BS: Demise of the Labour Party

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 22 Jul 16 - 04:16 AM

Sheeesh ! ! ! You must have been one important cook to still have access to naval deployments after all these years.

Just when was it you left the navy?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Jul 16 - 04:02 AM

punkfolkrocker - 21 Jul 16 - 08:48 AM

Btw.. would that be the Sub that just just pranged a ship in a careless collision...

Nope the sub currently tied up alongside the wall in Gib is an Astute-Class SSN and contrary to what some think -----

Raggytash - 21 Jul 16 - 11:32 AM

From the professor deciding that the submarine in question was not carrying nuclear weapons:


"No it was not"

The truth of the matter is that we don't actually know.

The Tomahawk Cruise Missiles carried by HMS Ambush (the latest design of nuclear powered submarine)can be adapted to carry an array of warheads including a nuclear option.

Although production of the given nuclear warhead ceased some time ago almost 2000 were produced and MAY be in service still."

The nuclear weapons carried by RN Submarines have all been built in the UK. The UK has never developed a nuclear warhead for the US supplied Tomahawk Cruise Missile. The USN did make modifications to existing "Tactical" warheads for possible use but these were all "retired" some time ago. The Royal Navy never had access to these weapons.

It would be the height of folly to mount a nuclear weapon on a cruise missile for glaringly obvious reasons. Possibly why the US "retired" those weapons years ago?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Jul 16 - 03:44 AM

Raggytash - 21 Jul 16 - 11:03 AM

Ah so time actually spent in the Royal Navy and personal knowledge and experience wouldn't count then Raggy.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Jul 16 - 02:59 AM

"They are not a first strike weapon."
This becomes bizarrely, you sound more and more like THIS with every line.
It is totally insane to believe that people fanatically driven enough to wrap a bomb around themselves will be deterred by the nuclear threat.
Nuclear weapons threaten all of us - the only people to have used weapons such as these have been the Americans and the only time it has been seriously suggested in wartime that they be used again was when General Westmorland proposed that the Vietnamese should be "nuked back to the Stoneage".
People like you are as mad as the suicide bombers Keith, maybe, like them, you believe that blowing everybody to your Kingdom Come is to be welcomed.
MAD AS A BAG OF CATS - listen to yourself.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 04:04 PM

If you notice professor I mentioned Tomahawk Cruise Missiles.

TOMAHAWK


Sheeeeeeeeeeeesh !

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 03:19 PM

"and it does not matter much what they do."


.. so they don't even have the future certainty & job security of a terr0ist suicide bomber...??? 😜

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 02:40 PM

after they have unleashed Armageddon.

They are not a first strike weapon.
The point of them being at sea is that they would survive any strike and retaliate, so that enemy is deterred from unleashing Armageddon.

After firing, their work is done and it does not matter much what they do.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 02:31 PM

So what exactly are the orders for nuke sub crews after they have unleashed Armageddon...???

.. make immediately for the Antarctic and hope they can live off penguin eggs and seal meat for a few decades
until they get a carrier pigeon message saying it's almost safe to come back home...????? 🙄

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 02:20 PM

The vessel can not carry or launch Trident, the subject of this discussion and of PFR's question.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 11:32 AM

From the professor deciding that the submarine in question was not carrying nuclear weapons:


"No it was not"

The truth of the matter is that we don't actually know.

The Tomahawk Cruise Missiles carried by HMS Ambush (the latest design of nuclear powered sunmarine)can be adapted to carry an array of warheads including a nuclear option.

Although production of the given nuclear warhead ceased some time ago almost 2000 were produced and MAY be in service still.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 11:03 AM

I take it Teribus that your source of information is the article on Wikipedia.

If you are going to use Wikipedia as a source please quote or link to the article instead of trying to mislead us you are quoting from a "reliable" source.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 10:31 AM

Maybe he'd send the bailiffs in for all the newest missiles, and let us hold on to a few rusty old ones,
until we could find the cash again.....????

Not really taken in a word that's been said then pfr - nice to know that you are so far off the mark.

I think in terms of costs it comes to about 5.5% of our total Defence Budget, but costs for Trident should never have been placed there in the first place. I think that change was brought about by Osbourne in the 2010 Review - before that it had always come out a separate budget.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 10:08 AM

"Now how much more independent would you want it?"

How about as independent as India's? Or China's? Or France's? Actual independence, not some lease from someone who can pull the plug when they want because they own, fix and maintain the actual missiles.

You do know which mad fuckwit could well be president in November? You want someone like him deciding he wants to change the terms of the lease or maintenance agreement?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 09:02 AM

...phew... ??

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 08:57 AM

No it was not.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 08:48 AM

Btw.. would that be the Sub that just just pranged a ship in a careless collision...

Great knowing we can have so much confidence in our sea going "End of the world capability" crewmen....????? 🤔

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 08:39 AM

..so basically.. it's like when we used to lease our tellys from Radio Rentals....???

There used to be a very sympathetic lady in our local branch..
she was very understanding if we couldn't afford to pay on time, or owe a couple of months..

Doubt if the Yanks will be so easy going if we can't keep up payments on their missiles...???

That Trump is making unhelpful noises about Nato friendships..

Maybe he'd send the bailiffs in for all the newest missiles, and let us hold on to a few rusty old ones,
until we could find the cash again.....???? 🙄


It probably wouldn't be so easy to pawn the missiles between payments like some folks used to with their rented tellys....

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 08:28 AM

This is the reality Stu:

At present there is a Royal Navy Vanguard-Class SSBN on patrol at sea.

It is probably carrying 8 fully operational Trident missiles each armed with 5 MIRV nuclear warheads.

These missiles can be fired should the order to fire those missiles is given

If that order was given then there is nothing any outside power or agency could do to stop those missiles from reaching their targets.

Now how much more independent would you want it?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 08:20 AM

The missiles are leased form the USA, we don't own them. You can post all flam you want to but the fact is they are not our missiles.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 08:09 AM

I would imagine that that would depend very much under what circumstances a decision regarding firing them would be taken.

1: Specific threat to the UK;

2: Threat to NATO.

Well past the skirting board Stu - just about to apply the second top coat.

Base coat "48 of those missiles are either in the UK at RNAD Coulport or loaded in the "at sea" SSBN, 16 missiles used to be carried but that number was reduced to 8 missiles carrying 40 warheads in 2010."

Second coat "The number of operational and fully functional missiles that we require to fully arm at least three of our submarines are in the UK at any given time. That's enough for us to blow up anything we might have to, or to serve as a deterrent against anyone thinking of attacking us."

Top coat The five MIRV warheads per missile are individually targeted while on the submarine. Once target information has been fed to the warhead it continually up dates as the submarine moves through the water. As neither the missile or the warhead relies on any further interaction with any other system the intended targeting of each warhead cannot be interfered with.

Final coat No PAL link as suggested by the writer of the article you linked to.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 07:30 AM

"Who decides upon the targets for those individual missiles."

..ooooh... we all should...!!!

That't be a great idea for the next UK public voter's referendum... 😜

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 06:12 AM

"The answer to your question Raggy - The five MIRV warheads per missile are individually targeted while on the submarine. Once target information has been fed to the warhead it continually up dates as the submarine moves through the water"

Thank You. OK next serious question. Who decides upon the targets for those individual missiles.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 21 Jul 16 - 05:43 AM

"We do not have any specific missiles allocated to us there is a "pool" of missiles our Vanguard Class share with USN Ohio Class SSBNs"

So they're not even our missiles? They're hardly independent of they're shared. Lordy. You haven't even sanded down the skirting board yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Jul 16 - 11:58 AM

Teribus - I expected that answer...

I also googled "submariners mental health"..

Far too much to even begin reading on such a hot uncomfortable day...



.. 2 computers running in a small room. Even with a turbo fan aimed up at my tackle, it's unbearable heat..

In this regard submariners have my full respect for their physical endurance in the most oppressively stifling conditions..

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Jul 16 - 11:48 AM

"We're technically dependent on the US"

The number of operational and fully functional missiles that we require to fully arm at least three of our submarines are in the UK at any given time. That's enough for us to blow up anything we might have to, or to serve as a deterrent against anyone thinking of attacking us.

We do not have any specific missiles allocated to us there is a "pool" of missiles our Vanguard Class share with USN Ohio Class SSBNs

So in what way are we "technically" dependent on the US Stu?

You were wrong PFR IT WAS just fanciful paranoid adolescent hysteria.


The answer to your question Raggy - The five MIRV warheads per missile are individually targeted while on the submarine. Once target information has been fed to the warhead it continually up dates as the submarine moves through the water. As neither the missile or the warhead relies on any further interaction with any other system the intended targeting of each warhead cannot be interfered with.

I see that our MPs voted 472 to 117 in favour of renewing Trident.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 20 Jul 16 - 11:02 AM

Serious Question.

"so cannot be redirected once launched" What about before launching?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 20 Jul 16 - 10:54 AM

I remember exactly this happening over 30 years ago....

The tories banging on about the importance of owning nukes and how weak labour would be defending us from the russkies...

All the time exploiting the issues as a cynical strategic distraction from more essential domestic social problems that they were failing to address rationally... 😣

Still.. it worked.. got 'em back in power for one more go..


I also remember the sheer underlying culture of terror and depression, as a mass phenomena, for any of us under 25;
trying to start out in life fully aware we could be incinerated or radiated at any time the crazies in power pressed the self destruct button...

Like many others at that time, I vowed to not bring kids into that unstable world of not knowing if there would be a tomorrow...
or what kind of post apocalyptic nightmare would be inflicted on any survivors.

These were real crippling fears at that time, not just fanciful paranoid adolescent hysteria.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 20 Jul 16 - 09:54 AM

We're technically dependent on the US, which means it's not truly independent. Still waiting to start on the walls.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Jul 16 - 08:47 AM

From the link supplied by Stu, to explain why he thinks that the UK does not have an independent nuclear deterrent.

The article points out that although we have our own submarines and our own warheads the missiles that carry those warheads to their targets are American, built by Lockheed-Martin. The weapon is therefore not totally independent according to the writer of the article.

The article does refer to what the writer calls "Operational Independence" - which is really all you require to have an independent deterrent.

"Under the terms of a missile lease arrangement, the United States does not have any veto on the use of British nuclear weapons, which the UK may launch independently" - Ministry of Defence Statement

The writer refers to the common pool of missiles kept and maintained by Lockheed Martin across in the USA. What the writer does not say in his article is that 48 of those missiles are either in the UK at RNAD Coulport or loaded in the "at sea" SSBN, 16 missiles used to be carried but that number was reduced to 8 missiles carrying 40 warheads in 2010.

The writer towards the end of his piece then gives away his lack of knowledge by stating the following:

"We are told if a UK prime minister presses the codes for launch from a Vanguard then Washington cannot do anything."

What he is describing here is the American PAL system. No such link exists in the British system:

"At the end of the Cold War, the U.S. Navy installed devices on its submarines to prevent rogue commanders from persuading their crews to launch unauthorised nuclear attacks. These devices prevent an attack until a launch code has been sent by the chiefs of staff on behalf of the U.S. president. The Ministry of Defence chose not to install equivalent devices on Vanguard submarines on the grounds that an aggressor might be able to eliminate the British chain of command before a launch order could be sent."

There are no codes that can be sent by the Americans to self-destruct missiles, the missiles carried on the RN's SSBNs rely on no external system for guidance so cannot be redirected once launched.

Don't know about you Stu, but that seems pretty independent to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 20 Jul 16 - 04:37 AM

"1: Your reasons for making that statement."

1) Threats have to be challenged. I still don't see any 'Stu' coloured walls here.

2) Calling people names like 'wanker' is not nice and has no place in a forum like this. If that's as imaginative as your insults get, then you have my pity.

3) The Beatles are still better than the Stones (although I love both deeply).



"2: Do you actually believe it?"

Yes. See here: Trident: is our nuclear deterrent really independent?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Jul 16 - 02:35 AM

"We are facing a huge terrorist threat, "
How on earth will our having nuclear weapons make the slightest difference to that?
Don't you think it's time that you people responded to exactly why we are facing a terrorist threat?
Will it, like the damage done by Brexit, all sort itself out, given time?
What a bunch of destructive, hate-filled tossers you people are.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 06:39 PM

does that mean we get to target ... the yanks.."!!!???

Too right, if The Trumpshit gets elected!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 05:25 PM

I want an independent nuclear deterrent..

If everybody in the UK over the age of 18 had their own independent nuclear deterrent
we could all live in eternal universal peace...!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 04:03 PM

Stu - 19 Jul 16 - 02:04 PM

"The UK does not have an independent nuclear deterrent."

1: Your reasons for making that statement.

2: Do you actually believe it?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 02:04 PM

"Oh and please, please, please let just one of you clowns chirp up and say that the UK does not have an independent nuclear deterrent, as I will paint the room with you."

The UK does not have an independent nuclear deterrent.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 01:40 PM

With the greatest of respect Teribus, isn't it about time we stopped talking in terms of Mutually Assured Destruction.   We are facing a huge terrorist threat, our economies can be attacked at will by tiny groups of terrorists, soon they will move on to biological terror, even the threat will be enough to check our economic revival.
We should be concentrating on this real and present danger, rather than threatening one another with MAD. The whole concept is MAD.

We need co-operation on security in the whole developed world, if these madmen are not stopped now by every means at our disposal including rigorous checks on immigrants.......our future looks bleak.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 01:35 PM

"Great Britain and France made sure that they would have their own independent nuclear deterrents because Suez showed that the USA could not be trusted."

Brilliant.. does that mean we get to target both the commie east and the yanks.."!!!???

fairs fair... Little Britain, World Apocalypse referee... 🙄


..about those Sub jobs... Keep building 'em....

The Ark idea aint so unrealistic... dedicated onboard Labs storing frozen sperm and eggs,
seeds, plantlings, and a photo library of what our green and pleasant land used to look like before the end came...

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 01:23 PM

punkfolkrocker - 19 Jul 16 - 11:30 AM

A Tory tool eh? Very funny then that it was a Labour Prime Minister who was its greatest advocate and Nye Bevan who insisted that we have it so that no British foreign Secretary would have to walk into any international negotiation naked.

