BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Aug 16 - 11:29 PM

Quite. All lefties are totally corrupt. They always obtain money by deception and never declare it. If they detect even the faintest whiff of a possible peerage in the air they immediately promise a whitewash report. Bastards to a man, eh?

"Oh sure, we believe that". Well when reds are suspected of dodgy dealing, you don't need evidence. Ask Keith. All cooked-up suspicions automatically confirmed. Say no more. Bloody commies. What more do you need to know?

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 03:07 AM

From Teri "Well now Shaw perhaps you should ask your pal Raggy about that and also ask Joe Offer - they will tell you that contrary to your "belief" that if I make a mistake I do not only admit it but that I also apologise for my error. "

Perhaps you would like to reiterate that Cork is on the East coast of Ireland.

http://www.mapsofworld.com/lat_long/ireland-lat-long.html

Here's a map to help you.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 03:51 AM

Steve, everyone knows that peerages are awarded to party donors, but there is NO EVIDENCE THAT ANYONE ACCEPTED A PEERAGE IN RETURN FOR A DONATION, so it is always wrong to make that inference, right Steve?

Or are you once again employing different criteria where antisemitism is involved?

What form could proof for either take? Only confession.

You claim to see racism in the most trivial of cases.
You claimed it racists to describe Alibhai Brown as Pakistani.
Perhaps in your ignorance you consider the word an insult.
It is not, and it is how she chooses to describe herself so it can not be racist.

However, when faced with blatant racism but in the form of antisemitism, you claim not to see it, perhaps because those guilty are politically your friends.
In your politics the end always justifies the means, right Steve?

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 03:59 AM

Blatant racism .............. calling a man who was born in Tooting Pakistani merely because of the colour of his skin.

Now that's BLATANT racism.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 04:34 AM

You have a racist obsesssion with skin colour Rag.
Skin colour is irrelevant in this.
I described Alibhai Brown as Pakistani because she is of that heritage and grew up within that culture, and because that is how she describes herself.

How can you call her racist for so describing herself, but not antisemitism so blatant that it "appalled" the "entire" National Executive Committee of the Labour Party?

"Different argument" again Rag?
It is antisemitic to have such double standards.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 04:36 AM

Raggytash - 08 Aug 16 - 03:07 AM

Now then Raggy - Give the context in which I said that Cork was an east coast port. It was something to do with the "Famine" and connected with the existing infrastructure of the time and the means and the ability to transport food to where it was needed.

If you wish to discuss this further Raggy I'd be delighted to do so - you could re-open the thread. But somehow I don't think that you will.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 05:02 AM

You said that Sadiq Khan was a Pakinstani.

He was born and raised in Tooting, South London. He describes himself first and foremost as a London.

That is just a very clear example (yet again) of your racism.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 05:07 AM

The context doesn't reposition a city Teri.

Have a look on the map I provided and then come back and tell us   again that "if I make a mistake I do not only admit it but that I also apologise for my error."

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 05:10 AM

Rag, if it is right to describe Alibhai Brown as Pakistani, as does does herself, why not Khan too?
The word is not an insult, except to racists Rag.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 05:17 AM

Because Sadiq Khan was born in London.

Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, who was born in Uganda, is an adult she can describe herself as she chooses.

It is your racism that describes Sadiq Khan as a Pakistani.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 05:35 AM

"NO EVIDENCE THAT ANYONE ACCEPTED A PEERAGE IN RETURN FOR A DONATION"
Life Peerages for donationins
What there is no evidence of is a serious problem of Antisemmitism in te Labiour Party - you have produced none, neither has anybody else
Perhaps it's time to remind you of your past support for British Antisemitism?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 05:43 AM

"he word is not an insult, except to racists Rag."
"Racist" rag has never described the entire British male Pakistani population as culturally implanted racists of children as you have
Rag has not defended blatant racism from the foreign Secretary - as you have
Rag hasn't defended Antisemitic filth broadcast by British peers and industrialists as "no more important than the theme song of Dad's Army - as you have
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 06:21 AM

