BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 08:02 AM

Complete denial yet again, yet more dishonesty and furthermore absolutely no evidence to support such a claim.



Keep digging.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 08:25 AM

"If you mean this forum, you have not seen it."
Piccanninny is a racist term - it is recognised as a racist term - Johnson was accused of using iot as a racist term - you and your thuggish mate are defending it
"No. He used it once in 2003, and no-one thought anything of it."
It has been "thought of" as a racist term since Powell used it in the sixcties
lapse of memory or lies on your part, or what?
Johnson also described Obama's heritage racially, giving it as a reason why people with such heritage hated Britain - you have kept somewhat silent that one.
"Here it is again,"
That is not a quote - itr is once again, your distortion of what people have actually said
Please provide a quote of anybody claiming that the entire male Pakistani population is inclined to underage sex because of their "implanted" "and we are all influenced (implanted) by our culture."(now a word used by you and not responded to)
You are lying when you claime any public figure has said it - prove you are not - simply done if you are not lying
Your knuckles-along-the-ground mate seems to have done his usual runner from his "get on your bike" theory of turning workers into itinerants.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 08:49 AM

Greg F. ... defends and supports the likes of Assad in Syria and Hamas in Gaza.

Right, then, you lying piece of dirt: show us all exactly when and where I have done so.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 08:52 AM

So you would walk up to a stranger with a child who happened to be black and say "lovely picanninny" to them would you?

He would, absolutely, and likely has done.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 09:48 AM

Any sign of that direct quote yet Keith or are we just going to have to take your word for it (not) yet again
Jeeze - you Christians!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 10:21 AM

Jim,
It has been "thought of" as a racist term since Powell used it in the sixcties

No it has not. That is why you can find nothing to back your silly assertion.

Johnson also described Obama's heritage racially,

Everyone's heritage is "racial," silly.


You are lying when you claime any public figure has said it - prove you are not

I have done over and over again since 2011, yet you still dredge it all up again whenever you lose an argument.
Do you deny that prominent members of that community ascribe the offending to their culture?
No. You can't.
Do you deny that we are all influenced to some extent by the culture we are all implanted with.
No. You can't.
Did I make any claim about it anyway?
No. I just said I believed them. Why would anyone not?

Now please, stop trying to smear me as a person just because you are losing another argument.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 10:28 AM

" No it has not. That is why you can find nothing to back your silly assertion"

How can not comprehend that Powell was castigated for using the term in 19168, how can you not comprehend that Johnson apologised also for using the word.

Did these things not happened, is the rest of the country living in a dream world, are the newspapers and websites which report these occurances lying.

Or perchance you are a racist who is trying desperately to crawl away from the things you have written here.

The moving finger writes.........

Keep digging.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 10:29 AM

Rag,
Different argument professor,

According to you, yes.
You said that failing to recognise other forms of racism make you an "abject racist," but not failing to recognise antisemitism.
It is a "different argument."

That is blatant antisemitism Rag.
You are revealed as an abject antisemite.
You should explain yourself or withdraw.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 10:32 AM

How can not comprehend that Powell was castigated for using the term in 19168,

If he was, show us.
You can't because he was not.

how can you not comprehend that Johnson apologised also for using the word.

He did not acknowledge or accept that it was racist. He denied that it was.
He apologised for any offence is all.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 10:43 AM

Hmmmm .......... your delusions, not of great deal of help there. My knowledge of psychology is limited to the first year of my degree when it was one of the options that I took.

That you cannot or, more to the point will not, understand the written word is obvious to all. That you lie to yourself and believe it to be the truth is obvious to all. That you are in complete denial is obvious to all. My advice would be to seek medical help.

In the meantime ......... Keep digging.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 10:46 AM

Link 1

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/mayor/boris-says-sorry-over-blacks-have-lower-iqs-article-in-the-spectator-6630340.html

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 11:18 AM

"No it has not. That is why you can find nothing to back your silly assertion."
Yes it is Keith and you damn well know it
Johnson was castigated for its use and he aplogised for using it
What the hell is it with you people are you insane?
"I have done over and over again since "]
You are lying Keith and you've proved that yourself
The only thing you've ever been able to dredge up is claims of "over-representation.
Such a statement as your is profoundly racist - anybody making it would at least have been dismissed from any position they held and they would be liable for prosecution.
No modern culture encourages the rape of children - none
Once again you have proved yourself totally shameless
If you have produced it - link to it.
I really think were''re done here for the time being - don't you?
How can you live with yourself?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 01:18 PM

Jim,
Such a statement as your is profoundly racist -

Hardly.
My statement was just that I believed all those prominent members of that community.
How is that racist?