"after all, nuke moscow, and survivors can still repopulate up in the northern tundra;
take out washington, and they can still attempt to rebuild elsewhere on the wild west continent."

pfr just exactly what do you think MAD means? We. us, little Britain has got the nuclear capability to wipe out Russia and China while we could only wipe them out the once Russia could wipe us out about about 100 times - but when all said and done once is enough isn't it?


Raggytash - 19 Jul 16 - 09:42 AM

Raggy the Argentines acted in 1982 for a number of reasons. They totally misread the situation and seriously underestimated the resolve of the British Government and the capabilities of our armed forces.

punkfolkrocker - 19 Jul 16 - 12:24 PM

Start totting up how many British jobs depend on those submarines being built.

Steve Shaw - 19 Jul 16 - 12:43 PM

"You don't really think that the yanks would put up with someone taking over a non-nuclear UK, do you?

In the wake of Suez - the greatest foreign policy mistake the Yanks ever made (Even their President who made the decisions at the time agreed with that) Both Great Britain and France made sure that they would have their own independent nuclear deterrents because Suez showed that the USA could not be trusted. France actually left the NATO military alliance and kicked all US troops out of their NATO bases on French soil.

Oh and please, please, please let just one of you clowns chirp up and say that the UK does not have an independent nuclear deterrent, as I will paint the room with you.

"And Freddie And The Dreamers were greater than both."

Only to a wanker like you Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 01:13 PM

Although a year or three later it was Cat Stevens for me, the first LP's I ever bought.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 01:05 PM

.. I'm veering more towards choosing between The Move, Small Faces, The Who,The Yardbirds, and Syd Barrett era Pink Floyd...

The beatles had a lot to thank George Martin for...

See how superior music was under Harold Wilson.... 😎

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 12:45 PM

"And Freddie And The Dreamers were greater than both."

Ack.

*does funny little jig*

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 12:43 PM

Huh? Don't know what happened to my post there. Never mind. So a nation that is otherwise deterred by our nukes needn't worry as long as it takes us by surprise. Heheh. As for the number of countries on the planet, there are various ways of counting. Google it. Picking me up on that technicality is a mark of the man's desperation. As for non-nuclear countries not being attacked because they're in some sort of alliance, well we could do that. You don't really think that the yanks would put up with someone taking over a non-nuclear UK, do you?

And Freddie And The Dreamers were greater than both.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 12:24 PM

.. maybe that little fleet of big submarines might have a better use as Arks...

.. crested newts, slow worms, lizards, tasty rare breed pigs & sheep, a few other remaining endangered indigenous UK island species....????

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 11:30 AM

I've always considered the 'nuclear armament' issue to be a bit of a very expensive political tool
to be used by the tories as a last resort to discredit Labour election candidates,
when the tories are losing the debates on more pressing social priorities......


I can be persuaded to see the reasons for mega world powers occupying huge land masses
to rely on the deterrence factor..

after all, nuke moscow, and survivors can still repopulate up in the northern tundra;
take out washington, and they can still attempt to rebuild elsewhere on the wild west continent.

If nothing else, Chernobyl established that radiation fall out could be 'contained' to some extent.

But whichever way you look at it, one or two nukes on London, Manchester, and the Whitby folk festival,
and all of us are 100% cooked and f@cked.....!!!!! 😬

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 09:49 AM

Yeah, but you know how those Argie wogs are! They'll do it one of these days!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 09:42 AM

I've come across many inane statements over the years on this forum but this particular one is brilliant in replying to Steve Shaw statement

"3: "We have the bomb but it didn't deter Argentina from occupying our sovereign territory".

Teribus typed "Most certainly did in 1977" something also prevented them in 1976, 1975, 1974, 1973 and numerous years before that. It also did in 1978, 1979, 1980 and 1981 but NOT 1982 the year the Argentinians invaded the Falklands Islands. Something has prevented them every year ever since but I somehow doubt it is the threat of nuclear retribution.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 08:19 AM

A

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 06:52 AM

"I thought everybody knew that."

I disagree that the Stones were better than The Beatles.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 04:20 AM

Steve Shaw - 18 Jul 16 - 07:09 PM

1: "Israel has the bomb but that has not deterred attacks on Israel from multiple quarters. Go on, tell me why Israel didn't nuke Gaza or Lebanon, and please don't say it was because Israel is the nice guy."

I would imagine that Israel has never ever used it's nuclear weapons because it has never needed to. The pan-Arabic movement of Nasser no longer exists and Israel is no longer confronted by nation states calling for its destruction (It has been 43 now since Israel was attacked by an enemy that represented a nation state).

2: "Pakistan has the bomb but it hasn't prevented Indian aggression or US drones from killing people on their turf."

Trust you to get the shoe on the wrong foot Shaw. What Indian aggression? Four times in the past Pakistan attacked India, there have been no such attacks since both acquired nuclear weapons. The Government of Pakistan is incapable of enforcing the rule of law and order in either the NWFP or in the FATA along it's border with Afghanistan, "allied" to the US effort to prevent attacks from inside these areas hitting targets in Afghanistan why would Pakistani nuclear weapons enter the equation.

3: "We have the bomb but it didn't deter Argentina from occupying our sovereign territory.

Most certainly did in 1977. In 1982 the Argentine invasion took the UK Government by surprise, or so we are led to believe. I personally know that Captain Nick Barker RN who was in command of the Antarctic Patrol Ship HMS Endurance had been supplying the powers that be in the Royal Navy and the Foreign Office with intelligence of Argentina's intentions for at least a year before the event.

At present it is the threat that one of our SSNs is allocated to the area that provides the greatest deterrent to any military action by the Argentines.

4: "The US has the bomb but it didn't deter 9-11."
Nor would I expect it to, but what it has deterred is what the USA identified as the greatest threat to its national security in the wake of the attacks on the 11th September 2001:

An international terrorist organisation, linking up with a "rogue" State hostile to the USA that either possesses WMD or has the technical ability to produce or procure WMD, which results in an "anonymous" asymmetric attack on the USA using WMD.

Subsequent US actions taken after 9/11 and US nuclear weapons did succeed in deterring any state from acting in the role of "rogue" state to any international terrorist organisation in the scenario outlined above. Evidence to substantiate that assertion?

Libya - unilaterally renounced its WMD programmes including a secret nuclear weapons programme.
North Korea - momentarily halted its nuclear weapons programme while GWB was in office.
Iran - was forced to halt its nuclear weapons programme when the US found out about the undeclared uranium enrichment facilities at Natanz and Qum.
Syria - Secret nuclear weapons programme halted and destroyed.
Pakistan - Illegal nuclear weapons proliferation network run by Dr A.Q.Khan exposed and shut down

5: "Over 200 countries do not have the bomb and the vast majority of them have not been attacked during the nuclear age."

Are you sure about that? From your list of 200 (The UN has only 193 member states including all those with nuclear weapons, so the following does not include those countries that you have obviously invented) take away those whose security is guaranteed by being part of an alliance that has as one of its partners a nuclear power. then go through the list again and you will be astounded at the number who have been involved in some form of conflict or another since 1945.


6: the Stones were better than the Beatles

I thought everybody knew that.

7: "The best deterrent by far is to have a non-aggressive, non-interfering foreign policy."

Really? What happens when another nation adopts an interfering and aggressive foreign policy towards you? Your statement is complete and utter rubbish.

8: The modus operandi of the likes of Al-Qaeda and ISIS is to pop up, do something and then get hammered. That has been their track record so far.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jul 16 - 02:50 AM

"Apparently we need nuclear weapons to aid the fight against terrorism"
How exactly to we "fight terrorism" with nuclear weapons - bomb Iraq, or Syria, or Nice, or Paris, or London, or Istanbul..... or wherever the terrorists operate? - how stupid can you get.
That's the nature of terrorism - unlike the nations involved in the Cold War, it has no base.
States like Israel and Saudi, whose policies generate terrorism and who, in some cases, finance it, are considered friends and allies; in the case of Israel, they have openly shown that they are prepared to spread terrorism by offering to assist apartheid South Africa to obtain nuclear weapons..
Deterrence has always been a short term and unreliable policy, even when our "enemies" had identifiable locations.
Winning the hearts and minds has always been the answer to world conflict and that will never happen while national self-interest is put first.
Have we learned nothing from the Chilcott rport?   
COST OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS
WHO BENEFITS FROM NUCLEAR WEAPONS?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 Jul 16 - 10:02 PM

Islamic Fundamentalism is a problem.

The problem is crazy people, not Islam.

The threat of their "lone wolf attacks" represent their last dying throws

Hardly. And I think you meant throes. Unless, of course, they're playing bocce.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Jul 16 - 07:09 PM

Israel has the bomb but that has not deterred attacks on Israel from multiple quarters. Go on, tell me why Israel didn't nuke Gaza or Lebanon, and please don't say it was because Israel is the nice guy. Pakistan has the bomb but it hasn't prevented Indian aggression or US drones from killing people on their turf. We have the bomb but it didn't deter Argentina from occupying our sovereign territory. The US has the bomb but it didn't deter 9-11. Over 200 countries do not have the bomb and the vast majority of them have not been attacked during the nuclear age. Proving that the bomb is a deterrent is like proving that God exists or that the Stones were better than the Beatles. Can't be done. The best deterrent by far is to have a non-aggressive, non-interfering foreign policy. The US and UK have a lot to learn in that regard. And the bomb is completely bloody useless against al Qaeda and Isis and they know it, and that knowledge informs their modus operandi.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Jul 16 - 06:52 PM

How droll Greg F.

Nice to hear that Raggy believes that Islamic Fundamentalism is a problem.

As far as that and those who may support them goes, the last thing Chirac in France did was to reconfigure the weapons load on France's SSBNs - four missile tubes are now loaded with "Tactical" warheads in case some state decides to back the "extremists" - Iran has already been given the warning.

Of course nuclear weapons are not meant to deter any terrorist attack. They will as explained above deter any country with any idea of supporting some terrorist organisation with nuclear ambitions George W Bush while he was President of the United States stopped in their tracks secret nuclear weapons programmes in Iran, Syria and Libya - by the bye just in case anybody misses the significance of that, the only reason you hide and create a secret nuclear weapons programme is that you fully intend to use those weapons, because if secret they serve no purpose as a deterrent.

Al Qaeda is now almost irrelevant, since their spectacular in 2001 they have achieved nothing.

ISIS have been on the back foot for the last 12 months. The threat of their "lone wolf attacks" represent their last dying throws and they fully realise that. As an organisation they are going nowhere and they know it.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 Jul 16 - 05:04 PM

I think Mr. T meant detergent.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Jul 16 - 03:08 PM

Surprisingly I find myself in agreement with Akenaton.

Having said that anyone who goes to bed with his cocoa and union flag pyjamas on probably won't understand.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Jul 16 - 12:59 PM

Sorry Mr T, but they are not a deterrent to terrorism

They may be a deterrent to Russia and China, though I find it hard to believe that either of these powers have any intention of attacking us....our biggest danger is to Western economies via small groups or "lone wolf" Islamic Terrorists and they can only be dealt with by conventional means.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Jul 16 - 10:46 AM

Because they actually do what it says on the packet - they are a deterrent.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Jul 16 - 09:57 AM

The vote will go in favour of the next generation of nuclear submarine but as Teribus said they haven't actually killed anyone. (maybe one or two in the dockyard)

Begs the question why do we have them.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Jul 16 - 09:45 AM

By the way, it has been explained before todays vote in Parliament has got nothing to do with Trident per se - The vote today is about building four submarines.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Jul 16 - 09:41 AM

Stu - 17 Jul 16 - 02:40 PM

"Voting for Trident means that person is willing to slaughter millions of people (most of whom will have no control over the actions of their government) in an insane act of mutually assured destruction."

Really??? It has been voted on before, and it's been around operationally since 1979 - how many people has it killed so far?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Jul 16 - 08:35 AM

Apparently we need nuclear weapons to aid the fight against terrorism

So sayeth the defence secretary on bbc this morning..when pressed by the obnoxious Mr Humphries he became a stuttering wreck and could not justify the statement.

The fight against terrorism will be appearing in a street near you very shortly.

the great powers are at last beginning to build bridges on defence against the biggest danger facing the world today....Islamic Fundamentalism........let us not rock the boat by creating cold war bogeymen.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Jul 16 - 02:26 AM

Stu, you are correct to cite it would be mutually assured destruction if Trident were to be used. However in the 21st Century it is normal to use an acronym for ease of use. Thus I would suggest M.A.D. instead of Trident.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 02:40 PM

Voting for Trident means that person is willing to slaughter millions of people (most of whom will have no control over the actions of their government) in an insane act of mutually assured destruction. It's the act of a lunatic, plain and simple.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 11:50 AM

Not entirely sure what kind of mood brief exposure to pin up boy Owen Smith has put the wife in...

.. but she's now watching a Hugh Grant rom com DVD in just her bra and pyjama bottoms... ?????


Could this be the magic winning formula for a next Labour Leader and Prime Minister...?????? 🤔

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stanron
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 11:28 AM

He also said he would vote for Trident. It wasn't squeezed out of him. He was direct and emphatic. A change from JC.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 11:00 AM

..so then... as speculated/predicted.. Angela Lameduck = stalking horse / sacrificial mutton..

Owen Smith = The Red Dragon Knight in Shining Armour... our hero !!!???


The wife has taken an instant fancy to Smith after only watching him for 10 minutes on the telly..

Well.. He might not be as left as Corbyn, but he's much younger, and dashing fit looking eye candy for middle aged house wives
in his open necked "Poldark" white shirt.. 😜

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 08:11 AM

"FTSE up to highest point it has been for 9 months"
Britain's greatest export is money and the wealth gap has never been greater and it is increasing whatever the figures say
The economy is now geared to producing more wealth for the wealthy
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 06:56 AM

"All the "doom'n'gloom" predictions that you lot were wittering on about have not come to pass and looking at it rationally why should they"

It certainly is happening in the higher education sector, which is already suffering. A funding crisis is building in our universities, and already we're seeing students and academics changing their plans. There is real unease in HE, and this is beginning to effect research which is an issue as we are a leading country for research and collaboration.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 06:40 AM

Yeh, whatever. Your knowledge of macro-economics is vast no doubt.

You can't even realise that I used Dell Computers as an example of what we can expect in the coming months. You just regurgitate again and again "I've only ever bought two computers ........ doesn't bother me"

You probably don't even realise it a small part of things to come because you have your Union Flag glasses on.