Steve Shaw - 07 Aug 16 - 05:21 PM

The report was spot on. There were ignorant attitudes and there were remarks made that were unwise. Making remarks about Israel and the Nazis in the same breath is not appropriate. All matters that must be addressed, but the party is not overrun by antisemitism. That is no whitewash. You wouldn't have been satisfied unless every member of the party had been named by her as a rabid antisemite. To you and your ilk, anything less is a whitewash. Sorry, but you are not entitled to make accusations that you can't support. Think all the evil thoughts about her you like, but you have NO EVIDENCE THAT SHE ACCEPTED A PEERAGE IN RETURN FOR A WHITEWASH. To make that accusation without evidence makes you a nasty little shit.

1: The report was spot on

If the report was spot on Shaw so were the reasons that not one but two investigations were commissioned by Labour's NEC the first occasioned by leading members of the Oxford University Labour Club resigning because they felt that they could no longer participate and attend meetings in safety - This Inquiry was conducted by Baroness Royall, she too found that anti-Semitism was not institutionalised but she did state that there were serious concerns that required immediate and sustained action. She also found that this was not only a problem for the University Labour Club but that the same situation existed throughout the Labour party to varying degrees. That is what gave rise to the Inquiry entrusted to Shami Chakrabarti.

Royall's recommendations included seven additional points that she suggested Chakrabarti's inquiry should adopt. Three of the seven were ignored making the key difference between the reports is that Chakrabarti offers amnesty to antisemites while Royall recommended robust vetting and expulsion if prior bad acts are found. The submission of the Chakrabarti Report, by it's own recommendation, acts as a "shut-off", a watershed if you like, as the NEC will not investigate any incident that predates the date of submission of the report.

Now does anyone want time line for all of this?

15th February, 2016 - The letter to the OULC following the resignation of Alex Chalmers as co-Chair.

18th February, 2016 - Minister for Universities calls for an Inquiry into the allegations of anti-Semitism

February 2016 - Baroness Royall appointed to conduct an Inquiry into anti-Semitism within Oxford University Labour Club

27th April, 2016 - Naz Shah suspended by the Labour Party for anti-semitic comments

28th April 2016 - Ken Livingston suspended by the Labour Party

29th April, 2016 - Shami Chakrabarti appointed to conduct a wider inquiry into anti-Semitism within the Labour Party.

16th May 2016 - Shami Chakrabarti joins the Labour Party.

17th May 2016 - Baroness Royall's recommendations and conclusions are made public the actual report is suppressed by Labour's NEC

23rd June 2016 - EU Referendum

24th June 2016 - David Cameron resigns, shortly thereafter his resignation honours list is compiled. Jeremy Corbyn has a member of his staff contact No 10 to get Shami Chakrabarti's name added to the list.

30th June 2016 - Shami Chakrabarti submits her Report

27th July 2016 - Shami Chakrabarti appears on Newsnight

4th August 2016 - Shami Chakrabarti receives peerage as Jeremy Corbyn's sole nomination in David Cameron's resignation honours list, having been a member of the Labour Party for roughly fourteen weeks.

Now what do you think she had done to deserve that unique honour Shaw?

Showed unswerving and unfailing loyalty to him "Momentum" rather frighteningly refer to as "The Leader"?

For delivering the Report "The Leader" required?

Shami Chakrabarti appeared on national television and was asked a question:

Kirsty Wark: Is there a peerage in the offing? It has been discussed a Labour peerage might be in the offing for you?

Shami Chakrabarti: I don't know Kirsty, are you going to take one?

KW: I haven't been offered one, have you?

SC: Many times

Her last offer came from Tony Blair and Gordon Brown - she turned them down. But on that Newnight programme Chakrabarti lied, because on the 27th July she would have had to have already been offered the peerage and accepted the honour if it was announced on the 4th August.