You resort to trying to smear me every time you lose an argument.
That statement is five years old you have tried to misrepresent it as racist several times a year every year since.

Other Mudcatters have asked you to stop, but you have nothing else, you sad man.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 01:30 PM

Rag,
Your link 1. is about something Johnson did not write.
It is dated 2008, and refers to something published years earlier than that.
It was dredged up by Livingstone to try and smear Johnson who was standing against him for Mayor.

No-one really believed he was racist, or he would not have beaten Livingstone to become twice Mayor of the otherwise solidly Labour London.
It was all smear tactics, and it failed miserably.
Like you boys.

Jim,
(italics not working)"No it has not. That is why you can find nothing to back your silly assertion."
Yes it is Keith and you damn well know it (end italics)

So can you find anything to support your silly assertion?
No.
Come back when you can.
Good luck with that Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 03:17 PM

"So can you find anything to support your silly assertion?"
Don't get out of that easy - you have claimed something which is horrendously racist - you claim others told you to say it - you lied whi the **** wants to discuss anything with a serial liar?
If it's a smear - give your quotes - it really doesn't get more simple than that.
AS far as "picanninny ids concerned - every sentient human being knows it is regarded as a racist insult and has been for a long time
"Controversial usage[edit]
"The term was controversially used ("wide-grinning picaninnies") by the British Conservative politician Enoch Powell in his "Rivers of Blood" speech on 20 April 1968. In 1987, Governor Evan Mecham of Arizona defended the use of the word, claiming: "As I was a boy growing up, blacks themselves referred to their children as pickaninnies. That was never intended to be an ethnic slur to anybody."[14] Before becoming the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson wrote that "the Queen has come to love the Commonwealth, partly because it supplies her with regular cheering crowds of flag-waving piccaninnies." He later apologised for the article. [15][16]"
Your defence of this term confirms your racism
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 03:24 PM

Keep digging

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 04:44 PM

The whole tenor of your posts about the child abuse in Rochdale was to focus on the British Asian community. You were obsessed with it and you called on out-of-context remarks by various witnesses and investigators to confirm your prejudice. Always appeals to authority, never what Keith thinks. You ignored the glaringly-obvious fact that 99% of that community were not involved and would have been no less revolted by it as you and I were. But on and on and on you went. Your modus operandi. You've done it here again with Labour's alleged antisemitism. It wouldn't be half so bad if you were honest enough to focus equally on other abuses, such as the serial mistreatment of Palestinians by the Israeli regime and the weak-kneed complicity of successive US administrations under pressure from the undemocratic pro-Israel lobby. You're a very sad little man. The M60 was a real bastard this morning but I got past Birmingham quite speedily. There are people in that area who I like to shoot by as fast as possible and I don't mean Lenny Henry.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Aug 16 - 05:00 PM

"No-one really believed he was racist, or he would not have beaten Livingstone to become twice Mayor of the otherwise solidly Labour London.
It was all smear tactics, and it failed miserably"

"No-one?" Well I believe that hundreds of thousands voted against Boris. Are you a mind-reader? Maybe you mean "no-one important," i.e. "no-one who isn't at least as right-wing as me." I should also remind you that four million people voted for the overtly-racist UKIP. Racism doesn't necessarily seem to put a certain type of person off...

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 01:59 AM

Raggy,

Thanks for those links, but they have already been posted twice before so nothing new there.

I see the name Ken Livingston mentioned in them. Is that the same Ken Livingston who is currently suspended from the Labour Party?