Your lack of consideration for other people is now legendary so no change there.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 06:28 AM

Ah Raggy are you talking about people who pop out all the time to buy computers again? Not noticed much of an increase in my usual household bills, food, electricity, etc.

Interest rates expected to come down to the lowest they have ever been, best mortgage rates on offer ever, British exports more competitively priced. All the "doom'n'gloom" predictions that you lot were wittering on about have not come to pass and looking at it rationally why should they - as for at least the next three years nothing will change and even after that people will do what is in the best interests of the region - and that will rule out any great "spite fest", they aren't after all the British Labour Party.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 06:08 AM

So the £1 is worth 1.20 Euro, well that's great except it's not is it.

Just 3 weeks ago it was slightly over 1.30 Euro and thus everything we import now will be approximately 8% more expensive than it was just three weeks ago including food together with all the other goods we import from Europe.

Who does this hit the most ............ well it affects us all to an extent but it does affect the people with less resources hardest as they have no surplus wealth with which to pay the increased costs.

But I'm sure you will say that is their own fault.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 05:26 AM

Steve Shaw - 17 Jul 16 - 05:18 AM

Pot, kettle, black Shaw I'll leave you to join up the dots, it is after all what you and the usual suspects have been unabashedly dishing out to Keith A and Akenaton for over two years now.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 05:23 AM

Jim Carroll - 17 Jul 16 - 03:08 AM

I say again what balls up?

FTSE up to highest point it has been for 9 months

£1 = €1.20

These reported each day so why do you select information that is one month out of date?

"Typical was the banking crisis, where we bailed out and those who caused it and those in charge paid themselves huge bonuses to put matters matters right."

The banks were bailed out so that people did not lose their savings, that businesses big and small who employ the workforce of the nation could continue to function and that people could be paid. Those sound reasonable explanations as to why the Government felt the need to "bail-out" the banks and come to their rescue? Those in charge of the banks paid themselves big bonuses did they? I seem to recall that they were actually asked to forego their bonuses and in some cases pay them back. Where changes at the top were made in certain institutions the incoming head was offered a salary and bonus package based upon HIS/HER performance NOT that of the institution he/she was taking charge of. Previous example given:

If someone steps in to take over the running of something that was making a £345 million loss each year and 12 months latter has succeeded in reducing that loss to only £150 million a year - he/she has saved the shareholders of that company £195 million pounds in the course of that year - has he/she done a good job? I'd say that he/she had and therefore would deserve the bonus offered when he/she was originally offered the position.

"Still nothing on accommodation for your itinerant work-force, I see??"

On the contrary, I have asked you a number of times now. When you came south to London to find work did you find accommodation? Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people, all over the world move to find work. That migration of labour generally seems to be towards big cities, yet it does not seem to result in them all finding themselves "homeless" possibly because they did the same as you and I did.

1. Stayed for a short while with someone you knew before finding somewhere affordable to rent.
2. Stayed at a cheap B&B until you could find somewhere affordable to rent.
3. Find somewhere affordable to rent before moving down.

No great mystery Carroll - as I say hundreds of thousands if not millions do it all the time - as well you know.

"The people of Northern Ireland were never asked what they wanted - the sectarians got guns and threatened to invade Dublin"

The people of Ireland weren't asked either, they knew that the political party they supported had won them Home Rule when a gang of seven sectarians decided to start a fight that resulted in the destruction of the centre of Dublin followed by two wars that resulted in massive loss of life - yet you applaud that. shall we put it into perspective:

In 1916 seven men signed the Proclamation of the Republic in Dublin.

The American Declaration of Independence of 1776 had fifty-six signatories.

In 1912 virtually an entire community put their signatures to the Ulster Covenant. In Ulster, 218,206 men signed the Covenant; and 228,991 women signed a parallel Declaration associating themselves with the men in their uncompromising opposition to the new Home Rule Bill now before parliament . A further 19,162 men and 5,055 women of Ulster birth signed in Dublin, Edinburgh, Glasgow, York, Liverpool, London, Manchester and Bristol.

The Ulster Covenant was a truly impressive demonstration of the resolve of early twentieth-century Ulster unionists to remain citizens of the then United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

Note: Ulster Unionists - not Protestants

Where and when did the UVF ever threaten to march south and "invade Dublin" as you put it? Carson and Craig were explicitly clear on who would face the UVF if Home Rule was forced on Ulster and Ulster men and women were deprived of their birth right as British subjects - the BRITISH GOVERNMENT

and those whose responsibility it was to defend Britian {sic} said they would not carry out that defence.

The responsibility for the defence of Britain was devolved to 57 officers of the 3rd Cavalry Division? Wow they must have been absolute Titans if they were responsible for the defence of Great Britain before the other 440,000 men in the British Army at the time and God knows how many more in the Royal Navy.

You've long lost this battle Keith

No Carroll you lose this battle every single time you bring it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 05:18 AM

It's bloody impossible to discuss anything at all with someone who declares that he will "take me to task" on the basis of gross misrepresentations of what I said. Your modus operandi is to fly off the handle with me and Jim at every opportunity, regardless of what we say (or in many cases what we haven't said at all) but not once do you ever "take to task" akenaton, Keith or bobad in spite of the multiple streams of idiocy that emanate from them. You are the ultimate tribalist. I could recite the Tory manifesto to you as gospel and you'd find something to "take me to task" about. You're a waste of time.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 05:09 AM

When the number of people reach 100,000 can they still be considered radicals or are they part of the broad church which the Labour Party has ever been.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 04:26 AM

pfr, surely it would be more appropriate for the Dodo to be adopted by the Labour Party considering the circumstances they find themselves in.

As for taking a break Mr Shaw, couldn't possibly when you come out with such outrageous assertions based upon nothing bar your own rather ludicrous point of view. You speak with authority for no-one but yourself so please do not be surprised if when you come out with terms like "mainstream Christians" and claim "majorities support" without evidence to back it up you will be taken to task for it.

The Labour Party is in one God awful mess, of it's own making. The only people who support Corbyn are the 100,000 radicals who were allowed to "join" the Labour Party to vote in the last leadership election by paying a £3 fee. The fear from Corbyn's supporters now is the fact that they may now baulk at the prospect of having to pay a heftier £25 fee to vote in this leadership election (What will it be next time? £50 - reads like some sort of sshoddy scam to raise Party funds).

Now instead of Shaw's baseless assertions here are the findings of some polls that have actually been taken that indicate the degree of "support" that Corbyn has:

1: Parliamentary Labour Party are against him 172 to 40

2: Three out of every four voters are against him

3: Labour's NEC had to ignore its own election rules to let Corbyn stand. The vote to let him appear on the ballot as incumbent was only passed by four votes, one of them being Corbyn's own vote.

4: Ipsos Mori Poll question - "Has Jeremy Corbyn got what it takes to be a good Prime Minister?"
Yes - 23% (% for Eagle was 21%)
Don't know - 9% (% for Eagle was 39%)
No - 68% (% for Eagle was 40%)

5: YouGov Poll Question - "If Jeremy Corbyn remains as Labour leader, how likely or unlikely are they to win the next general election?"

Likely - 39%
Unlikely - 57%
Don't know - 4%

6: YouGov Poll of UNITE Members:

Question 1 - "Is Corbyn doing well as Labour Party Leader?"
Yes - 34%
No - 65%

Question 2 - "Is Corbyn ever likely to be PM?"
Yes - 18%
No - 79%

Question 3 - "Should Corbyn lead Labour to next election?"
Yes - 35%
No - 49%

Len McCluskey Boss of UNITE claims his members have got it wrong and that UNITE will support Corbyn - shades of Arthur Scargill? I thought Unions were supposed to represent their members not tell them what is good for them.

7: So what were the views of other Trades Union members?

YouGov poll question - "Do you think Jeremy Corbyn should fight the next General Election as Labour Leader?"

CWU - Yes 30%: No 62%
USDAW - Yes 27%: No 61%
GMB - Yes 34%: No 60%
Unison - Yes 28%: No 59%

8: Sky Data Poll Question - "Who would make a better Prime Minister?"

Theresa May - 62%
Don't know - 20%
Jeremy Corbyn - 18%

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 04:22 AM

Were any catholics asked to sign?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 04:15 AM

The people of Northern Ireland were never asked what they wanted

Complete bollocks Jim!!
On 28 September 1912, over 500,000 Unionists signed the Ulster Covenant pledging to defy Home Rule by all means possible.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Jul 16 - 03:08 AM

"What balls up Jom?"
ONE
TWO
THREE
Are you insane? - Britain has suffered a series of economic disasters and is heading for another one caused by this shit decision.
As far as the consequences are concerned, the people of Britain have borne the burden of those disasters and those in charge have got off scott free.
Typical was the banking crisis, where we bailed out and those who caused it and those in charge paid themselves huge bonuses to put matters matters right.
Fine from your side of the fence Mr Woodencock.
Still nothing on accommodation for your itinerant work-force, I see??
"Do you deny that the majority in NI did not want to leave the UK, and were prepared to fight to remain part of it?"
The people of Northern Ireland were never asked what they wanted - the sectarians got guns and threatened to invade Dublin and those whose responsibility it was to defend Britian said they would not carry out that defence.
You've long lost this battle Keith
How happy wuld you be if those who wished stay in Europe took up arms to carry out their wishes and the army refused to act
I suppose you've been stirred into enthusiasm by the sectarian marching season you support, me little Billy Boy
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 10:00 PM

... ostrich...???


.. Rod Hull's effin emu...?????


.. bugger it.. too much choice.. they all display classic tory characteristics....????

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 09:55 PM

...and whilst we are amusing ourselves with ornithological metaphors..

..can't decide if the most apt bird for the tories is the vulture or the dodo...??? 😜

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 07:22 PM

That is just about the stupidest piece of twisting I've ever seen. Have another vat of your favourite and sleep soundly. All day tomorrow would be good, at least for us here, and it might just leave you sweeter. You are getting old, after all, and it don't half show.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 06:51 PM

Steve Shaw - 16 Jul 16 - 06:19 PM

STOP THE PRESSES - RESULTS OF ANOTHER NATIONWIDE POLL BY STEVE SHAW

Poll 1:
The people who keep the NHS afloat are all "lefties" who support Jeremy Corbyn to a man;

Poll 2:
The people who keep our old people happy in care homes on a pittance are all "lefties" who support Jeremy Corbyn to a man;

Poll 3:
Every single kid currently serving an "apprenticeship" is a "leftie" and a Jeremy Corbyn Supporter

Poll 4:
Every single retail worker in the country on the new Living wage introduced by the Conservative Government last April is a "leftie" and Corbyn Supporter

Poll 5:
All those working in the leisure and hospitality industry are "lefties" and Jeremy Corbyn supporters.

All of the above according to Steve Shaw do a damn sight more to keep this economy afloat than most, yet would by being Corbyn supporters throw the bloody lot a way in the blink of an eye to elect into office a man who would be the greatest disaster as a Prime Minister this country has ever seen. Hell leadership qualities!!! I don't know anyone who would follow him even out of the vaguest feeling of idle curiosity.

Must be nice speaking with so much authority on behalf of so many people - but hang on a minute you don't do you - its all just "made-up-shit".

Corbyn supporters are numbered at less than 200,000 - Labour voters are numbered in their millions and it is the Labour voters that will put a Labour Government in power - they will not vote for Corbyn or those candidates selected by his followers.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 06:19 PM

"The UK economy at present is one of the strongest in the developed world. Don't think many Corbyn supporters had anything to do with that though."

So lefties are all feckless benefits claimants then are they? Not the people who keep the NHS afloat in spite of Toryism, not the people who keep our old people happy in care homes on a pittance, not the kids who are being duped into thinking that they're on an "apprenticeship," not the millions of retail industry workers who are on the minimum wage and who can be called in to work until ten at night or all day Saturday and Sunday to make sure that you can shop at your whim, not the exploited millions who change the beds and clean the bogs in stuffy hotel bedrooms to keep rich foreign tourists happy? Yes, many of them are Corbyn supporters who do a damn sight more to keep this economy afloat than most of those spivs in the City who rob the world blind with computer mice. That quote of yours plumbs the depths of disgrace more than anything you've ever said, which is saying something, eh? Talk about us and them...

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 05:23 PM

Well, I rather like Mrs May's cabinet choice. I think Boris can make an excellent Foreign secretary, he seems at ease in any company and is unhindered by any deep seated ideology.....I can see Boris becoming a bit of a star, if he can handle the very difficult set of circumstances with which he has been saddled.
I like David Davis who seems sincere and sensible and Mrs May is exactly what we need at present as Prime minister.

Never voted Conservative in my life, but if it comes to a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea, my vote would go to the Conservatives over the self serving Blairite scum.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 04:01 PM

"much better to claim it from expenses, or maybe from the massive bonuses given out for making a balls-up of our economy"

What balls up Jom? The UK economy at present is one of the strongest in the developed world. Don't think many Corbyn supporters had anything to do with that though.

"watching them in their natural environment almost all of my working life."

I know there are some Mudcatters who are bird watchers and I think that they will agree with me on that, the seagull was the bird that inspireD R.J.Mitchell to design and build the Spitfire.

"Amazing what you can see through a galley porthole!

Ah back to your unfathomable downer on Cooks again Jom, but almost an "own goal" like the "Rourke's Drift" one in a previous thread - IF I were aboard ship, and IF I worked in the Galley you tell me "Brain of County Clare" who would have the best chance of seeing exactly what a seagull could do in flight?































THE F**KER WHO FEEDS THEM - YOU HALFWIT PRAT.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 03:21 PM

Jim,
- an illegally armed political organisation who re-introduced the gun into Irish politics and threatened to invade Dublin.

That would be the Irish Republican Brotherhood, and they did invade Dublin!

Do you deny that the majority in NI did not want to leave the UK, and were prepared to fight to remain part of it?

No.
It is a fact.
The officers you refer to refused to force them out by killing their former comrades.
They preferred to resign as was their legal right.
There was no refusal to obey orders nor any threat to do so.
Resigning is not a rebellion.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 03:02 PM

"perhaps they could chuck a brick through somebodies window and steal something to raise the sum required."
Nah, much better to claim it from expenses, or maybe from the massive bonuses given out for making a balls-up of our economy
"watching them in their natural environment almost all of my working life."
Amazing what you can see through a galley porthole!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 02:50 PM

Seagulls one of the most successful birds in existence. Truly remarkable. I have had the pleasure of watching them in their natural environment almost all of my working life. Best fliers on the planet.