Stinks to high heaven Shaw and "guilty" or "innocent" neither the Labour Party, "The Leader", Labour's NEC or Shami Chakrabarti have come out of this very well, their timing and judgement has been terrible and as a result of being the opposite of transparent their integrity is in tatters.

2: "There were ignorant attitudes and there were remarks made that were unwise. Making remarks about Israel and the Nazis in the same breath is not appropriate. All matters that must be addressed, but the party is not overrun by anti-Semitism."

Not yet Shaw, not yet.

Oh and before you launch into another diatribe about how this was all some figment of the imaginations of Teribus, Akenaton, Keith A of Hertford and bobad, I would suggest that you read that letter sent to the OULC on the 15th February 2016 that kicked all this off and pay particular attention to those who signed it.

While Baroness Royall stated that anti-semtism was not institutionalised within the OULC and in Labour she did say that there was a "culture of anti-semtism" - care to enlighten me as to what the difference is?

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 06:29 AM

Open Letter to OULC

I know Shaw wouldn't do anything about it, so there it is for all to read.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 06:31 AM

There you go Steve a clear example of Teriblunders version of:

"if I make a mistake I do not only admit it but that I also apologise for my error."

Wasn't it magnificent !!

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 07:51 AM

From Teribus' link:

Lastly – but most distressingly – we observe with horror what Mr Chalmers describes in his note of resignation: "members of the Executive throwing around the term 'Zio' (a term for Jews usually confined to websites run by the Ku Klux Klan)"; senior members expressing "solidarity" with Hamas; claims that "most accusations of anti-Semitism are just the Zionists crying wolf" and the fact that "a large proportion of both OULC and the student left in Oxford more generally have some kind of problem with Jews".

Rather reminiscent of our resident Labour apologists, isn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 08:17 AM

As was your non-response to what was stated and to the challenge offered for you to re-open the thread in question.

For Raggy who earlier questioned my knowledge and education I previously received the following message:

"Hi Teribus, Firstly I know this may be a bit of a shock to you, so apologises for that.

You are obviously interested in the subject and far more knowledgeable than some others on this forum.

Having said that he continued on the same subject after repeatedly proclaiming his own lack of knowledge to tell myself and others that we were all wrong and that he knew better.

By the way Raggy I will direct you to the Thread on Easter Week and the term Field General Court Martial which I disputed and admitted I was in error offering apologies to both Joe Offer and yourself.

Not wishing to acknowledge that and appear to be out of step with Shaw you'd rather show precisely the lack of honesty and integrity that has been shown by the Labour Party under Corbyn over the last seven months - Well done Raggy - you reassure me with practically every post of yours that "Leopards do not change their spots".

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 08:46 AM

You made a statement Terriblossom, you stated quite clearly:

"if I make a mistake I do not only admit it but that I also apologise for my error."

I have merely pointed out that it is not the case. You may prevaricate and tergiversate much as you wish.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 09:10 AM

Also from T-Bird's link, Bubo:

... the words of Nelson Mandela: "As a movement we recognise the legitimacy of Palestinian nationalism just as we recognise the legitimacy of Zionism as a Jewish nationalism. We insist on the right of the state of Israel to exist within secure borders, but with equal vigour support the Palestinian right to national self-determination."

Obviously a Hamas-supporting antisemite was Mr. Mandela.

We don't pretend for a second that there are no problems in Israel-Palestine. We don't ignore the imperfections of Israeli society. We don't overlook the tragedy of conflict.

Obviously the Baroness & friends are also clearly antisemitic. How dare they criticise Israel!

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 09:32 AM

Raggytash - 08 Aug 16 - 08:46 AM

And what mistake have I not admitted and apologised for oh ragged one?

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 10:24 AM

but with equal vigour support the Palestinian right to national self-determination.

Has anyone here said that they don't support a Palestinian national state?

