walk from the nearest town and is over 2000 feet high. So it's pretty quiet. Balm to the soul, I'd say. You'll meet the odd aficionado on your way up and down. But they are like you, true appreciators of all that's best in the world.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 03:54 AM

It can get busy at times when the 3 peak challengers who have no idea what they are letting themselves in for are out. Penyghent is the first of the three so they are usualy quite boisterous then. Wait until they have done Whernside as well and realise that they also have Ingleborough to climb to see them quieten down :-)

Usually it is pretty quiet though. I have been up mid-week when the peak was covered in snow and not seen another person. I could see Blackpool tower but couldn't make out if anyone was showing their arse off it though :-) Distance to do the classic walk from Horton is not far at all - not much more than 6 miles - but the final ascent to the peak is bloomin' steep! Worth visiting the limestone pinnacle and Hull Pot, both just off the main path, on the way down. Once saw an old dear in a pink tracksuit and trainers mooching about the pinnacle so you can guess that it is pretty easy underfoot from there down to Horton.

Cheers

D.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 04:43 AM

Oh Dear. No wonder they want to babble about the peaks.
This came out of the trough!


http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/two-bury-council-officers-deliberately-13362889

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 05:04 AM

Are you implying that this is a "serious Labour paedophilia problem?" Ever thought of being a Sun journalist, Iains? Hey, world out there, would you rather keep this as a digging-the-dirt-on-Labour thread or would you rather read about the Yorkshire Dales?

Dave, when I did the Three Peaks we started with Whernside and ended with Penyghent, thinking it was a bit more climactic that way. It did leave us with a long, weary trudge back to where we'd parked the car for Whernside, I must admit. I made the cardinal error of doing it in insufficiently broken-in boots. Took four quick pints in a pub in Settle to ease the pain....

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 05:15 AM

I would have been more than tempted to use the train for that bit, Steve! For a folky I am no traditionalist :-)

Inanes link is not even worthy of comment.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 05:38 AM

"Inanes link is not even worthy of comment"
What a sorry human being you are if you consider child abuse as not worthy of comment.



#
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3181783/Did-Jeremy-Corbyn-try-protect-fellow-Left-wingers-implicated-paedophile-scandal.
https://labour25.com/


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 05:59 AM

Hasn't it occurred to you fellers that that Keith's obsessive crusade against the "massive Labour problem of (well it only seems to be) has more to do with her non-English religious culture/colour/racial/non-whitishness origins than it does her supposed antisemitic slip?
After all, anybody can make a biigotted slip, what with her , "cultural implants", "slave owning travellers", "brainwashed Irish children...
Don't let that stop you lads - it keeps him from infesting other threads
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 06:03 AM

fwiw, my participation in this drift was only a foolish attempt to apply some comments I made in another. I think I can reasonably try to paraphrase that as that some threads just go on with rows, positions are fixed and even another 1000 posts will not change anybody's mind. I believe I then suggested talking about things we have in common like gardening instead.   

This participation has already been taken as being part of a gang who I don't think I could join even if it existed (I'd differ in my belief there is a God for starters...) and apparently a desire to hide some story about a Labour cover up. Unfortunately, that is the way life works and I suppose we can all be guilty of it - putting reasons we want to see into things...

For the record, as for what I'd rather be discussing here. I'd rather be away but lack the sel discipline. The ugly truth is that I wrestle with drink problems. I can post for other reasons and, eg. do know a little about abc (I fixed the mandotab converter, originally from a site I started, fairly recently) and do eg try to play mandolin and tenor banjo in Irish sessions, etc. but if I get stuck down the bottom, it's usually connected, at least to start with, with a round of drinking. The sad fact is that in some ways, I view my own relationship with the forum as tainted and the bottom of the line poisoned. In saner times, I usually stay away rather than perhaps look in, find a nice thread (eg gardening or birds round the back) and then find I've got myself caught up in something else...

I genuinely do not want to feel the bottom of the line is poisoned (and I see my own good times here as well as the bad ones) and I don not feel matters from religion to politics should not be questioned. A question there is perhaps more whether the belligerence here could ever enable it...