As for Corbyn's supporters and the £25 "entry fee" perhaps they could chuck a brick through somebodies window and steal something to raise the sum required.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 02:14 PM

Yebbut seagulls are winners. Tits get eaten by sparrowhawks.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 02:14 PM

Jonathan Livingston would take issue with that..........

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 01:42 PM

An eagle is a noble bird that swoops on prey decisively with grace and beauty....

A seagull is a verminous opportunistic bird that squawks and flaps about randomly,
shitting indiscriminately as it pounces and steals whatever it can greedily gorge on... 🙄

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 01:17 PM

Dunno about Eagle or Seagull. She's a bloody tit, I know that much.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 01:09 PM

Whatever the outcome of this bitter coup..
especially if that hopeless Angela Seagull wins..

I will grit my teeth and continue vote labour rather than not vote at all.


At least it will still be a best of a bad choice anti tory vote....

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 12:45 PM

Yebbut without those stricter rules there would be howls of self-satisfied "protest" from the Keith/Teribus axis about entryism. Reds under the bed, etc. I don't like the idea that "registered supporters" get to vote if I'm honest. Party members only. The Jan 16 cutoff is draconian and wrong. The cutoff should be the day the first challenge to the leadership was posted. It's a bit like being a Catholic. You hate lots of things that your club does but you stick with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 12:01 PM

It seems that Mr Corbyn may not win another election to the leadership of the Labour Party.

Apparently people who joined the party after Jan 16 will not be eligible to vote.....Unless they pay £25!!   as most of Mr Corbyn's supporters are young people and from the less well off sectors of society I think this new ruling is indefensibly biased in favour of the predominantly "liberal left" Blairite faction. This new ruling was brought in by the NEC behind closed doors after Mr Corbyn had left the meeting.

How on earth is someone with the record of Mrs Eagle even considered as Labour leader, surely with her views she would be more at home with the Liberals?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 07:14 AM

"Now what point were you attempting to make?"
And until you stop talking down to people and come to terms with where exactly you figure in the grand order of things you will continue to be regarded as a bullying, arrogant pratt
Get a grip
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 07:11 AM

"Nobody has ever suggested that anyone should have the right to demand that you do anything."
You are proposing that if I can't find work, an entitlement I have paid in all my life be withdrawn from me - - tantamount to demanding I sshould take anny job offered, no matter whether I am quailfied to do it, I want to do it or taking it would enable me to feed my family - wage slavery
" Britain is not really very different to the "system" under which you'd live anywhere else in Europe"
So?
I don't support capitalism anywhere, but my concern is for what happens here.
The rest is unqualified twaddle or dealt with interminably and really not worth bothering about - link us to something substantial or piss off
Your word alone is as unreliable as it comes and your unpleasant arrogance leaves a sour taste in the mouth
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 06:39 AM

"My background was the North of England, my friends and activities were based there, I liked living there - nobody should ever have the right to demand that I move elsewhere because the system we live in can no longer provide work for vast sweeps of Britain"

Nobody has ever suggested that anyone should have the right to demand that you do anything.

The "system" we live in (Or more correctly in your case lived in) in Britain is not really very different to the "system" under which you'd live anywhere else in Europe and probably a lot better than many judging by the number of people from all over racing through the countries of the EU to attempt to get into the UK.

Nowhere in Europe, or for that matter anywhere in the world, does "the system" provide work for everyone on their doorsteps (You previously claimed that as a right and you were asked to identify where this right is laid down - needless to say you failed to do so - so that claim was just thrown on top of the Jim Carroll "Made-Up-Shit" Pile)

"At that time the North east and Northwest of Britain were permanent unemployment black-spots, the Midlands were not much better, the work was centred in the South-east which was the only place in Britain where it was readily available."

Good heavens I came from Scotland and at that time there loads of people in work. My brother worked in the Midlands, the cities of Nottingham, Leicester and Derby were collectively described as the "Diamond" triangle, they were considered to be the three richest cities in Europe.

"Your account of the Scandinavian model, based on social co-operation between workers organisations and government bodies a gross distortion of what happens there and is impractical here anyway as historically, the British establishment has refused to recognise workers representation as part of governance"

My account of what happens in Scandinavia is based on me having lived and worked there for many years - your take on it is based upon what you think you've read and understood from a paper that was written ten years ago.

Trades Unions are supposed to look out for the best interests of their members. Great pity that the bosses of the Trades Union movement in the UK forgot about that and decided that they had any role to play in the governing of the country - simply put they don't.

Couple of things about Trades Unions in Scandinavia and in Germany - they restrict themselves to looking after their members and are aware of what constitutes being in the best interests of the industries their members are involved in - Company profits are viewed by those unions as being essential to the health and survivability of the companies and industries providing employment for their members. The hand they play in the day to day life of those companies is extremely responsible - In the days we are talking about how many "wildcat strikes" were there in the UK? How many in Germany? (Give you a hint - None the term is unknown and the practice illegal). In Scandinavia prior notice must be given of any strike action and the duration of any strike is limited. Once that limit has been reached the dispute goes to binding arbitration and once the verdict is given that is the end of the matter - Again in Scandinavian countries Trades Unions have no role in the governance of the country.

"Britain has opted to force people to take whatever menial job is available"

Now where on earth did you get twaddle from? Give me an example of anybody being forced to do any job in the UK by the Government. The problem is exactly the opposite with the Government seemingly being content to shovel out billions in benefits to those who steadfastly refuse to go out and find jobs that are there. They must be there because loads of people are coming into the country from all over and are being employed in jobs that our unemployed are not prepared to do. More people working in the UK today than at any time in the countries history.

"We live in a stable society where people have established permanent identities in specific areas - we are no longer a nomadic nation and haven't been since the Neolithic period, yet twots like you would turn us into hunter-gatherers all over again.

Simple matter of choice for which the individual is responsible for preparing themselves for the adult world they will soon join. If they fail to do that then as with anything involving choices there are consequences that they must accept. Nobody is forcing them to do anything.

"We are human beings, not chess-pieces to be moved about to suit an economy favouring as small, privileged group who have become the sole beneficiary of the riches of society."

I think that you will find that this small privileged group consist of people who actually earned what they have, they worked for it usually from very humble beginnings.

Your scummy argument that those who will not revert to itinerancy to find work should be either forced to by law or starved into accepting anything, whether it suits our capabilities or meets our needs, or not - which is the logic of your argument - it is primitive and savage situation you propose.

If you wish your job in life to suit your capabilities and meet your needs, then you should appreciate that YOU must start preparing for it while YOU are still at school - It is not the governments job to do that for you, it never was - IT IS ENTIRELY UP TO YOU. If it doesn't happen because you didn't do anything about it, it is not anybody else's fault but your own. If this is not explained to you firstly by your parents and secondly by your teachers then you have been severely let down, but by the time you leave primary school and enter secondary education it should have become pretty self-evident. If YOU, yourself are not going to think about your own future why the hell should anyone else? Life is NOT fair, it never ever was and it never ever will be, prepare yourself as best you can to live it.

"You say we should move where the work is, yet you refuse to tell us where we are going to find somewhere to live in areas where accommodation costs are directly linked to employment"

You say you moved down to London to find work - did you live in - "hobo encampments, workingmens' hostels, or did you sleep rough?

Of course you didn't, neither did I, you found somewhere to live that you could afford.

Unfortunately for your argument at the time we are talking about it was a Labour Government that had introduced a pay freeze that covered both private and public sector workers and the Trades Union movement full of piss and an over-inflated sense of its importance in the scheme of things completely ignored what it should have been doing and decided to try and take the duly elected Government of the country down - for the best part of a decade they had really screwed the country up and made it an international laughing stock - that ended when the results of the 1979 election were made known and a Prime Minister entered Downing Street on a promise and with a mandate to curb Union power in this country - thankfully she succeeded.

I seem to remember not so long ago your defending military officers who, at a time when hostile forces within Britain were threatening armed violence against British citizens, declared they were not prepared to act to prevent that violence."

You mean in March 1914 when a few officers stated their right to withdraw their labour by resigning their commissions in response to a "hypothetical" situation described to them?

You of course presented this as an act of aggression, that involved half the Army - it didn't, that the men refused orders when in fact no orders were given for them to disobey, and then finally when orders were given they were carried out and complied with promptly to the letter.

Now what point were you attempting to make?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 06:28 AM

They just refused to use armed force to make a community exit the UK when they wanted to remain."
Not a community Keith - an illegally armed political organisation who re-introduced the gun into Irish politics and threatened to invade Dublin.
The "community" were in no way consulted.
Beside the point anyway - the Army were under the command of the British Govenment and any refusal to obey orders would have been tantamount to rebellion - and we all know what you feel about that in regard to Ireland!!!
A "contemptible" what, did you describe it?
Wot Raggy just said - in spades!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 06:07 AM

Gosh !

History being "revised" before our very eyes, amazing !!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 04:53 AM

Jim,
I seem to remember not so long ago your defending military officers who, at a time when hostile forces within Britain were threatening armed violence against British citizens, declared they were not prepared to act to prevent that violence.

They did no such thing.
They just refused to use armed force to make a community exit the UK when they wanted to remain.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Jul 16 - 04:04 AM

"Did you have a family when you got on your bike Jom? "
Are you making my point for me?
I wasn't married, if that's what you mean, but I had a mother and young sisters who depended to a degree on me - I had recently lost my father.
My background was the North of England, my friends and activities were based there, I liked living there - nobody should ever have the right to demand that I move elsewhere because the system we live in can no longer provide work for vast sweeps of Britain
At that time the North east and Northwest of Britain were permanent unemployment black-spots, the Midlands were not much better, the work was centred in the South-east which was the only place in Britain where it was readily available.
Since then that has intensified tenfold since Thatcher drew a line across Britain, virtually abandoning everywhere outside the South East.
" I have given you my suggestions on what to do with them twice now"
Where - I ignore nothing.
Your account of the Scandinavian model, based on social co-operation between workers organisations and government bodies a gross distortion of what happens there and is impractical here anyway as historically, the British establishment has refused to recognise workers representation as part of governance - Thatcher deliberately destroyed what little there was of that.
Britain has opted to force people to take whatever menial job is available - slavery without the chains.
We live in a stable society where people have established permanent identities in specific areas - we are no longer a nomadic nation and haven't been since the Neolithic period, yet twots like you would turn us into hunter-gatherers all over again.
We are human beings, not chess-pieces to be moved about to suit an economy favouring as small, privileged group who have become the sole beneficiary of the riches of society.
Your scummy argument that those who will not revert to itinerancy to find work should be either forced to by law or starved into accepting anything, whether it suits our capabilities or meets our needs, or not - which is the logic of your argument - it is primitive and savage situation you propose.
You say we should move where the work is, yet you refuse to tell us where we are going to find somewhere to live in areas where accommodation costs are directly linked to employment - hobo encampments like the Hungry Thirties in America, workingmens' hostels, sleeping rough.....?
Take your hospital porters example - because of the essential job they do, they can never take action to improve their conditions - doesn't matter that they can't feed their families on what they are paid.
Same with teachers
Same with Nurses
Same with ambulance drivers, or public transport workers.... how far do you want to go.
Same with anybody we rely on in society
Take what we choose to give you and get on with it - you have no say in your lives.
I seem to remember not so long ago your defending military officers who, at a time when hostile forces within Britain were threatening armed violence against British citizens, declared they were not prepared to act to prevent that violence.
Didn't those officers fall within the description "essential"?
You are a running joke - please keep running - it really is quite entertaining.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 15 Jul 16 - 01:18 PM

Hospital Porters, Jom, whether you were admitted to hospital, or not, or whether you could be buried or not had something to do with crossing Picket Lines.

22,511 people voted for Boris Johnson when he became MP for Uxbridge and South Ruislip in 2015 (He polled 50.2%, or %50.2 of the total votes cast). Haven't gone through the same exercise with May's Cabinet but Cameron's consisted 94%, or %94, of people who had been elected to the House of Commons - I would imagine that May's Cabinet would be similar.

Did you have a family when you got on your bike Jom? Probably not. Mine stayed in the family home and I travelled to work and lived away from home as and when I had to.

The "scroungers"? - I have given you my suggestions on what to do with them twice now. As you seem to have ignored what was said I see no point whatsoever in repeating them a third time.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 15 Jul 16 - 08:46 AM

.. it also convinced me never, ever, to get on a motorbike...

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 15 Jul 16 - 08:44 AM

I was a hospital porter [special duties orderly - my formal title] in 1980.

Aged 21 - no formal training, just handed a uniform and told to follow a nurse, do what she says, and 'get on with it'...

Mostly pushing wheelchairs, and taking amputees to the toilet.

Taking blokes with both arms amputated to the bog was probably where the 'special duties' part of my job title applied....

Too many young blokes had lost limbs on motorbikes, and in the army in Ireland.

That job convinced me to get back into education and do a humanities focused degree.....

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Jul 16 - 08:33 AM

"good will" of a Hospital Porter"
rather than that of predatory bankers and crooked and incompetent self-serving politicians, you mean, how partisanly patronising can you get?
Hospital Porters may not have the experience, but they tend to have more contact with and care for human beings as do the people whose arses you have rammed your head up.
It was politicians and predators that have fucked up the health service, not those who actually have to clean up their mess on a daily basis.
"Fewer than 200 people voted for Theresa May for PM."
Did anybody vote for Boris or any of the other no-marks who now hold the fate of Britain in their hands
And they claim Brexit hasn't balled up Britain....!
Jim Carroll
Still no word on accommodation fotr the itinerant work force or what to do with "scroungers" I see
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Jul 16 - 08:12 AM

Fewer than 200 people voted for Theresa May for PM.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 15 Jul 16 - 03:43 AM

Shaw was rabbiting on, on another thread about the percentages required to put people in positions of power. I would draw his attention to the membership numbers of the UNITE Trades Union then draw his attention to the minute portion of that membership who actually voted to elect its leaders. These are the people he wishes to be re-empowered, these are the people who thought that the Trades Unions should dictate policy to the elected Government of the United Kingdom in the 1970s. Shaw conveniently forgets the days when it depended upon the "good will" of a Hospital Porter whether or not your operation was performed or indeed if you were admitted to hospital. He forgets that in Liverpool the Royal Navy were approached regarding mass burials at sea because bodies were piling up in hospital morgues and could not be interred or cremated. Wonderful time the 1970s, all power cuts, the three day week and Healy having to go cap in hand to the IMF for a bail-out - all down to wicked capitalists my arse.