There are some who have a problem with a Jewish national state though.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 10:33 AM

The one I raised again this morning, you know the location of Cork, you've referred to it today, I've given you the map.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 11:11 AM

"There are some who have a problem with a Jewish national state though."
Not on this forum there isn't
If there are, point them out, otherwise, once again you have been proved a lying troll
"And what mistake have I not admitted and apologised for oh ragged one?"
This'll do for a start - lots more where that came from - like democratic Britain in the early 1800s, well off Liverpool, Ireland being tricked into rebellion by foreigners, the peace loving Loyalists, A War to end all Wars....
Difficult to know where to start really!!
You might try explaining why, if there is so much Antisemitism in the Labour Party, nobody, inside or out, has ever put a description or a figure on it?
There - I knew I should have worn my bullshit proof vest!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 11:14 AM

Already said reopen the thread and we can discuss it in the context originally stated. No mistake on my part, the Port of Cork served the eastern side of Ireland, links to the South and to the west of Cork were extremely poor. IIRC correctly the point being made was to do with distribution of food and the lack of deep water ports with all their requisite facilities in the South and West of Ireland. You as usual missed the point completely and roared off on one of your pedantic "Fisking" expeditions.

By the Bye here's a Map for you (Although I fear that you are too dense to realise the significance of it!!):

Severity of Famine - Look at Cork


Population Increased in Cork

The first of those maps showed how the effects of the famine were mitigated round Cork - that demonstrates how extensive distribution infrastructure was. Compare that to the South and to the West.

The population of Cork, Dublin and Belfast grew during the famine years as people cleared off the land in the worst affected areas and moved to where they could get food, work or transportation. The reduction in the size of the population in Ireland between 1845 and 1851 was due to three things in decreasing order of magnitude:

1: Emigration
2: Disease (For which at the time there were no cures)
3: Starvation - the least factor by far.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 11:26 AM

Rag,
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, who was born in Uganda, is an adult she can describe herself as she chooses.

Yes, and the fact that she does even though a British citizen and not born in Pakistan is proof that it is not racist to thus describe someone of that heritage, so drop the silly name calling.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 11:27 AM

To Raggy and to Jom - reopen the threads - you were getting slaughtered on them before I dare say the same will happen again.

Old ground Jom and your arguments were ripped to shreds then.

Thanks for the link though - it wasn't quite as scathing of Kitchener as I think you took it to be. Jim and Gerry missed out some quite amazing and highly significant factors though.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 11:37 AM

Moving the goalposts are we Teri. You stated repeatedly that Cork was on the East coast.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 11:38 AM

You said that a Londoner was a Pakistani merely because you saw the colour of his skin.

Full stop. No if's, no but's, no maybe's.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 11:46 AM

Jim,
Life Peerages for donationins

Your link sttes it can not offer proof.
It describes a statistical algorithm that could not prove any peerage was for a donation or a whitewash report.
Steve was being nauseatingly disingenuous in demanding proof.

What there is no evidence of is a serious problem of Antisemmitism in te Labiour Party -

Serious enough to "appal" the "entire NEC" just with "recent incidents!"

Perhaps it's time to remind you of your past support for British Antisemitism?

Yes please! I did not know you had made one up.

"Racist" rag has never described the entire British male Pakistani population as culturally implanted racists (sic) of children

I am relieved to hear it. Nor have I

Rag has not defended blatant racism from the foreign Secretary -

Good. Neither have I. He would have to resign anyway if he had been blatantly racist, but that is made up too.

Rag hasn't defended Antisemitic filth broadcast by British peers and industrialists as "no more important than the theme song of Dad's Army

Good for him. Nor has anyone else.

Rag,
You said that a Londoner was a Pakistani merely because you saw the colour of his skin.

No. Merely because like Alibhai Brown he was born into that heritage and brought up in that culture.
YOU are the only one who has repeatedly linked it to skin colour.
You have a racists obsession with skin colour, but are oblivious to blatant antisemitism if from hard left Labour.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 11:53 AM

Despite desperate attempts by Jom & Raggy to divert attention away from Labour's problems over anti-Semitism - it still rumbles on with Chakrabarti being accused of deliberately ignoring evidence placed before her and another story of two of Corbyn's main supporters making anti-Semitic remarks.