The same Ken Livingston who said in the 2012 London Mayoral Elections:

"Livingstone stood for the Labour candidacy as 2012 Mayoral candidate. His campaign attracted criticism when he joked that the election was "a simple choice between good and evil",[296] and when he was accused of anti-semitism by Jewish Labour supporters for suggesting that being largely wealthy, the Jewish community would not vote for him. He denied making the comments, but nevertheless apologised.[297][298][299]"

The same Ken Livingston:

"In April 2016, Livingstone commented publicly on the suspension of Labour MP Naz Shah; she had been removed from the party after it was revealed that she had made comments on Facebook suggesting that Israeli Jews should be relocated to the United States.[314] Livingstone stated that Shah's postings, which were made before she became an MP at the 2015 general election, were "completely over the top" and "rude",[315] although he did not deem them antisemitic.[316] He asserted that there is a "well-orchestrated campaign by the Israel lobby to smear anybody who criticises Israeli policy as antisemitic",[317] and also stated that Adolf Hitler "was supporting Zionism before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews".[315]

He defended his claims by reference to Lenni Brenner's Zionism in the Age of the Dictators,[318] and many commentators suggested that Livingstone was referring to the Haavara Agreement between Nazi Germany and the Zionist Federation of Germany.[319][320][321][322] Livingstone's statements were criticised by historians,[323][324] among them Roger Moorhouse, who said that they were historically inaccurate.[325] However political scientist Norman Finkelstein said that whilst "Livingstone maybe wasn't precise enough, and lacked nuance", his comments did reflect an initial ambivalence on the part of Hitler towards Zionism and other Jewish territorialist projects before the Nazi adoption of the Final Solution, though he conceded Livingstone may have made the remark simply to "bait" critics of Naz Shah.[326] Livingstone also became involved in a public argument on the subject with the Labour MP John Mann.[327]

Livingstone was subsequently suspended from Labour Party membership "for bringing the party into disrepute".[328] Over 20 Labour MPs called for Livingstone's suspension, while Jon Lansman, founder of the pro-Corbyn Momentum group, called for Livingstone to leave politics altogether,[328] and Khan called for his expulsion from the party.[318] In a subsequent interview, Livingstone expressed regret both for mentioning Hitler and for offending Jews but added that "I'm not going to apologise for telling the truth."[329][330] Corbyn announced that the decision to expel Livingstone would be made by a National Executive Committee internal inquiry, whilst Livingstone insisted that he would be exonerated on the basis of Brenner's book, saying "how can the truth be an offence?"[331] Following this controversy, Livingstone has questioned whether or not he has Jewish ancestry on his mother's side stating that Greville Janner used to speculate whether or not he was Jewish because "my grandmother's name was Zona."[332]

Livingstone was sacked in Spring 2016 by LBC. He was quoted by The Daily Telegraph as saying this was because of his comments about Hitler.[333] With the former Conservative minister David Mellor, Livingstone had co-hosted a Saturday morning current affairs programme on LBC for 8 years.[333]

That the man that accuses Boris Johnson of being a racist? If so you'd have to admire his brass-necked hypocrisy.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 02:36 AM

"That the man that accuses Boris Johnson of being a racist? "
No-one had to accuse Johnson of being a racist - his own words make that unnecessary - and his appointment has smeared the entire administration with the same brush.
No decent government would ever appoint anybody with such a cloud handing over him into such a senior position - it would have been unthinkable.
Brexit really has brought British politics out into the opem.
Thought I'd dig out a theme tune for you Cap'n!
To be played in times of stress
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 04:25 AM

Jim,
No decent government would ever appoint anybody with such a cloud handing over him into such a senior position

And no government has, because there is no cloud.
He only used the word once, back in 2003, and no-one thought it wrong at the time.
In 2008. Livingstone dredged it up in a failed attempt to smear his rival for Mayor of London.
Boris was elected twice even though London was solidly Labour before and since.
NO-ONE BELIEVED HE WAS RACIST!

Your quote from Wiki is worthless.
There was much controversy about Powell's message, but none at all about his language. The "controversial" assertion is not supported.
Wiki noted, "This article needs additional citations for verification."

every sentient human being knows it is regarded as a racist insult and has been for a long time

Yes Jim, but only in USA.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 04:28 AM

Rag,
Different argument professor,

According to you, yes.
You said that failing to recognise other forms of racism make you an "abject racist," but failing to recognise antisemitism does not.