Reading the last few posts from the "Labour faithful" you realise just what a bunch of dinosaurs they are - world's changed lads, time you caught up.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Jul 16 - 12:56 PM

Denise Healey - Denise Skinner - or maybe denise Young Socialist lady I used to knock around with in Liverpool in my sadly long-gone misspent youth
Those were the days, my friend!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Jul 16 - 11:18 AM

Btw.. anyone know a lefty woman called Denise...???

My brain tries to compensate for my poor reading eyesight
and keeps telling me this thread is called

"Denise of the Labour Party"....

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Jul 16 - 11:13 AM

I have vague memories of being involved with "Unemployed Workers Union" back in the early - mid 80s

Just googled to see what came up, re the present...

might be stuff worth reading if I find time later....???

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Jul 16 - 11:07 AM

The unions have been emasculated by decades of Thatcherism and Blairism.

And Reaganism and Buehish this side of the pond. Same situation.

We need the unions more than ever in order to stop this country from descending into near-slavery.

Amen. But the average U.S. worker is completely clueless: hence The Trumpshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Jul 16 - 10:44 AM

The unions have been emasculated by decades of Thatcherism and Blairism. The consequences have been bogus apprenticeships, millions forced to declare that they're "self-employed," unsocial hours payments slashed, job security a thing of the past, work-life balance destroyed for millions of people, a rise in workplace abuse and bullying, a boom in low-paid part-time and seasonal work, a million on zero-hours contracts, pensions devastated and pay frozen for years. That's the legacy of the right-wing war against trade unions. Labour started with trade unions and should seek always to re-empower them. No worker exercisings his or her right to withdraw their labour ever "held the country to ransom." That has always been done by greedy capitalists and multinationals. We need the unions more than ever in order to stop this country from descending into near-slavery. We are already some way down that road.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Jul 16 - 10:40 AM

"The unions are irrelevant to millions of people in this country, "
Yup - the ones with no job, that would be!
British workers have never need a Trades Union to protect them from the indifference of politicians as they do now.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 14 Jul 16 - 10:26 AM

After watching her live announcement to run in opposition to Corbyn, and a late night interview on News Night;
I'm even more convinced now that whoever persuaded and convinced Angela Seagull
that she would be a more electable leader and win over the British public to become Prime Minister,
has a severely twisted wicked cruel sense of humour...


... and should join mudcat as a member, because he or she would fit in very well here.... 😈

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 14 Jul 16 - 10:07 AM

The unions are irrelevant to millions of people in this country, and Labour needs to move on and restructure to reflect the fact most of the workforce is not unionised.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Jul 16 - 08:31 AM

DEMISE OF THE IRISH LABOUR PARTY
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Jul 16 - 05:22 AM

I must say I share your views on that. I dislike authoritarian behaviour from the left. Too reminiscent of Stalin and Mao. But let's stick with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 14 Jul 16 - 02:23 AM

I've been a member since end 2014, and branch organiser since last year. What's the point in getting potential activists engaged if they are being treated like this by the national party. They do not have to apologise to those who turn up tonight because they haven't got their meeting cancellation email in time.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jul 16 - 08:07 PM

Well I joined last September for £1.96 per month so I get to vote.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 13 Jul 16 - 04:24 PM

Or leave and start going to folk clubs again.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 13 Jul 16 - 03:22 PM

Who actually understands who, and how are they, trying to 'possibly' rig the election by pricing out new members from 3 to 25 quid,
and not allowing anyone to vote who wasn't a member before February.


Angela Seagulll sounded very much in favour of this move....

Last night the mrs said, she really wants to join and vote this time, 10 mins later we heard a brief mention on the news about the 'apparent' vote rigging....???


she later read a comment later on twitter, that joining a union if you are not already a member,
might be a way to combat the 'alleged' rigging....????

The wife is already a Union member.

I'm unemployable, and not.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jul 16 - 03:13 PM

Stay and fight.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 13 Jul 16 - 02:43 PM

The Labour Party may be about to lose a committed member who, over the last two years, has put in hundreds of hours of voluntary campaigning due to the NEC not allowing local meetings to take place until after the leadership election.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 11 Jul 16 - 03:59 PM

Angela Eagle is surely a very able and committed MP and potential future front bench Minister...???

Angela Seagull is an insipid, uninspiring, and unimpressive choice as a Labour Party leadership contender and potential Prime Minister....!!!!! 🙄

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stanron
Date: 11 Jul 16 - 02:50 PM

So Angela Eagle has announced her leadership challenge. I'm not a Labour supporter but the one time I saw her do Prime Ministers Questions against George Osbourne I think most people thought she did a pretty good job. So is she one of your

punkfolkrocker wrote: tory lite twats

?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 03:23 PM

A suggestion.

Should Corbyn be re-elected as party leader he could suggest that those MP's who stood against him resign their seats and put themselves forward for reselection by their constituency parties before a By-Election.

If this were to happen I wonder how many would be re-selected?

Yes in the short term the labour party might well lose some seats but as we will probably have a Conservative government for the next four years that in itself won't be too much of a problem.

Time to rebuild.

As I say, a suggestion.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 03:16 PM

Whichever way you look at it, the plotters have grossly miscalculated strategically,
are causing terminally stupid disruption & division,
and have effed up big time in their panic & haste to force Corbyn out.

If as seems likely, the tories won't be calling a sudden election,
then over the next few years I'd have preferred to see a Corbyn mentored younger successor [RIP Jo Cox]
groomed to lead Labour into the next election.

That person need not have been entirely unpalatable to the blairites..

But the tory lite twats have decided to set loose chaos and disorder.....????? 😬

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 02:48 PM

.. oops.. I left out Martians, time travellers, and subterranean mutant ninja turtles...???? 🙄

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 02:41 PM

"even Corbyn himself might be a secret undercover tory / mossad / CIA / KGB.. /etc [take yer pick] sleeper agent;
deployed to destroy the Labour party when the time was right for him to be 'activated'...???? 😱

Why would the Tories, CIA, KGB etc want to destroy a "Blairite" Labour Party? ......a centre left party is necessary to the establishment, it gives the impression of choice and is capable of doing things to the electorate that the Tories could never get away with. See Iraq, Mass privatisation etc

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 02:20 PM

Yebbut there isn't anybody, pfr.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 11:51 AM

Keith - seriously [for a change].. I don't know..

There must be intense anxiety and speculative calculations on both sides..

My distrust lies with the plotters, and my sympathy with Corbyn..

But as a skeptic and cynic.. who know's who's really pulling the strings...???

..and.. as an out and out barmy paranoid conspiracy theorist..

even Corbyn himself might be a secret undercover tory / mossad / CIA / KGB.. /etc [take yer pick] sleeper agent;
deployed to destroy the Labour party when the time was right for him to be 'activated'...???? 😱

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 11:41 AM

If both parties are irreconcilable?
Is it too painful to discuss?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 11:39 AM

"How might a split work out?"


acrimoniously... dividing the CDs and DVDs will get bitter and tearful.. it's the kid's that'll suffer in the long run... 🙄

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 11:30 AM

How might a split work out?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 10:57 AM

PURE SPECULATION: [no more, no less] part 2

Angela Seagull kicks off the leadership contest
Corbyn is denied entry by foul devious dirty underhanded exploitation of technicalities..

Labour grassroots membership are outraged by the obvious coup and threaten to quit the party en mass

Suddenly up stands a Hero..

a slightly lefter and more charismatic MP than Seagull
who declares he is so pained by the prospect of a split, his conscience insists he must put himself forward
as the healing candidate Corbynites might regard as a consolation prize,
and floating disenchanted ex Labour voters should flock back to.

He, actually being the plotters genuine first choice for replacement leader.

Seagull as predicted loses, and she meekly skuls back into jobsworth obscurity...

.. and they all lived happily ever after.. The End. 🤔

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: DMcG
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 07:52 AM

I am not sure, Ake. I agree a party led by Hilary Benn might have been electable if we had got there by another route, but if a lot of the rank and file knockers on doors and leaflet distributors and drivers-of-housebound-to-vote feel they have been disenfranchised from the party, it would be unsurprising if a lot decided they weren't interested. As to whether the media would support them: I doubt it. If can hear the pre-election interviews from here....

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 07:38 AM

The problem is that a Blairite Party led by someone like Hillary Benn, would be very electable, they would have the complete support of the media and the electorate are willing to support anything which they "think" gives them a voice.
What we need to ask ourselves, is electability that important if we are to be represented by a bunch of self-serving career politicians?

The rank and file of the Constituency Party want a Party which reflects their views, regardless of short term political success. As I have stated before, it will take years for people to come to terms with what socialism means.
A split would be best for all concerned.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 06:28 AM

So a plotting MP is supposed to be able to simply put her name forward, thereby ousting the leader. In theory, if no-one else puts their name forward and he can't get his 50, the Eagle has landed it. Blimey, even the Ayatollah couldn't do it as neatly as that. That isn't a challenge, is it. The plotters want to split the party in two, but, unlike what happened in the 80s, they want to form the big bit. Well they've got another think coming. They have shown themselves twice already to be unelectable, lest they forget. Two-time losers against the shabbiest bunch of Tories ever. Being seen, as they will be, as a ragbag collection of devious chancers (and Murdoch is waiting in the wings to do the branding), who ignored the wishes of the massive party membership, is going to make them a damn sight more unelectable than Jeremy Corbyn could ever achieve. And to think that John Major thought that HE was surrounded by bastards. The NEC had better make the right decision at their next meeting. A challenged leader who doesn't want to step down has every right to democratically defend his corner. Otherwise, I'm out, and I won't be the only one.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: DMcG
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 05:52 AM

By the way, if he is excluded from the ballot I would expect there to be a massive campaign to encourage people to write the name in by hand. These may just be reported as 'spoiled ballots' but if spoiled ballots substantially outweigh the valid ballots the legitimacy of whoever is elected will be challenged constantly and especially when the next general election takes place.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: DMcG
Date: 10 Jul 16 - 05:45 AM

The plotters also want Corbyn excluded from the ballot. This is a real problem for them: if he is not excluded, the likelihood is that he will receive a massive backing and they lose whatever credibility they have left. If he is excluded that the word 'coup' is pretty well unavoidable and the likelihood of a mass resignation of members is significant. Getting rid of a leader who is 'unelectable' by ensuring the party as a whole is unelectable is an odd move.

Clearly another example of entering something without reflecting on the consequences then.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 Jul 16 - 03:15 PM

What is it with Angela Seagull...
Is she seriously the best leadership contender the plotters can muster...???

In terms of charisma and voter dazzling prime minister potential
she's so insipid, she even makes Corbyn look on a par with Las Vegas era rhinestone jumpsuit Elvis...!!!??? 🙄

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jul 16 - 02:09 PM

"I am a lifelong believer in Socialism as a means of delivering purposeful lives to the people of this countr"
Then why do you spend so much time opposing it and advocating exactly the opposite?
Your arguments are National Socialist - and we know what the abbreviation for that is
Homophobia and the racist attitude you express towards immigrants is an anathema to socialist ideals
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Jul 16 - 12:12 PM

I never suggested that socialism would "improve freedom and prosperity" Don.
Both of these would take a hit in the short term......We lead extremely wasteful lives, we poison the planet, we are greedy selfish an acquisitive.......We demand "freedoms" to do exactly as we please regardless of the effect on society.
I we want real benefits like free education, a properly functioning health service and other public services which are fit for purpose, we will be required to relinquish many of the faux freedoms which have been handed out as sops to a nation completely without any sense of personal responsibility.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Donuel
Date: 09 Jul 16 - 09:34 AM

Ake your one trick pony argument that 'liberals have become knee jerk reactionaries when it comes to responding to Conservative assaults'

is valid.

Beyond that I don't see what else you contribute as to improving freedom and prosperity.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Jul 16 - 06:11 AM

Nothing to do with "Brexit" Stu, I have socialist friends who are anti and one or two who are pro.
This issue crosses party or political divisions.

The issue is how the country should be run given the large number of problems which now affect the economy, the change in demographic in the population , our ability to compete in "globalism" etc.

The "liberal left" have fooled themselves into thinking that the present economic system can be made to work fairly when in reality it requires extreme inequality to survive and prosper. Under the correct circumstances it can prosper and some of that prosperity "trickles down" but the effects are transient and in the long term bound to fail the mass of the population
Socialists are aware that the whole edifice requires to be demolished and re-constructed few are under the impression that this will be quick easy or pain free.......but it is a necessity.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 09 Jul 16 - 05:21 AM

Ake - how can you know who is a 'serious socialist'? This is an internet forum and despite having been here for around 16 years I can't say I know anyone at all, expect those I meet personally.

I'm not really sure what you're getting at here, unless it's invalidating everyone else's opinion because they don't meet some arbitrary personal criteria of yours that means their views are uniformed or less relevant than those of the chosen few. Hardly the grounds for reasonable debate, especially when the Brexiteers are accusing others of doing precisely that.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jul 16 - 01:45 PM

I do not believe for one second that Mr Farage is "racist" or "xenophobic".

Now THERE'S your problem, Ake.

Or are you suggesting that Farage only PRETENDED to be a racist xenophobe in order to gain personal political advantage and votes for "Leave"?

Which would make him even slimier than I thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jul 16 - 01:39 PM

I do not believe for one second that Mr Farage is "racist" or "xenophobic".

Now THERE'S your problem!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Jul 16 - 01:37 PM

Stu, a socialist is clearly defined politically.
Blairite "liberals" who make up the rump of the present Parliamentary Labour Party are as far removed as you can get from being socialists.

These are the people whom I describe as "not serious socialists"
They are career politicians without scruples.
There are perhaps two or three "serious socialists" on this board, but they rarely post.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Jul 16 - 01:31 PM

I wasn't linking them Ake, just mentioning 2 separate issues of contention...

I remember the anguish of being a young lefty and having to conform to peer pressure
to tow the ideologically correct line on all issues
for fear of being ostracised/vilified if harbouring any personal 'doubts' on any particular one...