As for their Leadership election they still haven't even decided upon who can actually vote in it. Apparently the High Court has just announced that all the mugs they conned into parting with £25 now can vote.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 11:56 AM

Goalpost changing Ragged? Nope just reopen the thread and quote in full the post where I originally referred to Cork as an East Coast Port - I think that it was perfectly clear what I meant, and so I suppose do you as you seem so reluctant to do that.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 12:43 PM

Your link sttes it can not offer proof.
A feckin' sight more proof that your claim of Antisemitism in the Labour party
Peerages have long been recognised as a way of rewarding donations
"Serious enough to "appal" the "entire NEC" just with "recent incidents!"
You've said this already and still haven't provided any examples of it.
The Labour Party carried out an enquiry and no serious problem was found - you are now attempting on the one hand to undermine that enquiry while on the other, putting forward your misinterpretation of what the NEC said - the NEC accepted that there was no problem - if there is - name it and shame it or stand as the liar you are.
"Yes please! I did not know you had made one up."
Just put it up Keith
We were discussing the Fascist 'Right Club' - made up of Tory Politicians, Peers of the realm, including the Duke of Wellington and industrialists, press barons and other prominent figures who were attempting to form a provisional government at a time when the war was in the balance and Jews were being herded into extermination camps.
Yur dismissed them as a bunch of harmless cranks and, when presented with some of the Antisemitic filthy that was being published in their 'Journal' you dismissed it an unimportant and claimed it was as "harmless" as the theme song from Dad;s Army
It seems, your line hasn't changed here much - Tory Antisemitism isn't worth bothering about but it's worth while inventing Labour Antisemitism
You are a racist, an apologist for Government racism, and a an enthusiastic supporter of the appointment of a racist Foreign Secretary.
The fact that neither of you will explain why the Governmewnt won't hold a demanded enquiry into Islamophobia, makes all of these transparent.
Now take your accusations of "racism" and stick them where they beloing, you squalid little man
RACIST JOHNSON
"Old ground Jom and your arguments were ripped to shreds then"
No they weren't - you did a runner on all of them - how could they be "ripped to shreds" when you refuse to provide proof to anything you claim
Who the ****'s goung to believe an arrogant biggoted flag-waggger who sti;; yearns for the Empire
Dreamm on
Now - you were going to tell us all about this Labour Paty Antisemitism - what is it - how many people practice it - who says they do - what evidence do they provide
I knew I should have wor that bullshitproof shirt
Jim Carroll
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 12:59 PM

"You have a racists obsession with skin colour, but are oblivious to blatant antisemitism if from hard left Labour"
And you have stated quiute clearly that myou8 believe all male Pakistanis in Britain to have been culturally inplanted implanted with    a tendency to rape underage girls - and you've just confirmed that this is sill your view"We are all implanted to some extent by our culture "
The implication of this is that the Muslim culture produces perverts
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 01:28 PM

A reminder of what you were describing as "silly "– the song was written at the time the Jews were beginning to learn the lessons of Nazism.
You arean Antisemitc shitbag Keith
Jim Carroll

BS: Ireland-What happened? thread
Hymn 1939
Land of dope and Jewry,
Land that once was free,
All the Jew boys praise thee
While they plunder thee.

Poorer still and poorer
Grow the trueborn sons,
Faster still and faster
They're sent to feed the guns.

Land of Jewish finance,
Fooled by Jewish lies,
In press and books and movies
While our birthright dies.

Longer still and longer
Is the rope they get
But, by the God of battles
T'will serve to hang them yet.

Your response.

Subject: RE: BS: Ireland-What happened?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 16 Dec 10 - 12:57 PM
Silly songs don't count, or I could post "Who Do You Think You Are Kidding Mr Hitler" as proof to the contrary!

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 01:39 PM

Jim,
Peerages have long been recognised as a way of rewarding donations
No. That has never been given as the reason for any peerage.
It is just quietly understood that is the reason, as with whitewashing.