It is a "different argument."
That is blatant antisemitism Rag.
You are revealed as an abject antisemite.
You should explain yourself or withdraw.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 04:40 AM

"And no government has, because there is no cloud."
Not to a racist there isn't Keith
Johnson has hit the headlines by being accused of racism on numerous occasions - even if there had been an excuse for what he said, the last thing any decent government should do is appoint anybody with his record into a senior position - it is totally unprecedented.
It was an obvious deal done between him and Ms Mayfly to secure the PMs position.
A Brexit shambles - the man is a buffoon anyway
Your quote from Wiki is worthless.
Again, only to a racist
"This article needs additional citations for verification.""
There was never any doubt Powell used the invective he did - I watched his ***** diatribe
"Yes Jim, but only in USA.
**** rubbish Keith - and if you were not set on winning competitions you'd admit it.
Your performance here has been pathetic
If your malignant racism wasn't so damaging to so many innocent people, one could almost feel sorry for you.
That doesn't include your thuggish mate - he deserves all the humiliation he gets
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 04:50 AM

THE HAAVARA AGREEMENT
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 04:51 AM

Are you a bit confused professor

Yesterday you posted:
"Rag, Your link 1. is about something Johnson did not write.
It is dated 2008, and refers to something published years earlier than that"

Today you posted:
"He only used the word once, back in 2003, and no-one thought it wrong at the time"

Keep digging.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 05:02 AM

Jim,
you have claimed something which is horrendously racist

No I have not.
My only claim was that there was an over-representation, and that was and is true.

Steve, you have chosen to join Jim's smear campaign with lies of your own.

Your lie, " You ignored the glaringly-obvious fact that 99% of that community were not involved "

The truth is that I acknowledged many times in that 2011 thread that only a tiny minority were involved. Your smear is a blatant lie.

Your lie, "The whole tenor of your posts about the child abuse in Rochdale was to focus on the British Asian community. You were obsessed with it "

The truth is that I ignored the issue for days, posting about the original subject instead. My first post on the subject was to defend the victims when someone blamed them for their own abuse.

Your lie, "you called on out-of-context remarks by various witnesses and investigators to confirm your prejudice"

The truth is that I quoted in context, providing links to the original sources so the quotes could be seen in their original context.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 05:07 AM

Are you a bit confused Rag?

Yesterday I posted:
"Rag, Your link 1. is about something Johnson did not write.
It is dated 2008, and refers to something published years earlier than that"

That was correct. it was published years earlier and it was not written by him.

Today I posted:
"He only used the word once, back in 2003, and no-one thought it wrong at the time"

That is also correct, but refers to the P word. Your link was about something else.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 05:13 AM

My word you are confused, a link to a headline that states:

"Johnson's Picanninies Apology"

Really about something else?

Keep digging.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 05:14 AM

Jim,
the last thing any decent government should do is appoint anybody with his record into a senior position -

Or elect him mayor of London twice?
If anyone believed all that shit, they would not have elected him Mayor of London twice.

There was never any doubt Powell used the invective he did - I watched his ***** diatribe

So did I. There was much controversy about Powell's message, but none at all about his language. There was no controversy about the P word.
That is why you can only quote that spurious Wiki page.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 05:17 AM

Rag, My word you are confused.
Your link 1 does not have that headline and is not about the P word.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 05:23 AM

Try again professor, Yesterday at 10.46AM

The link that says Link 1.

Keep digging.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 05:48 AM

"Or elect him mayor of London twice?"
Sys much for the soft underbelly of Little England, doesn't it?
London is the mostr racist city I have ever lived in - ask anybody whose been stopped and searched, or you might try Stephen Lawrence's parents.
I can still remember phoning up about a job when I first moved there and being asked what colour I was.
You make Holocuast deniers look like L-Drivers.
There was controversy about Powell's racist invective and there still is.
post:
POWELL'S HATE INVECTIVE
You seen to have moved on from suggesting that Powell did not say what he said to defending his language
Powell was saying much that the Tories agreed with at the time - what they sacked him for was the way he said it
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 06:38 AM

Rag, you gave the heading "link 1" followed by a blue clickie with URL.
I see now that both were blue clickies.
Neither of them challenges anything I have said, so what is your point?