I expect to get ripped apart for this but I'm trying to be open in terms of the way I'm seeing things at the moment.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 07:31 AM

Well I think that trying to steer the thread away from the interminable attempts by a couple of idiots to taint the Labour Party at all costs by clutching at whatever straws they can dig out is a Good Thing. They are the trolls - yes, you, Keith, bobad and Iains - and we are trying to restore sanity. Thread drift is a peccadillo compared to the hateful, non-stop attempts at smearing by yesterday's people. The Manchester Evening News is a tatty right-wing rag, and in another thread Iains is trying to taint the BBC by resorting to Breitbart. Of course these things go on. That's life. Wouldn't like to hold too many Tories up as paragons of virtue either... but there are well over half a million of us in the Labour Party now and every member I've met has the one aim of trying to make this country a fairer place to live in. Go and dig for dirt elsewhere. Try the Tory Party for starters. You'll have a field day, I promise you.

And keep posting, Jon. You're a breath of fresh air next to some of these right-wing thread-polluters.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 10:26 AM

Steve,
Well I think that trying to steer the thread away....

Normal decent folk would just withdraw from a thread they did not like.
You people feel somehow entitled to determine how the discussion should go, dominate it with a mass of postings from your gang and deny anyone the right to discuss what they choose.
As Joe said, you are just a gang of bullies who dominate every political thread.

Dave,
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?

Then fuck off and allow anyone else to discuss what they want with who they want, instead of joining the continuing domination of the thread by your gang of cronies.

You now admit that it is me personally you have a problem with. Mainly that I keep showing up your arguments as vacuous whims that you can not support.

Why can't you just say if you find Shah's comments anti-Semitic or not?
What are you afraid of?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 10:48 AM

The scandal you dismiss because reported in the Manchester Evening News is not that a Labour Councillor was a paedophile, but that child protection measures were delayed for political reasons.

The Times,
"A paedophile inquiry into a Labour politician was deliberately delayed by senior council officers in an attempt to boost the party's chances in the 2015 general election, an independent inquiry has found.
A report has concluded that Mike Owen, the former chief executive of Bury council, and Mark Carriline, its head of children's services, did not follow child protection rules for political reasons.
This was allegedly in an effort to ensure that claims surrounding Simon Carter, a disgraced former councillor, did not surface before the poll."

" the reports found that Mr Owen and Mr Carriline waited up to five weeks before carrying out child-protection measures that should have been implemented within 48 hours of the allegations being made.
They took eight days to inform the two schools of which Carter was a governor."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/council-delayed-abuse-inquiry-to-aid-labour-qfwp3ntkb

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 11:05 AM

Thinking again on Pen, I guess we could also consider Ben. It confuses the hell out of me but in Welsh for one, words mutate. I think pen would change to ben if you put a y in front of it. For those that played football in a village with Welsh speakers, "ar y ben" could be a header (on the head, I think).

Hopefully this time round, it's over and out for me.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 12:17 PM

Oooo! Someone's cage is rattled, using foul and abusive language.

Now should be a yellow card from a Mod at least.

Incidentally that same poster is obviously not very bright, despite another poster saying nummerous times that he is bored with that poster, he is still trying to ensure an outcome that will not happen.

Meanwhile on the Connemara coast in glorious sunshine we watched about 3 hours of the local regatta, sailing and rowing on a beautiful bay with a stunning background of mountains.

Truly, spectacular, breathtaking and utterly beautiful.

Out to the bar we visited on Thursday for more great music, song .......... and Guinness!!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 12:21 PM

""A paedophile inquiry into a Labour politician was deliberately delayed by senior council officers nthe poll."
JAY-SUS!!!
You are now a certified lunatic Keith - does you8r obsession know no bounds?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 12:26 PM

There are plenty of "pens" down here in Cornwall, Jon. I suppose it's a bit closer to Wales. Not quite so many in East Cornwall though - it's a bit more Anglo-Saxon and a bit less Celtic round here!