[I've known some very scary thatcher voting feminists, and unhinged animal rights activists in early 80s Leeds & Bristol...]

But I hoped we all grew up to realise life aint as simplistic as that...

Even so, I guess because I'm younger and matured through the inclusive culture of the 70s and 80s, that's maybe why my chosen path is different to yours...???

I might be persuaded to grudgingly consider Farage's personal 'strengths',
but no way could I ever respect him as a role model......!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Jul 16 - 01:25 PM

I do not believe for one second that Mr Farage is "racist" or "xenophobic".   He is a highly intelligent person his views are purely political.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jul 16 - 01:21 PM

Now, Ake, about that bit on vindicating Farage's xenophobic racism...

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Jul 16 - 01:09 PM

I don't quite understand the link between Mr Farage and homosexuals PFR...... I admire Mr Farage's bravery and his clear sightedness regarding unregulated immigration from the EU and the effect it has on society. I am opposed to Mr Farage's views on the economy but am quite prepared to give him credit on other issues.
The trouble with The "liberal left" is that they suffer from ideological blindness, if people do not conform to their views on one subject then everything else is ignored or seen as invalid.
I judge people as I see them on each separate issue.

Observe the language used by so called liberals here, they are chock full of hate for everyone and everything which does not fit into their ideological agenda....Fascist, xenophobe, racist, homophobe, it never ceases long enough for these people to listen and consider what has actually been said.

On Homosexuals, my views are well known and unlikely to change.
I consider the behaviour dangerous and unhealthy, I have given incontrovertible stats which prove my point.
I do not "hate" or even dislike homosexu8als, I supported de-criminalisation. I simply do not agree that legislation in favour of this sexual minority is good for society or even for homosexuals themselves.   They urgently require a medical inquiry into the reasons for the huge anomaly in hetero and homo sexual health rates.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Jul 16 - 10:22 AM

it's the weekend... "Pride" - Trailer

yeah.. ok.. it's a shamelessly emotionally manipulative feel-good comedy drama movie.. but so what..
Wallow in it.. have a good laugh and wipe a few tears...


If you haven't seen it, you can find the DVD for 3 quid..

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 07 Jul 16 - 09:32 AM

Ake seriously reminds me of old socialists I used to know 30 odd years ago
when I was a student learning to understand 'everything'..

The recent Brit movie "Pride" excellently depicts that era.

- A time of Working class militants with ingrained regressive attitudes towards 'minorities' and women.. -

His analysis helps stir memories of who I used to be, and what I used to think,
before my mind eventually became fogged & torpid with all the shit life constantly throws at you..
and I find benefit in that while I'm struggling to piece my intellect back together again.....

But Ake.. it's you your conclusions leading you down a blind alley re farage and 'gays' where I part company...

I think you sincerely believe what you say on those subjects.. but like most others here, I can't accept it.
and hope you could positively rethink your position on those issues...???

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 07 Jul 16 - 09:10 AM

"I share this view with most of the serious Socialists with whom I have come into contact."

So... if you don't share Ake's opinion you're not a serious socialist. This type of argument is called a fallacy.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Jul 16 - 02:33 AM

Steve Shaw - 06 Jul 16 - 06:03 PM

You've lost your bet Shaw, I see no reason at all to disbelieve what Akenaton states as being his beliefs regarding both capitalism and socialism, I can accept fully that he is stating his view plainly and honestly. As he states in a subsequent post we hold different views, but only on some things, not all. I wholeheartedly agree with what he states in his last paragraph.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 08:16 PM

He's barking, Greg. Regard your interventions with him as entertainment only. 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 06:34 PM

So Ake, about that bit of vindicating xenophobic racism..........

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 06:23 PM

MrT and I have different views on political matters, however he bases his arguments on facts and makes his case for the retention of the current system very well and very sensibly.
There is a possibility which I accept that he may be right and I may be wrong, but there is no possibility that the "liberal left" are correct in their ideology. Capitalism is a cut throat system with no room for the posturing of faux socialists. The "liberal left" see the destruction of society as a victory.....they have little vision.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 06:03 PM

Mad as a box of frogs. I bet Teribus doesn't come along to wholeheartedly agree with you. 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 05:57 PM

PFR....You are one of the few who usually deserve a response.

I am a lifelong believer in Socialism as a means of delivering purposeful lives to the people of this country, Socialism will take many years to be absorbed by an electorate who have been bred and educated in the game of financial aspiration.
Someday they will realise the unsustainability of the Capitalist economic system.

On social matters I am extremely conservative. I share this view with most of the serious Socialists with whom I have come into contact.

The "liberal left" are half hearted reformists......those of them who have any vestige of principle left; but in reality they have as much chance of reforming the Capitalist system as Mr Cameron had of reforming the EU.......They are only interested in social posturing it makes them feel as if they are in some way relevant.....that feeling is massively misplaced.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 05:34 PM

I reserve my democratic right to not disclose to you how I vote, Teribus, so desist from guessing. Now bugger off, will you, with this thought: there is no black and white.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 03:16 PM

"Disgusting creep!....."
Farage or Daniel Snow?
"He admits he wants to change the law so employers can discriminate on grounds of nationality. There was a time when people used to post signs saying: "No dogs. No blacks. No Irish." Nigel Farage, by his own admission, wants to make it permissible to again put up signs that say: "No dogs. No Irish." "
FARAGE
"mind they do love transsexuals and anything socially radical"
Homophobic creep
MENTAL DISORDER
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 10:41 AM

Mr Farage and his views have been fully vindicated

So you believe that xenophobic racism has been "vindicated", Ake?

Thus you must also consider The Trumpshit vindicated in his support of the same?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 10:29 AM

Ake - it seems there are two Akes...???

The one I can enjoy a transgressive grin at reading, and almost agree with on socialist analysis...

and the other one who holds views that are perversely out of touch with almost all reasonably and commonly accepted social consensus....

baffling.....?????? 😕

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party...???
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 10:20 AM

Ake - it seems there are two Akes

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 10:18 AM

(thanks to the first past the post setup that you and Teribus love so much)

Well according to what you said about the way you voted in 2011 in the Alternative Voting Referendum it would appear that you favour it as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 10:11 AM

The BBC rags Cameron, Blair, Brown, Corbyn and you name 'em just as much as Nigel Farage. Considering the incredibly poor representation of his party (thanks to the first past the post setup that you and Teribus love so much) he should be thankful he gets any airtime at all. If you have any complaints about media treatment of Farage, give us the links so that we can judge the context, please.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 10:02 AM

The largest media outlet is the BBC....ever tried listening vto politics or news on BBC radio 4, So called comedy shows full of shitty "jokes" about Mr Farage's "racism"....interviews from the likes of Jon Snow referring to "black sheep"......."yet I hesitate to use the word black in your company Mr Farage".

Disgusting creep!.....but the BBC is full of them, mind they do love transsexuals and anything socially radical   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 07:29 AM

My remarks were in response to akenaton's bogus claim of a hate campaign, not to you, Teribus. I don't think that was too difficult to work out. As for the public wanting a referendum for years, prove it. I'd say that it was quite low on the list of the public's priorities, though of course Nige has persuaded them tirelessly that it wasn't. You have no evidence that Europe has ever swung any general election, for example, and his Euroscepticism still managed to see William Hague well and truly dumped, as I recall. Two days to save us from the euro my arse. Incidentally, I have no heroes of any kind whatsoever except for Beethoven. You are under suspicion of having Maggie for yours, as you often defend her even before she's been attacked, as in go on, blame Maggie for that as well, I know you will... 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 07:03 AM

We will have many years to consider the out vote.

We are already aware of the negative effect on the value of the pound, a 38 year low against the dollar, a fall of over 10% in one week against the Euro.

What will you say to the people who lose their job, oh let me guess "we've got FREEDOM!"

Just as stupid as Wallace shouting it when his guts and gonads were on fire at his feet

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 06:48 AM

Believe me Shaw I have no political heroes. Neither of the current leadership wrangles holds any interest for me as they concern members of political parties and I have never been a member of any political party in my life.

Truth remains though that had there been no Nigel Farage then there would have been no EU Referendum, something that the British public have wanted for years. He fought, single-handed at times to get one - he did and I thank him for it. If you opponents of democracy do not like that then that is your problem, voice your own opinions and do not presume to speak for others.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 06:43 AM

Independent, 2 hours ago,

"Labour officials try to work out who owns party assets as split looms over Corbyn
'You would think that this had been settled after the last split, but it wasn't,' official says"

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 05:32 AM

The TV and radio media have been pretty neutral regarding Farage and have given him a lot of airtime on programmes such as Question Time and Any Questions. In fact, he and his party have been given a damn sight more oxygen than any other political group you could care to name that has always had no more than either nil seats or one seat (and you love first past the post, remember, before you start bleating about how many votes they got). Most of the print media, especially the tabloids, have supported him. Papers such as the Guardian, which opposes UKIP, do so in a measured manner and in no way could be accused of whipping up a "hate campaign." The good old British tradition of lampooning politicians in satirical shows has treated him no better nor worse than any other politician. Frankly, you want your hero to have been a victim of a hate campaign so that you can moan to us that he's been a victim of a hate campaign. In other words,you're making it up as you go along.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 05:25 AM

"you at least acknowledge that the "nice Mr Farage" is on a personal gravy train. His expenses claims have been questionable over and above the allowance that each MEP is given."

What personal gravy train are you referring to Raggy? Would that be the European Union Member of Parliament pay/expenses/allowances & pension gravy train set up by the EU Commission/Council/Parliament for the benefit of those who happen to "work" for the highly corrupt, inefficient and unaccountable organisation organisation known as the EU? Hardly personal Raggy even to your fevered imagination.

As to his expenses being questionable. As you have mentioned this it would appear that you actually know what his expenses are which begs the obvious question why ask what expenses he received? You would appear to already know the answer. Why do you ask questions you already know the answers to Raggy? To impress yourself with the extent of your astounding knowledge?

I totally agree with what Akenaton says about Farage being almost totally responsible for there ever having been a referendum on Europe despite promises of one, reneged upon, by major political figures. Akenaton is also correct in drawing attention to the vast sums of money spent by political opponents and the campaign of ridicule and vilification mounted by the media against this man, who guess what? Is entitled to exactly the same rights of free speech as you or anyone else in this country.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 04:33 AM

It occurs to me that you should recognise the efficacy of such a media hate campaign as it is still in operation and is now directed at Mr Corbyn.......or do you always only see one side of the coin?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 04:31 AM

Well done Teribus, you at least acknowledge that the "nice Mr Farage" is on a personal gravy train. His expenses claims have been questionable over and above the allowance that each MEP is given. You could try explaining some of this to those on "your side" who seem to think it is not worth mentioning.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 04:30 AM

I am not at all surprised that Mr Farage has not been elected, given the comprehensive media hate campaign to which he has been subjected over the last number of years.....Even now when all mainstream political Parties have belatedly accepted his views on immigration he is still the subject of universal loathing by the "liberal" left (see these pages) Irregularities in the conduct of the last election are still being considered, as public money was pumped into the constituency in an attempt to stop Mr Farage from being elected.

Thankfully Mr Farage and his views have been fully vindicated by the largest vote of all ....a national referendum.

"Get used to it"!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Jul 16 - 02:34 AM

MEPs being part of a useless gravy train for get paid inflated salaries, masses in expenses that require no receipts, allowances and upon completion of their elected five year term an 80% salary pension upon which, irrespective of where they live is taxed at the lowest rate of taxation in the EU. If anyone can actually tell me what these parasites have done over the past 43 years I'd be amazed.

So if Farage is an elected member of the European Parliament he is therefore free to claim any expenses and allowances to which he is entitled - whether he actually incurred them or not as is the will of the EU. Now that I would have thought was all fairly obvious to anyone with regard to any MEP - so a bit of a daft question Raggy, the answer to which should have been pretty self evident - even to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 08:57 PM

Well as a matter of fact, Teribus, I agree with you about the Kinnocks, shock bloody horror. So why did you bother mentioning them? They're nobody's heroes this end, I assure you!

" Mr Farage would have been allowed no say in how the exit is brought forward He would have to be in government to be considered and the stupid bastards all hate him anyway"

Well it isn't the "stupid bastards" in government who have kept Nige at bay. It's the stupid bastard British electorate, who have decisely rejected his attempts to become an MP seven times out of seven. 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 07:08 PM

I don't think I have commented on the Kinnocks Teribus. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 06:42 PM

Raggytash - 04 Jul 16 - 03:55 PM

Just how much did that "nice Mr Farage" claim in expenses?

One would hope at least as much as the collective twats Kinnock.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 09:42 AM

Anybody vaguely left of Tony Blair is regarded as Marxist Leninist in today's careerist-crammed Labour Party with its Shadow Education Ministers who send their children to private schools..... et al
Problem with people like Keith is they choose not to read beyond the labels.
Principled people like Corbyn make them shit blue ollies - a politician with ideals "hand me the crucifix and the holy water!!!"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 09:21 AM

'Marxist-Leninists'... ahhh.. that's a quaint old term.. which century is Ian Lucas living in...??? 🙄


..just looking at the parallels between me and Lucas..

near enough the same age, both grammar school educated council estate kids..

.. but when I was sent for an interview for a job as a trainee solicitor, I told 'em I'd rather play guitar in a punk band,
and the interview was finished abruptly as I was ushered out of the office...

Thank Joe Strummer I didn't end up as Ian Lucas.....


[wouldn't mind his standard of living though...]

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 09:06 AM

"We want our party back!"
So do we from the neo Tories who took it off us under Blair
"I thought you cared about the party!"
We do - we don't care about your manipulations of what's happening
You've already bombed at trying to prove that Labour if full of Antisemites - why not accept the fact that your attitude is no longer acceptable
The world is far too full of inarticulate right wingers already
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 08:59 AM

How much does that "nice Mr Farage" earn as an MEP

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 08:29 AM

Plp meeting yesterday,
Former shadow minister Ian Lucas declared at one point that it was time to retrieve Labour from 'Marxist-Leninists' around Corbyn. He said: "We want our party back!"

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 05:24 AM

"Rag, who cares?"

I do. Some of that's my effing money.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 05:14 AM

Rag, who cares?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 04:10 AM

Just how much has that "nice Mr Farage" claimed in expenses from the EU.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Jul 16 - 04:00 AM

BBC 42 minutes ago,
"But addressing a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party on Monday evening, Mr Watson(elected deputy leader) said he had told Mr Corbyn he needed the support of his MPs, and not just party members, if he wanted to stay in post."