"Serious enough to "appal" the "entire NEC" just with "recent incidents!"
You've said this already and still haven't provided any examples of it.

No need to, unless you think that "the entire NEC" were lying!

Yur dismissed them as a bunch of harmless cranks and, when presented with some of the Antisemitic filthy that was being published in their 'Journal' you dismissed it an unimportant and claimed it was as "harmless" as the theme song from Dad;s Army

Not true.
Produce a quote why don't you?!

a demanded enquiry into Islamophobia

Demanded by who? Just you Jim?

And you have stated quiute clearly that myou8 believe all male Pakistanis in Britain to have been culturally inplanted implanted with    a tendency to rape underage girls

I never have or would state such nonsense

this is sill your view"We are all implanted to some extent by our culture "

It is my view, and an obvious truth.

The implication of this is that the Muslim culture produces perverts

Utter bollocks.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 02:02 PM

"No. That has never been given as the reason for any peerage."
Of couse it hasn't - you don't think these pricks tell us what they get up to
You have the link
"No need to, unless you think that "the entire NEC" were lying! "
No they weren't - yo are by deliberately distorting what they actually said
Where has anybody proved a "serious" problem
All your own work Keith
No justify your claim bey describing it - or at least, lining to a description of it
No?
Thought not.
"Not true.
Produce a quote why don't you?!"
Have just done just that - you are a liar and have been proven to be one - again.
"Demanded by who? Just you Jim?"
Youve been given it half a dozen times - here's another
DEMAND FOR ENQUIRY INTO ISLAMOPHOBIA
Maybe it doesn't count if it's made by "implanted" perverts
"Utter bollocks."
Of course it's utter bollocks tomake such an ourageously racist claimn - whyu do it
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 02:39 PM

Looking for a "prominent person" so you can claim you were only saying it was a bit of harmless fun because somebody told you to Keith?
Now - anout all these Antisemites in the Labour Party - who are they and what are they saying?
Your mate seems to have fecked off again
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 03:34 PM

Can't wait to see what Bobad has to say about all this, but maybe he believes Antisemitic songs are a bit of fun if they're written by Tories!!
JimCarroll

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 03:41 PM

Nope, I recall, even if you don't, that you told me I couldn't read a compass or navigate, that you had done all these things, sailed tall ships, been in the navy and that you KNEW Cork was on the East coast of Ireland.

You went very quite when I first attached the map I have included today, Can't quite think why.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 05:54 PM

In The Navy

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 07:08 PM

Now let's see. You make an accusation that this woman has accepted a peerage IN RETURN FOR A WHITEWASH. Then you tell us not to be silly because the accusation is unprovable. So why are you making an unprovable accusation? In a court of law that would be thrown out among laughter and derision from judge and jury. The point here is that the accusation did not exist until anti-Labour and (more particularly) pro-Israeli factions made it. The onus is squarely on your shoulders to prove your claim, not on us to disprove what you say. You started it, so let's see you seeing this through. Timelines, coincidences, putting two and two together to make five and character assassinations, not to speak of insinuations about the innate corruptness of the left, are not evidence. The fact that you won't back down on this scurrilous and unsupportable smear against someone whose politics don't suit you speaks volumes about your dishonesty and lack of integrity, qualities that she has in spades but which have evaded you completely.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 07:45 PM

" In a court of law that would be thrown out among laughter and derision from judge and jury."

As no actual crime has been committed that would be a civil court Shaw, where no such absolutes as "beyond" reasonable doubt apply, cases are judged on probability and taking into account the events and the time line I do not think that it would be beyond the bounds of probability that your jury would conclude that there had been a pay off for a "whitewash".

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Aug 16 - 09:23 PM

I do not think that it would be beyond the bounds of probability that your jury would conclude that there had been a pay off for a "whitewash".

Only if said jury was made up of individuals with your mental prowess, T-Bird.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Aug 16 - 01:37 AM

Greg F. - 08 Aug 16 - 09:23 PM

Not so Greg F. - I am not the only person who thinks this whole thing stinks, not by a long shot.