No-one's denying you the right to discuss anything, Keith. Your problem is that you can't seem to find anyone to discuss things with just now. You can't force people to discuss what YOU want to discuss. That would be bullying. And you wouldn't know what normal and decent meant if they reared up and bit you on the arse. And I don't suppose you'll get too many takers for your Bury Council offering. Actually, it's a damn fine local authority. My old disabled mum gets amazing help from them in all sorts of ways. On the other hand, maybe I won't get too many takers for my Tory-sex-parties-with-underage-boys offering either. Some you win and some...you lose....😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 12:35 PM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9657036/How-Tory-paedophile-claims-were-covered-up.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tory-mp-enoch-powell-investigated-as-alleged-member-of-westminster-paedophile-network-10142235.html

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2012/11/06/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-tory-paedophile-scanda

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4238188/Sir-Edward-Heath-paedophile-says-police-chief.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/how-thatchers-government-covered-up-a-vip-pedophile-ring

http://theleveller.org/2015/03/burd-epstein-phonebook/

http://nationalpost.com/g00/news/u-k-conservative-mp-killed-boy-at-sex-party-victim-of-pedophile-network-claims/wcm/654cef11-4aed-4395-a726-af26918c971c?i10c.referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.ie%2F

Mad as a bag of frogs
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 01:06 PM

THATCHER, MI5, THE POLICE AND PAEDOPHELIA Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 01:30 PM

Well done, Jim. That should shut 'em up. Idiots.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 03:09 PM

Not a chance
Keith hasn't won anything yet and Iains...... well.... I mean to say!
You do realise we're feeding these trolls, don't you?
Oxygen of publicity (as Old Iron Knickers used to say) and all that
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 04:42 PM

I see the usual gang resort to their usual trick. If they do not like the messenger, they do not have to believe the message.
Tell me boys do you have a problem accepting that if a seagull or a crow shits on your head then the outcome is the same:- a head covered in shit. Not really that difficult to understand now is it. Does it matter if the substantiated facts are printed in the sun, the times, or reported by theBBC, Al Jazeera, or RT.

You really do have simple little minds, do you not?

and another little titbit for you:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/libyan-rebel-leader-abdul-hakim-belhaj-supreme-court-wins-right-sue-jack-straw-tor

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 04:54 PM

and a little thread drift so the gang do not feel isolated:


http://pureaircontrols.com/human-health-dangers-bird-droppings-associated-building-hvac-systems/

A tad more informative than babbling on about bits of rock and weeds doncha think!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 04:59 PM

You're a waste of space. And unfunny to boot. Don't let us stop you though.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 05:02 PM

Is this the usual gang practising for their next joint offering?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKURJBXq-sA

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 06:24 PM

Oh good. A little friend for Keithy to play with. Glad to see he is not on his own after all. Mind you, with friends like Inanes and ake, who needs enemies.

Glad to see that Keith is rattled enough to tell me to fuck off as well. I am sure he once told us that abuse was a sure sign of losing the argument. Or was it that he never indulges in abuse? I really can't remember as he changes his story so often.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 22 Jul 17 - 06:44 PM

http://muppets.disney.com/

Stevie chunder and gnome please identify yourselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 05:03 AM

More ill brought up abuse here
Give it ****** rest Iains
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 06:33 AM

Jim the solution is quite straightforward. If you, Stevie chunder, Gnome and their acolytes did not hurl out gratuitous abuse at everyone that holds a contrary view, there would be no need for the responses generated. It is quite clear to anyone following these threads that you are all there to bully, bluster, insult and gang up on all who dispute your view of the world.
I have been dealing with your sort all my working life. I know precisely how to deal with you.