Jim,
Sys much for the soft underbelly of Little England, doesn't it?
London is the mostr racist city I have ever lived in -

Rubbish. London has a staunchly Labour supporting electorate.
They only made an exception for Johnson.
They would not have if they believed any of that shit.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 06:47 AM

Have you forgotten already, you really are confused.

"Your link 1 does not have that headline and is not about the P word"

Keep digging

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 07:06 AM

So what?
Ihe first link had already been discussed and does not establish any racism at all, so what is your point?
The second link was about something else altogether that Johnson did not even write!

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 07:13 AM

1. Denial again.

2. The Editor of a publication is ultimately responsible for the content.

However

Keep digging.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 08:34 AM

RE: 03 Aug 16 - 08:49 AM

We're still waiting, T-Bird.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 09:10 AM

Rag,
Keep digging.

No need.
You have been buried.
You have produced nothing to show that the P word is racist outside USA, because you can't.

Now, will you explain your own apparent antisemitism Rag.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 09:14 AM

Yet more denial professor.

Johnson apologised for using the term, why would he do that if it wasn't racist and offensive.

However keep digging, each time you express your support for the use of the word it merely shouts out I AM A RACIST !

As I say please keep digging, it's very amusing.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 09:22 AM

Raggytash - 04 Aug 16 - 04:51 AM

You are drawing attention to two completely different things.

The IQ thing was something that someone else wrote that appeared in the Spectator while Boris Johnson was it's Editor.

The other instance which when put in context referred to the Queen, the Commonwealth and children waving flags was written by Boris Johnson and he penned that in 2002. As Keith A states no-one objected to it at that time, and it was only dragged to smear Johnson in the London Mayoral election by Ken Livingston - where the electorate of London were so incensed by Johnsons "racist" remarks that they elected him not once but twice.

There is a thread above the line about a Ewan MacColl cartoon that has appeared in Private Eye - There is a link to it showing the cartoon. Those who are minded enough to, could quite easily claim the cartoon to be "racist" and offensive pandering as it appears to, to racial stereotypes. Certainly more "racist" than anything Boris Johnson has said.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 09:22 AM

From Haaretz today:

REUTERS - The number of anti-Semitic incidents in Britain rose by 11 percent in the first six months of the year reflecting a worrying trend of intolerance across the country, a Jewish advisory body said on Thursday.

The Community Security Trust, which advises Britain's estimated 260,000 Jews on security matters, recorded 557 incidents from January until June, the second highest number for the first period of a year since it started collecting figures in 1984.

The year-on-year rise comes at a time when politicians and police have warned about growing levels of hate crimes since Britons voted to leave the European Union on June 23, with Muslims and Eastern Europeans particularly targeted, although the CST said it had not seen a spike after the referendum.

It also follows accusations of anti-Semitism against figures in the opposition Labour Party.

"This rise in reported anti-Semitism comes at a time when division, intolerance and prejudice appear to be deepening within our society," said CST Chief Executive David Delew.

"Reversing this worrying trend requires real leadership from all political parties, and for the social media companies to take their share of the responsibility."

In its report, the CST said the average monthly number of hate incidents directed at the Jewish community was now almost double that recorded in 2011-13.

Social media was the medium for almost a quarter of all incidents and had become an "essential tool" for campaigns of anti-Semitic harassment aimed at Jewish public figures and politicians.

One Labour Jewish lawmaker, Luciana Berger, reported in April she had received thousands of online abusive messages including threats to rape her.

The CST said most of the occurrences took place in April, May and June when anti-Semitism was in the news with Berger's disclosure and Labour launching an inquiry into whether the party had a problem in its ranks ranging from a former London Mayor to Oxford University students.

"The message should go out to everyone that we will not stand for anti-Semitism. Perpetrators of hate crimes against Jews will be caught and prosecuted and the bystanders must be educated," said lawmaker John Mann, chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group Against Antisemitism.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 09:32 AM

As I said earlier Teri, as Editor Johnson was ultimately responsible for articles printed in the Spectator.

He allowed a racist and offensive article to be printed so he must carry the can.

As to the other article it matter not one jot that it was about the Queen or the Commonwealth. Johnson used a word that was racist and offensive.

He issued an apology for the use of the word. FULL STOP. No if's, no but's, no maybe's. He acknowledge the word was racist and offensive.