Chakrabarti's report was supposed to be "independent" - it clearly would have been so and beyond question had she remained politically neutral - yet for some reason just over two weeks after having been given the task she feels she has to join the Labour Party.

Corbyn stated that he would never appoint anyone to the House of Lords. He has only ever lobbied for and put forward one nomination - Shami Chakrabarti - a staunch, loyal and valued member of the Labour Party who had given invaluable service for all of 14 weeks - Of course it was entirely coincidental and totally immaterial that she just happened to be investigating the Labour Party for racist behaviour at the time.

Chakrabarti accepted the honour, the timing of which could not have been worse, in doing so she shot the integrity of her report and herself to shreds. She did that Greg F. not me, not Keith A, not Akenaton or bobad, She did that and rather a large number of people, in politics, in various action groups and in the media think that. Maybe that is why there was so much chatter about it.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Aug 16 - 01:50 AM

Steve Shaw - 08 Aug 16 - 07:08 PM

"Now let's see. You make an accusation ............. The onus is squarely on your shoulders to prove your claim, not on us to disprove what you say. You started it, so let's see you seeing this through."

Remember those words Shaw, they are yours and they are, without any shadow of a doubt, going to come back and bite you and your pals.

As to the honesty, the impartiality and the integrity of the Report in question and the subsequent award of a peerage - far from being a deliberate and well orchestrated anti-Labour or pro-Israeli smear campaign, the first cries of foul came from within the Labour Party itself.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 16 - 03:56 AM

" I am not the only person who thinks this whole thing stinks, not by a long shot."
What the **** does that mean?
Your, or anybody's "thinking" that somebody is guilty of anything means nothing - proving it is what matters.
To prove something has been covered up requires that you show what has been covered up - you refuse to do so with your bizarre statement that it is not necessary to do so.
Yours and you Antisemitic mates' double standards are unbelievable
One party had been condemned by you for something that had been found not to exist while you fully accept and even defend proven racism in appointing a strutting loud-mouthed racist lout Foreign Secretary.
The Labour Party was accused of Antisemitism, immediately held an enquiry and found there to be none of any significance.
The Tory Party is accused by Islamic community leaders of Islamophobia - it does nothing - and you refuse to comet on that fact.
You accuse The Labour Party of using the honours system to cover something you will not specify, yet you refuse to acknowledge the well-known ongoing corruption in the use of the honours system as a method of fundraising and profiteering.
Bit of a tendency apparent here, don't you think?
You want to prove there to be Antisemitism in the Labour Party - you need to identify what it is, who is involved and how many - basic justice on which our judicial system rests.
The only thing that is definite here is that, as |I said from the begnning - the whole affair is traceable back to Israel's proagands machinations to prevent the Goods Boycott campaign from gaining further ground - Keith's and Bobad's 'witnesses' are examples of that.
Now - let's see if you are capable o dealing with that without your usual three B's - bullshit, bullying and bluster - and let's try it without the pomposity this time.
Jim Carroll

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

To prove something has been covered up requires that you show what has been covered up"

Jom old son I don't really think that you have been following this at all have you?

1: Royall Report 11 recommendations + 7 additional suggested recommendations for the Chakrabarti Inquiry that Royall was shut out of (You cannot obviously influence anyone by offering them a peerage if they already have one can you?)

2: Three of the seven suggested additional recommendations are ignored and Chakrabarti's recommendation basically shuts off any further investigation that would delve into the situation that prevailed prior to her report being submitted. So conveniently for Labour's NEC any calls for any investigation that would expose any wrong doing they can sit back and ignore.

Any suggestion why within the extremely short timespan that Shami Chakrabarti was a member of the Labour Party, "The Leader", decided to do a U-turn on his declared decision not to make any nominations to the Lords and reward the new-comer, who just coincidently was investigating abuse within the Labour Party involving "Momentum" with a peerage - his one and only nomination lobbied for as soon as Cameron announced his resignation.