You all share the arrogance of feeling that you dictate the subject matter and content of this forum and no other views at variance will be tolerated. You actuslly boast about destroying threads and chuntering on about any subject that jumps to mind when you are bored with the argument or cannot counter it. Most irritatingly, prior to jumping off at a tangent, you all throw insults about like confetti. This is typical trolling behaviour. "First, trolls are more likely to display noxious personality characteristics, that is, traits that impair one's ability to build relations and function in a civilised or pro-social way. In a comprehensive examination of their psychological profile, trolls were found to be more Machiavellian (impulsive and charming manipulators), psychopathic (cold, fearless and antisocial), and especially sadist than the overall population. Trolls enjoy harming and intimidating others, so much so that the authors of this study concluded that trolls are "prototypical everyday sadists", and that trolling should be regarded as online sadism. This is in line with the view of trolling as a form of cyberbullying."
I recognise certain character traits above that describe you all to a T.
What a totally unsavoury bunch you are.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 06:48 AM

No gratuitous abuse from this Gnome. Do you know what gratuitous means?

done without good reason; uncalled for.

Find any abuse that was without good reason or uncalled for from me. I shall not hold my breath.

Have any of your postings actually added anything to the thread?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 06:54 AM

Barking mad. And he's on a campaign in three separate threads. Hope his home life is happier...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 07:26 AM

Labour the party of the people !

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/25/labour-fined-20000-for-undeclared-election-spending-including-for-ed-stone

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/13/revealed-labour-mp-faced-criminal-charges-election-expenses/


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10462871/Its-no-coincidence-the-MPs-found-guilty-of-fiddling-are-all-Labour.html

https://order-order.com/2016/10/25/labour-given-maximum-fine-expenses-fraud-mcnicol-committed-offence/

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 07:31 AM

I think it's just you, Steve. He loves you :-)

Took the grandsons swimming this morning and then onto the zipwire just outside the leisure centre. Airville Park in Skipton is a lovely place for all but especially for kids. Back home for a first for me. Son #3 and I had kedgeree for breakfast. Really enjoyed it. Having fish for tea later too as we are being invaded by pescatarians. Good job I like fish :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 07:40 AM

Leave him to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 08:26 AM

Steve,
You can't force people to discuss what YOU want to discuss.

No, and unlike you people I would not try.
Instead of just avoiding a discussion that is not going your way, you and your gang swamp it with off subject posts and intimidate decent folks from joining.

They see the abuse you dish out. I celebrate it as an admission of your defeat in debate, but most normal people are put off by it.

You deny that Shah advocated the transportation of Jews from the Mid.East even though she freely admits that she did.
You called me a liar over it.
It is reasonable then for me to ask you to back your accusations.
Your problem is that you can't, so you try to silence the debate.

Jim,
""A paedophile inquiry into a Labour politician was deliberately delayed by senior council officers nthe poll."
JAY-SUS!!!

Do you not see anything wrong in that Jim?
Putting more children at risk for political purposes?

Of course there are paedos in every group, but those people kept it quiet not even telling the schools he was involved with.

If you had acknowledged that was wrong, or just ignored it, I would not have followed it up.

But Steve denied it as he denies what Shah said.
You lie to protect your ideology, because you are told "The end justifies the means."

And you call honest folk liars, while blatantly lying for your worthless creed.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 09:12 AM

Give. it up, Keith. The game's up. There's nothing honest about your approach. You want to smear the Labour Party with whatever trivial bit of dirt you can dig up. Well I'm a member, and I and the other 552000 members resent the likes of you hypocritically ignoring the major moral issues in your right-wing organisations and homing in on what are, in the overall scheme of things, near-irrelevancies. By the way, I haven't denied anything about Bury Council. You made that up. So what's new.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 09:27 AM

Stevie boy.Pointing out that the Labour party has some very dubious members scattered throughout it's ranks is offering a public service. You should appreciate it instead of responding to every post like a rabid ferret on steroids. Have you been in the sun too long or did a rabbit bite your nose last time you ventured down a burrow?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 09:34 AM

A little ditty for stevie chunder.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNZzJELbFRI

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 09:36 AM

How many? How many out of 552000? Name them! Come along, every single one. As an honest member of the party I want to know the scale of the problem!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 10:18 AM

Steve, you dismissed the story because it was in the Manchester Evening News.
The scandal was not that Labour had a paedo. Every organisation does.
The scandal was that they kept it quiet thereby putting more kids at risk.
Are you happy with that?
Had you acknowledged or even ignored the story I would have left it.
But you denied it was a story.