It would seem there are two people who do not recognise this truth.

However I am enjoying watching the professor dig a deeper and deeper hole.

Carry on professor !! Keep digging !!

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 09:35 AM

"WE" are waiting Greg F. ??

That the "royal" we?

What is it that you are waiting for? Answers to specific questions? Substantiation of something said?

If so Greg F. I would like to remind you and your pals that you have got quite a back-log of your own to clear first - I'll wait for that to be done first.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 09:58 AM

Well, Keith-the-prosecutor-judge-and-jury-man who stated that Naz Shah was antisemitic, would you kindly note that even Haaretz only refers to "accusations of antisemitism" and "reported antisemitism" and does not pin the badge on anyone, as you have unjustifiably done (I also note with amusement that MPs are now "lawmakers" according to Haaretz, twice, but we'll let that pass). Anyway, cheers to bobad for producing material that should help Keith to moderate his tone, not for the first time either! 😂

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 10:10 AM

Raggytash - 04 Aug 16 - 09:32 AM

As I said earlier Teri, as Editor Johnson was ultimately responsible for articles printed in the Spectator.

He allowed a racist and offensive article to be printed so he must carry the can.

And he apologised for that and for any offence caused. Now while it appears to be enough for Labour MPs to escape censure for causing offence and making "racist" remarks by apologising - that is not acceptable if you happen to be a Conservative ("One sauce for the Goose another for the Gander" - So much for "equality eh Raggy).

"As to the other article it matter not one jot that it was about the Queen or the Commonwealth. Johnson used a word that was racist and offensive.

He issued an apology for the use of the word. FULL STOP. No if's, no but's, no maybe's. He acknowledge the word was racist and offensive."

Well that is not really true is it Raggy:

1: Written in 2002 nobody objected to the article at the time - that would come years later.

2: He did apologise for any offence caused but in making that apology he did state that what had been written had been taken out of context and that in content and in context what he had written was neither "racist" or "offensive".

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 10:19 AM

"And he apologised for that and for any offence caused. Now while it appears to be enough for Labour MPs to escape censure for causing offence and making "racist" remarks by apologising - that is not acceptable if you happen to be a Conservative ("One sauce for the Goose another for the Gander" - So much for "equality eh Raggy)"

Tell your mate who is in denial over this.

PS It's not "racist" it's racist.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 10:32 AM

Why do you type "racist" and "offensive" instead of racist and offensive.

Someone else in denial perhaps.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 11:41 AM

Rag,
Johnson apologised for using the term, why would he do that if it wasn't racist and offensive.

He only apologised for any offence, as politicians always do.

He acknowledge the word was racist

He did not! You are making shit up Rag.
He denied any racism.

Keep digging.

No need.
You have been buried.
You have produced nothing to show that the P word is racist outside USA, because you can't.

Now, will you explain your own apparent antisemitism Rag.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 11:44 AM

Greg, are you saying that you do not support or defend Hamas?
Will you say that now?

Why have you never once criticised Hamas?
You criticise Israel all the time.
Why do you treat them so differently?

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Aug 16 - 11:47 AM

The remarks would have been racist and offensive if someone had thought so when they first appeared in print, They didn't though did they? The remarks were dragged up as part of Ken Livingston's attempt to smear Boris Johnson in the election to the position of Mayor of London years later so it would appear that the remarks were only "racist" and "offensive" to those who sought to gain political capital by portraying them as being "racist" and "offensive".

Funny isn't it that the person who complained out Boris being "racist" and "offensive" proved to be not beyond being racist and offensive himself to the extent that by being so he was suspended from the Labour Party as he had brought that political party into disrepute.

By the way who is in denial about what? The plain truth is that Labour's NEC ordered an inquiry into anti-Semitism and found the resulting report too embarrassing to allow its contents to be made public - so they buried it.

It would appear that for you and your pals it is perfectly OK for someone in the Labour Party, who is a self-confessed racist, to get off the hook by making an apology - but a Conservative who made remarks in 2002 that were belatedly deemed by some to be "racist" and "offensive" and for which that person apologised for any offence caused about ten years ago now should not be eligible for any post in Government, That Raggy, is what I call bare-faced hypocrisy.