He is not going to get the support of the MPs, so what next?
If he does not step down there will be a leadership challenge, but he may win again, so what then?

No view?
No opinion?
I thought you cared about the party!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 05:14 PM

Farage is basically The Trumpshit with a British accent.

No wonder Ake & The Professor adore him.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 05:05 PM

"Is it not an existential threat to Labour as we know it?"
It's an attempted coup by the right
They should learn from the Irish Labour Party who have compromised themselves out of existence leaving the way clear for genuine left parties to build up support
Little point of having main parties with identical policies as is happening in Britain
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 03:55 PM

Just how much did that "nice Mr Farage" claim in expenses?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 12:43 PM

The original meaning of the word 'existential' is under existential threat....

I award "existential threat" twattish buzzword of the year 2016... 🏆

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 12:29 PM

A breakaway by the Plp is a real possibility.
Why make a joke of it?
Is it not an existential threat to Labour as we know it?
Has it ever faced a graver threat?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 10:08 AM

"Any views on the Corbyn issue?
The PLP rejects him, but he would probably win a members' vote so where do they go?"


Keith - Now that Farage is retiring to his villa in the South of France,
the way is clear for the Labour PLP to split off and join their rightful home in UKIP,
where Angela Seagull will contest UKIP's one and only MP for Leadership...

.. and they all lived happily ever after...... 😘

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 09:45 AM

and [Farage} subsequently has become a target for all sorts of abuse

And every bit of that abuse well deserved.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 08:16 AM

I see that the "nice Mr Farage" is to stay on as an MEP for another two years pocketing in the region of 190,000 euro.

Just how much did he claim in expenses??

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 07:41 AM

Any views on the Corbyn issue?
The PLP rejects him, but he would probably win a members' vote so where do they go?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 07:39 AM

Avoid !! Bugger should read afford.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 07:37 AM

Tell that to all the people who will lose jobs in the next few years. Tell that to those who will have their job security undermined.
Tell that to those with capital who have seen it's value diminished even in the last few days. Tell that to those who won't be able to avoid foreign goods because the exchange rate has just put 8% plus on the cost of imports.

Yes I can see everyone is going to win.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 07:27 AM

Mr Farage would have been allowed no say in how the exit is brought forward He would have to be in government to be considered and the stupid bastards all hate him anyway.

Without Mr Farage there would have been no Brexit, we would have been ultimately forced into the Eurozone and we would have ended up as a region of the United States of Europe.

Three cheers for Mr Farage, he took them all on single handed and gave them a whupping.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 07:09 AM

Well if his objective was to sell the country down the river and then bugger off leaving other people to pick up the mess left behind you're right, he did achieve his objective.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 06:53 AM

Not all Raggytash, Mr Farage has achieved his objective and subsequently has become a target for all sorts of abuse, he obviously feels that he is a liability to the Party amongst ex Labour voters.

Apparently he is going into a career as International advisor to the anti establishment movement.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 06:15 AM

"Any views on the Corbyn issue?"
Never miss a chance to take a pop, do you Keith?
Having failed miserably to prove that Labour is riddled with Antisemites, you try a backdoor approach.
How about a thread on the fact that the diabolical decision has caused the fall of a Prime Minister and others and has led to a wonderfully divisive leadership contest?
The Labour right have been planning to get rid of Corbyn since he was elected.
His performance during the referendum is just another phase in that campaign
COUP
Britain now desperately needs a change off policy - not more of the same from the right
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 05:18 AM

Oh dear, some people on here are going to be upset.


It seems that the "nice Mr Farage" is standing down from leading his party.


Yet another one to leave a sinking ship.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Jul 16 - 04:09 AM

Any views on the Corbyn issue?
The PLP rejects him, but he would probably win a members' vote so where do they go?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Jul 16 - 08:01 AM

"Of course when you can't challenge the facts attack the messenger"
I have never done anything else but challenge your distorted and highly prejudiced facts and have put up masses of facts of my own which you have even refused to read, let alone respond to - that's balanced argument as you appear to see it apparently.
You are the most cowardly, dishonest and insulting poster to this site - you answer nohthing and you spit vitriolic abuse at anybody who disagrees with you - all behind anonymity and from the comfort of a keyboard.
Not a particularly good representative of your cause, but the way things are going, a fairly typical one
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 03 Jul 16 - 07:36 AM

Of course when you can't challenge the facts attack the messenger, that's the sure way to show you've lost the debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Jul 16 - 04:35 AM

"Fascist, extremist and racist according to him."
I named your sources - Jihad Watch', from which you took one of the largest cut-'n-pastes ever made to their forum) is an openly Islamophobic site which targets Muslims and their religion
Evern 'The White Supremist's, best friends wouldn't describe it as anything but fascist.
Others you have used are equally extremist by nature - each time I have pointed them out I have linked to their policy.
"are filthy anti-semites in your book, right? "
Anybody who implicates The Jewish People with Israeli war crimes and atrocities is a filthy antisemite - every time you describe criticism of Israel as "antisemitic" you expose yourself as an antisemite - you offer very little else here, making you an extreme antisemite.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 08:16 PM

I love "homage" there, Greg, but I can't help feeling that "big girl's blousage" might be more appropriate! 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 07:06 PM

Steve, "Bearded" is just homage to another fourteen-karat 13-year-old effing idiot who, thanks be to God (OOOPS! Religion - mea culpa!) hasn't been posting of late.

Not meant to be taken literally.   ;>)

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 06:39 PM

I doubt whether he is old enough to have a beard. He certainly isn't man enough, that's for sure. Greg, while he's here, the thread is dead. I suppose I could always attract a moderator to it, just to get them to see what this eejit is up to, but I'd have mention religion to achieve that. 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 06:28 PM

And now, hopefully, back to the actual subject/topic of this thread before it was hijacked and pissed upon by BeardedBoo.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 06:24 PM

AKE,   RE:02 Jul 16 - 05:06 PM

See above. Case in point. BeardedBoo strikes again. Same old worthless shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 05:58 PM

I stand corrected. Mr Wiesel DID, repeatedly, advocate taking the wrong side, viz:

Now, of course, all those Jewish folks, above, are filthy anti-semites in your book, right?

Greg frantically Googling Jews opposed to Elie Wiesel to justify his bigotry......lol.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 05:51 PM

Boo: see 02 Jul 16 - 05:45 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 05:48 PM

Nor did he recommend unthinking bigotry.

The only bigotry I see here comes from folks like you and your fellow travelers but keep trying to smear others with your ad-hominems - it shows you for what you are.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 05:45 PM

Sorry, Boo - I stand corrected. Mr Wiesel DID, repeatedly, advocate taking the wrong side, viz:

The Tragedy of Elie Wiesel: Why does such a great man keep apologizing for a government that betrays his ideals?
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.643037

NY Times Runs Ad From Holocaust Survivors Condemning Israel, Attacking Elie Wiesel
http://observer.com/2014/08/ny-times-runs-ad-from-holocaust-survivors-condemning-israel-attacking-elie-wiesel/

A Response to Elie Wiesel
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/09/09/a-response-to-elie-wiesel/

Now, of course, all those Jewish folks, above, are filthy anti-semites in your book, right?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 05:36 PM

Mr. Wiesel (RIP indeed!) never recommended taking the WRONG side, Boo. Nor did he recommend unthinking bigotry.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 05:25 PM

We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.

Elie Wiesel 1928-2016 RIP

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 05:06 PM

the only way to silence Bobad is to address the points he makes.

Not so. The "points" he makes are bigoted bullshit and the only result of trying to engage him is to produce an even greater spew of bullshit.

Might as well "debate" a Holocaust denier.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 02:38 PM

Name calling? Either you don't read threads or you've got a bloody short memory! 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 01:45 PM

Steve the only way to silence Bobad is to address the points he makes.
Name calling or ignoring him just makes you look foolish, or unable to defend your position.

What you are doing is attempted intimidation, this is a free debating forum and as far as I can see Bobad has broken no rules.

Many members have occasionally logged out and posted as guest...for many reasons.....it is not a capital offence and what you are attempting, group intimidation, is many times worse.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 12:30 PM

Bobad - Steve & Jim, even Ake, as much as I can know, like, or agree with, have convinced me they are substantially real life sincere genuine people...

YOU, are literally a digital non-entity..
just random provocative negative words that I can choose to ignore or respond to, depending on my mood and If I think I might learn a little from that interaction....

Keith & MGM.. bless 'em... well they're our traditional British elder reactionary eccentrics... 😜

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 12:29 PM

Same old spew, Boo. Boring.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 12:05 PM

Quiz time

Someone who doesn't share Shaw's opinion on any matter and is not afraid to challenge him on it is:

A. A bigot
B. A coward
C. A religious nutter
D. An Islamophobe
E. A troll
F. All of the above

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 11:36 AM

Tell you what, Jim. I've been threatened with suspension twice by a mod for a damn sight less than what he's doing. Seems that the yanks will defend free speech to the death, no matter how hateful. Unless it's free speech about r*******, of course.

I should like to suggest that we completely ignore him from this point on. We've got better things to do than argue fruitlessly with a cheating, lying, bigoted coward. Just post "troll". Maybe he'll just wither away. Or should that be whither away. Jesus, I'm confused. 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 11:31 AM

openly extremist Fascist and racist sources

Lol....read any source that doesn't conform to Carroll's fixed ideology especially if it supports Israel which which makes it, by definition, Fascist, extremist and racist according to him.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 11:25 AM

"Carroll is the most racist, anti-Semitic"
Once more you implicate the Jewish People in Israeli terrorism
Doesn't come any more Antisemitic that that - and yas - I do feel hatred towards Antisemites.
Happy donate a large sum of money to any organisation you care to name if you can produce one example of racism in any of my posts though
Won't stop you making the claim though, cowards have no problems in hurling abuse anonymously from a distance
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 09:02 AM

Bobad id [sic] probably the most vitriolic hate-filled poster on this forum

Carroll is the most racist, anti-Semitic, diarrhea spewing poster on this forum.

See how easy it is to post shit about others on the internet Carroll. Keep it up, I'll match you one for one.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 09:02 AM

Bobad id [sic] probably the most vitriolic hate-filled poster on this forum

Carroll is the most racist, anti-Semitic, diarrhea spewing poster on this forum.

See how easy it is to post shit about others on the internet Carroll. Keep it up, I'll match you one for one.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 08:51 AM

Er, it wasn't intended and I think one apology should be enough. You haven't apologised yet for calling me a Jew-hater, and even up to yesterday you were still trying to pretend it wasn't you. I suggest to you that you find out a little about Ms Chakrabarti before impugning her integrity by accusing her of a whitewash. In terms of honesty, fair-mindedness, thoroughness and straightforwardness she knocks cheating little worms like you into a cocked hat.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 08:22 AM

"I guess she just isn't quite the right colour for him."

I have no idea what colour she is but am not surprised whatsoever that you would direct such an appalling statement at me. As usual, personal attack in place of reasoned discourse by the usual suspects. We expect it.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 06:58 AM

Gracious as ever - as as shy as ever at responding to arguments
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 06:34 AM

Oh, it's you alright.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 04:58 AM

I'm horrified with myself for that choice of words and I apologise for the offence caused. Until I read akenaton's second post I was wondering what he was on about. What I'd had in mind and what I'd intended to convey was that Shami Chakrabarti is on a part of the political spectrum that didn't suit bobad. I suppose that he'd have preferred Bibi to have done the investigation and found that every single Labour Party member was a rabid antisemite. Ms Chakrabarti is known for her thoroughness and integrity and the suggestion that she would have produced a whitewash report is despicable. In fact, the report actually makes for far more uncomfortable reading than I'd expected.

I wish I could remove that remark from my post. It just isn't me.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 03:24 AM

"I see no evidence that bobad is in any way prejudiced against people on grounds of colour."
A poor choice of words maybe, but PFR's point was perfectly valid.
Bobad id probably the most vitriolic hate-filled poster on this forum and he has no compunction in using openly extremist Fascist and racist sources to spread his bile, so when he is accused of racism, he has nobody but himself to blame.
He compounds his behaviour with his Antisemitic arguments, namely, that the Jewish People as a whole are responsible for the behaviour of the Israeli regime - doesn't even meet the criterion of the much reduced definition of the term 'Antisemitism' that the Israeli regime has reduced it to.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 03:10 AM

I see no evidence that bobad is in any way prejudiced against people on grounds of colour.
Islamic Fundamentalists come in all colours and all nationalities.
Many Christians are black, or brown.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Jul 16 - 03:05 AM

" I guess she just isn't quite the right colour for him."

PFR....I think you are probably one of the most honest posters here, does the above attempt at irony not make you raise your eyebrows a little? does continual writing in this vein not point in the direction of ideological obsession?......Most people no longer think in terms of colour, but in terms of behaviour or effect.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 09:26 PM

"However, a troll is a troll an' all that...


yeah.. give 'em enough chances... or give 'em enough rope.... 😜

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 09:02 PM

Points taken. However, a troll is a troll an' all that...

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 08:40 PM

Steve - fair enough.. but I can count ideas gleaned from talking to the worst kinds of people as some quality of learning experience..

it's what I used to do when much younger and more active...

I didn't follow a traditional middle class career path after my degree [stupid really - that's why I've been so skint all my life, and have such a diminished vocabulary now]

but lived, worked, and socialised with all sorts of working class reactionaries, very similar to the kind that Labour lost support from,
who voted for 'Leave' in the former heavy industrial areas...

When I was 23, sharing a bacon breakfast with a NF supporting workmate was a very enlightening experience at getting to know first hand the mind set of the 'enemy '...

When I was post grad, a lecturer was even encouraging me to delve deeper 'under cover' with a photography project,
as he insisted "I could communicate in the vernacular that middle class conformist students could not...."
That's thinking back to the radical "Education Photography" movement of the 80s..

That's the MA I failed to complete for health & finance issues..

So that's another of my ingrained 'foibles' trying to find common ground, and potential for progression with the kind of people we find appalling...

Something Labour needs to face up to in the near future ...???

I guess I'm too f@cking naive still...