You also denied that Shah advocated transporting the Jews out of M.E. even though she freely admits she did.
You called me a liar over it.
Why will you not admit you are wrong?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 10:36 AM

SOS    dit dit dit dah dah dah dit dit dit

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 12:12 PM

You really aren't getting this, are you, Keith. I don't give a monkey's flying fart about those two issues in the context of this thread. Do you know why? Because you clearly have ulterior motives for dredging up the stories and I don't wish to be drawn into your stupid little game. When I meet normal, balanced people with honest and open minds I discuss these issues or issues like them. But I'm not discussing them with you because you are closed-minded and have one aim only, to smear the Labour Party. You and your sorry Tory ilk need to realise that smearing Labour has just lost you your majority. It's yesterday's tactic, Keith, and the fact that you won't give it up makes you yesterday's man.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 02:26 PM

And the most hilarious quote of the day from stevie " I puke in your general direction."Chunder

"We waste a lot of energy here checking the accuracy of what people say when they could have afforded us the good manners to check it for themselves first"

I had to sit down I was laughing so hard. Best entertainment in days. Hard to believe the twerp was being serious. Is he guilty of substance abuse or what???????

You smug, posturing, silly little man! You are so incredibly stupid you cannot see just how pathetic that appears to the more rational of us here. I give you 10 out of 10 and a gold star for self delusion. Perhaps your medication is in severe need of revision. Better call out jimmy and the wrinkled gnome for a little support you sad diminutive dwarf.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 04:19 AM

Inanes - I see you did not take any notice of your mate.

From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 23 Jul 17 - 08:26 AM
...
They see the abuse you dish out. I celebrate it as an admission of your defeat in debate, but most normal people are put off by it.


Keith. I hope you are going to join me in admonishing the poster of the abuse above.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 04:38 AM

Corbyn for PM:- God help us.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4082787/jeremy-corbyns-u-turn-on-tuition-fees-debt-is-jaw-dropping-and-only-a-ruse-to-persuade-vot

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/labour-urged-to-apologise-to-graduates-over-uturn-on-student-debt-a3594076.html

Must be a hell of an ideology for the ferrets to support it. Notice two sources in case they want to claim it is false news. I really need some help to make a cage for them, they would be 10 times worse if they went feral.

No doubt the follow up will be about.weeds or wobbling their carcasses around the peak district.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 05:13 AM

I celebrate this abuse as an admission of your defeat in debate.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 05:18 AM

It is not a U-turn. The alleged policy was never in Labour's manifesto and his remarks during the campaign were misrepresented by the right-wing tabloids. You went ballistic yesterday when I corrected you over your uninformed statement concerning the age of consent. You haven't learned. I suggest that you resort to slightly more balanced sources that the Sun and Standard, both of which embed smears in their "reporting."

Putting right-wing spin on stuff isn't unique to Keith, Dave!

Do try to keep your blood pressure down as you type the inevitable insulting ranting response to this, Iains, and try to remember that you're impressing nobody. One day you'll look back at your your posting behaviour over the last couple of days and wish to God that Mudcat had a retrospective delete button.

By the way, if anyone wants to read about the disastrous impact of Cameron's referendum catastrophe, take a look at the Guardian's Brexit Watch item today. Real income down, productivity crashing, the falling pound causing inflation, borrowing up, growth grinding to a halt. The double-page spread is full of unalloyed factual information, Iains, as well as expert analysis. Now that's a source - only one source, of course, but I'd back it over those shabby tabloids of yours any day.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 05:26 AM

I was going to correct him on the Peak District comment as well Steve but if I am on Penyghent I would prefer him to be in the Peak District.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 05:54 AM

Do you mean his peak district comment, Dave? 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 06:03 AM

pRoBaBly

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 06:24 AM

The Labour manifesto is still available for download (as is the Conservative manifesto).

So if you really want to, it is easy to check what was in the manifesto, rather than rely on third party interpretations.