If that set of circumstances were applied to the Conservative Party you would be screaming "cover-up" and "whitewash" from the rooftops. Unfortunately it is the Labour Party that Corbyn has chosen to destroy that are in the firing line and most complaints are coming from within the Party and that Jom is an undeniable fact.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Aug 16 - 04:48 AM

"You want to prove there to be Antisemitism in the Labour Party - you need to identify what it is, who is involved and how many - basic justice on which our judicial system rests."

Both Royall and Chakrabarti found evidence of anti-Semitism and a culture of tolerance to anti-Semitism within the Labour Party - both mitigated that by stating that as yet it was not "institutionalised" throughout the Labour Party - but 11 recommendations were put forward by Royall and others by Chakrabarti that required "immediate and sustained action" {Royall's words} to prevent anti-Semitism becoming "institutionalised" throughout the Party. You from the outset have never acknowledged that fact.

I do not need to identify whether or not there is anti-Semitism within the Labour Party two inquiries commissioned by Labour's NEC have found that anti-Semitism does exist inside the Labour Party.

I do not have to identify names and numbers, Royall and Chakrabarti already know them, we do know that 50 members were suspended pending investigation and now because of Chakrabarti's report we will never know the results it now all goes quiet - a classic "cover-up".

What Royall and Chakrabarti carried out were internally commissioned inquiries - not a trial so our system of justice does not come into it.

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 16 - 05:26 AM

Well a couple of things (again). First, okay, there has been a distinct lack of spin (refreshing) but a considerable amount of naivity (bloody annoying) over the timing of the enquiry apropos of Chakrabarti's membership and peerage. They really should have seen the flak coming. However, all the dark talk in the world about how these things can't just be coincidences, etc., is NOT EVIDENCE THAT SHE ACCEPTED A PEERAGE IN RETURN FOR A WHITEWASH. Next, the facts of the matter. We KNOW what remarks by Livingstone, Shah and others led to this furore. We KNOW what Chakrabarti said about those remarks and other ignorant and inappropriate comments. She reached a conclusion that there were matters to be addressed but that Labour is not overrun by antisemitism. Which it bloody isn't. So where's the whitewash? Do you actually know the substance of any other remarks that haven't been made public or are you just inventing stuff in your mind to demonise Labour as much as you can?

Subject: RE: BS: (UK) Whither the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 16 - 06:13 AM

"Jom old son I don't really think that you have been following this at all have you?"
Didn't think for a minute you could manage to avoid the three Bs
Get a grip and answer the questions, you arrogant half-wit
An insignificant amount - all relatet to criticism of criticism of Israel - hardly surprising, since the Israeli regime are insisting that all criticisms of its policy - even by Jews, is Anrtisemitic.
No Antisemitism, other than criticism of Israel was found - if it was, what was it and how many were involved - if that's all there was, as the Israelis have made any definition of Antisemitism unusable, so there isn't even a case to answer on that
It is little wonder that the case has been closed on this nonsense.
Labour is in the midst of a leadership attempted coup in which the Blairite New Labour right wing have leapt on this Israel-instigated claim as if it was a 49 bus.
If the Labour Party is to survive, this has to either be proven with evidence and numbers or walked away from.
You bunch of hypocrites have made quite clear that Antisemitism isn't the issue here - one of the most vociferous of your number is a blatant antisemitsm appeaser.
It is about taking a pop at the Labour Party
None of you care a toss for the Jewish People, you don't give two flying ***** abut bigotry or racism, otherwise you would be up in arms aboit Tory racism and bigotry -
THis is all about your hatred of anything that challenges the establishment
Make your case - give us numbers or examples - show us there is evidence of Antisemitism or stick your accusations up your fascist holes.
And please try to come to terms with the fact that you are neither knowlegable or bright enough to talk down to anybody here - if there was a pecking order, you'd be standing in a queue outside the farmyard waiting for your application top be considered
You really are a nasty little squalid - it's little wonder you only have the supporters you do here
Jim Carroll