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 07:41 PM

You are seriously indulging a troll, pfr. The most dishonest person on this forum by a country mile (he was still lying about his dual identity a few hours ago, until I informed him that the mods had sussed him) is smearing Shami Chakrabarti (just about the most honest and upright member of our society) with whitewashing, in spite of her numerous uncomfortable, yet fair, criticisms of Labour. I guess she just isn't quite the right colour for him.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 07:22 PM

bobad - I know nothing at all about "antisemitism.uk", so cannot comment on their credibility or integrity..
Obviously I have no grounds to be dismissive or hostile towards them
Their declared aims would be considered admirable by any life long anti racist.

But reading their "About" page does raise concerns about the kinds of zealots and nutter they could be recruiting as volunteers..

..and in some ways could confirm reasonable suspicions about groups sponsored and organized to monitor the social media of individuals
targeted to be victimised & discredited by spurious accusations of anti semitism....???

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 06:42 PM

Just thought I'd offer a perspective on the report from a group that should have a pretty good handle on anti-Semitism and how it is being whitewashed in an internal party report.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 06:27 PM

Bobad - no surprises that the quotes you will find to post on the Report are inevitably biased against Labour...

How many would reached first draft before the contents of the report was even made public...???

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 06:04 PM

Talk about cloud-cuckoo land...😂

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 04:29 PM

The Chakrabarti Inquiry is a vague, meaningless whitewash that will do nothing to rid Labour of antisemitism

Today, the Chakrabarti Inquiry into antisemitism in the Labour Party presented what it set out to present: a narrow set of recommendations on how the Labour Party should change its rules on racism.

The Inquiry did not examine the disgraceful cases of antisemitism in the Labour Party, or their even more disgraceful mishandling by the Party leadership, including Jeremy Corbyn who presides over a regime of the lightest slaps on wrists for even the most offensive and deliberate antisemites.

Inexcusably, the Inquiry proposes making it harder to suspend antisemites and keeping suspensions secret so as not to affect elections. Additionally the Inquiry dismisses any claims of antisemitism arising from sharing a stage with antisemites, and suggests that any antisemitic incident coming to light after more than two years should not be considered — a limitation period so short it has no parallel in any other disciplinary regime that we are aware of.

Apart from imploring Labour activists to stop calling Jews 'Zios' or accusing them of supporting Nazi policies, this Inquiry is a vague, meaningless whitewash that will do nothing to rid Labour of antisemitism or address the total absence of leadership it has shown on this issue.

As if to emphasise how far the Labour party are from dealing with their antisemitism problem, Jeremy Corbyn, during the launch, compared Israel to ISIS, and failed to intervene to defend a Jewish MP who left the event in tears after being very publicly racially abused by a Labour activist.

The Chakrabarti Inquiry has avoided addressing the well-documented postwar re-emergence of an insidious antisemitism of the 'progressive' Left, merely encouraging Labour members to not use abusive words. Instead of helping the Labour Party regain trust, this report will further harm its reputation in the Jewish community, as well as in the wider world.

Campaign Against Antisemitism

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 03:44 PM

"The NEC are appalled by recent cases of anti-Semitic abuse."
Quite - how many 2 - 22 - 200 -2000 no number mentioned
FRiom the contact I have had with the Labour party one case would be appalling
Every single aspect of your cut-'n-paste has been covered in my last post - it is a serious matter to be accused of Antisemitism - your own post proves my point.
Baroness Jan Royal found no evidence whatever of widespread antisemitism - done and dusted
What point are you trying to make - that the was wrong?
Perhaps we might look at how the same problem was handled in the Tory Party
"Conservatives have a choice. Do they go down in history as those who spoke out, or those who shamefully and cowardly remained silent - or even supported this disgrace? These are not Facebook posts shared by oddball bigoted party activists and councillors. There is no Tory inquiry into anti-Muslim prejudice, just as there was no inquiry into Tory mayor and leadership frontrunner Boris Johnson attacking Barack Obama through his "half-Kenyan ancestry" or describing black people as "piccaninnies" or bandydng around "watermelon smiles" or publishing articles, while editor of the Spectator, suggesting black people have lower IQs. This whole campaign is sanctioned and orchestrated by the very top of the Conservative party. No excuses. No hiding places. Speak out now, like other decent Tories have done - or be damned by history."
TORY RACISM
Do you know what the result of the Tory Party's enquiry into racism came up with???
Thye haven't even announced they are even arsed about the behaviour of the front runner for the post of Prime Minister's racism - a bit like making someone responsible for massacring 3'500 unarmed refugees Prime Minister of Israel.
"They need to define what constitutes anti-Semitism"
Easy- peasey - any criticism of Israel according to her Minister for Justice - Rabbis, soldiers, Holocuast survivors and their families.......
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 03:03 PM

including anti-Semitism

They need to define what constitutes anti-Semitism as it's too easy to slime out by using euphemisms and code words, as is widely evident.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 02:25 PM

Jim,
The NEC are appalled by recent cases of anti-Semitic abuse. Anti-Semitism has no place in the Labour Party and is contrary to everything we stand for. Jeremy introduced a new code of conduct for the party, which states:

"The Labour Party is an anti-racist party, committed to combating and campaigning against all forms of racism….Labour will not tolerate racism in any form inside or outside the party….Any behaviour or use of language which targets or intimidates members of ethnic or religious communities or incites racism, including anti-Semitism…or undermines Labour's ability to campaign against any form of racism, is unacceptable".

Anti-Semitism inquiry

Jeremy Corbyn then introduced Baroness Jan Royall, who has conducted two recent investigations into specific allegations of anti-Semitism, and Shami Chakrabarti, who will be chairing a wider ranging inquiry looking at anti-Semitism within the Labour Party. The entire NEC recognises the seriousness of this issue and is committed to addressing all the issues raised by these inquiries."

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 02:12 PM

bonzo 3 legs is a right wing pot stirrer my advice to him is to jump off beachy head

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 01:55 PM

"It was and is a fact."
No it is not - it took the accusation seriously, as it should have, but the only people to claim there was an actual problem were direectly connected with the Israeli propaganda campaign.
You were asked to produce sources for you claims you ignored requests to do so and you still have not produced them

This is actually what the NEC said
"The NEC are appalled by recent cases of antisemitic abuse. Antisemitism has no place in the Labour Party and is contrary to everything we stand for. Jeremy introduced a new code of conduct for the party, which states:"
REPORT
No mention of large numbers, no widespread concern.
In a socialist party, half a dozen racists would be "appalling"
You have deliberately attempted to make this a widespread problem, why wouldn't you, you are a right wing pro Israeli extremist who hates Muslims enough to have described them as cultural prone to pedophilia.
There is no major problem, there has never been a major problem - the main problem Labour has IS THAT IT IS UNDER ATTACK FROM ISRAELI PROPAGANDA
Your own cut and paste reads of minority hateful or ignorant attitudes - a major problem, my arse
Stop making things up – it doesn't make for good debate
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 11:55 AM

"You have nothing against the party" eh, cheat? So why did you post a pathetic, unfunny little play on words in Keith's thread, viz "Wither the Labour Party?" Regular little comedian, aren't we?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 11:39 AM

Jim,
Yo implied there was by inventing "large numbers of Labour people, including their NEC who were claiming there was a problem - there were so such numbers - you invented it.

It was and is a fact.
"The NEC are appalled by recent cases of anti-Semitic abuse. Anti-Semitism has no place in the Labour Party and is contrary to everything we stand for."
http://labourlist.org/2016/05/alice-perrys-nec-report-corbyn-fighting-prejudice-and-listening-to-voters-online/

The recent enquiry established that there was not a problem

It established that there was!
page 1
"there is too much clear evidence (going back some years) of minority hateful or ignorant attitudes and
behaviours festering within a sometimes bitter incivility of discourse. This has no place in a modern
democratic socialist party that puts equality, inclusion and human rights at its heart. Moreover, I have
heard too many Jewish voices express concern that antisemitism has not been taken seriously enough
in the Labour Party and broader Left for some years.
An occasionally toxic atmosphere is in danger of shutting down free speech within the Party rather
than facilitating it, and is understandably utilised by its opponents."

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 11:37 AM

and why you have such an obsession with the UK Labour Party...???

I have nothing against the party, as a matter of fact I am in agreement with most of it's policies, it's anti-Semites and friends of terrorist groups that I have a problem with.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 11:23 AM

Labour Apologizes After Corbyn Seems to Compare Israel, Radical Islamic Groups

U.K. opposition party reaches out to Israeli envoy in London to 'unequivocally' apologize for ' unacceptable remarks,' Israel says.

Ha'aretz

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 10:55 AM

"I distinctly remember the poster you are obsessing over stating that he/she was a regular member who was going to post anonymously to thwart those mentally defective obsessives who become fixated on the individual rather than the content of their post."

The "poster I'm obsessing over" is you. The time for pathetic pretence is over. How typical of you to try to dishonestly distance yourself. You were investigated by the mods after all my "obsessing" and it was confirmed that you were the anonymous Guest who called some of us Jew-haters and who waded in frequently with vile Islamophobic bigotry. And no-one is "fixated" on you, believe me (I can't think of anything I'd want to do less, so don't flatter yourself). We are "fixated" on trying to get you to grow up and stop spewing out hate speech. You are very fortunate that the mods around here are so indulgent, frankly. Anyway, how brave of you to call people who don't agree with you "mentally defective" whilst acting as bobad instead of Guest. Bet that made your head spin.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 10:50 AM

.. ok.. I've just missed a train, so I've a few spare minutes to put this together....

PURE SPECULATION: [no more, no less]

Angela Seagull postponed her leadership bid announcement to allow Corbyn more time to fall on his sword...

Actually, in the heat of over excitement, her advisors remembered yesterday was the day for publicising the Chakrabarti report,
which allowed more opportunity for other's to heap further discredit on Corbyn's Leadership,
pressurising him into resignation...

Perhaps, awareness that the Chief Rabbi's PR team were already preparing to exploit any word they could pounce on in Corbyn's speech,
may have been an additional factor....????

..and today is the Somme Remembrance.
No decent politician would be selfish enough to conduct distracting business on such a sombre occasion...


Not that it mattered at all to Gove.....

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 10:50 AM

.. ok.. I've just missed a train, so I've a few spare minutes to put this together....

PURE SPECULATION: [no more, no less]

Angela Seagull postponed her leadership bid announcement to allow Corbyn more time to fall on his sword...

Actually, in the heat of over excitement, her advisors remembered yesterday was the day for publicising the Chakrabarti report,
which allowed more opportunity for other's to heap further discredit on Corbyn's Leadership,
pressurising him into resignation...

Perhaps, awareness that the Chief Rabbi's PR team were already preparing to exploit any word they could pounce on in Corbyn's speech,
may have been an additional factor....????

..and today is the Somme Remembrance.
No decent politician would be selfish enough to conduct distracting business on such a sombre occasion...


Not that it mattered at all to Gove.....

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 10:18 AM

Bob - no it's a straight question - steve suggests you're 13, and I think you're older than me.. Im 57...

Surely, an easy neutral question to answer honestly...

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 10:05 AM

Hello bobad, how old are you ?... conjecture ranges from 13 upwards...

How clever of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 09:37 AM

"but isn't the founder of momentum, and political supporter of Corbyn, a prominent jew....????"
Jon_Lansman
His statements make sense to me - unlike you, there are no hysterical shrieks of "Antisemitism" whenever somebody criticises Israel.
Many Jews are vociferous critics of Israel - all written of as "self-hating Jews"
Jim Carroll
"Labour, Israel, Palestinians and Jews[edit]
Lansman was interviewed by The Jewish Chronicle in January 2016. He was asked about attitudes to Israel in the Labour Party and the attitudes of Jews towards it: "Yes, of course the vast majority of British Jews are supportive of Israel as a Jewish state – and actually so is Jeremy – but they are far from supportive of all aspects of what is currently happening there", he said. "I think Jews in Britain want peace too. I think Jeremy's message of fairness for the Palestinians is not something that will be rejected by the Jewish community."[3]
At the end of April 2016, after long-standing Corbyn ally Ken Livingstone had made comments which led to his suspension from Labour Party membership, Lansman was quoted as saying: "A period of silence from Ken Livingstone is overdue, especially on antisemitism, racism and Zionism. It's time he left politics altogether."[19] A few days later, in early May, he wrote on the Left Futures blog that the use of the term Zionist to describe supporters of the government in Israel was "counter-productive". He cited one poll in which a larger majority of British Jews, 71%, favoured a Palestinian state, and 75% opposed the Israeli settlements, while only 68% identified as Zionists.[20] A "rational debate about how to change the terms of the current debate" requires, in Lansman opinion, an acknowledgement "that people on the left may also demonstrate some prejudice of their own."[20]"

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 09:33 AM

bobad - remind us which country you live in [I have a vague recollection from some older thread it might be Canada?]

and why you have such an obsession with the UK Labour Party...???

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 09:32 AM

he thought the most appropriate thing that he could say was to compare Israel with Isil

Which, Boo, he did not do. Obviously Mr.Pollard has his head up his arse, same as you.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 09:26 AM

Spot on observation from Stephen Pollard in The Telegraph:

"One might say that the irony that he was launching a report condemning inappropriate comparisons with Israel was lost on him. But, as I will explain, it wasn't lost at all; it was deliberate. Some have tried to argue that his words do not compare Israel with Isil. You have to wonder if they can read. His point is that both Israel and Isil are extremists, terrorists, call them what you will. And while Muslims are decent because they do not support Isil's actions, so too Jews are decent when they do not support Israel. And, of course, only when they do not support Israel.

You could describe this as cloth-eared, or even stupid – and since he became Labour leader, the narrative has usually been that Mr Corbyn isn't up to the job, doesn't get it, isn't really to be taken seriously. But that is to give him credit he does not deserve.

The truth is far more unsavoury. It's clear from his speech that for Jeremy Corbyn, anti-Semitism is something to be weaponised. This was not some off-the-cuff remark, some slip. These were his – or probably Seumas Milne's – considered words. At a meeting on anti-Semitism, he thought the most appropriate thing that he could say was to compare Israel with Isil. This is hard-Left dog whistle politics. With "anti-Zionism" a defining feature of the hard-Left, this is using anti-Semitism as a tool."

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 08:52 AM

Hello bobad, how old are you ?... conjecture ranges from 13 upwards...

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 08:48 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't the founder of momentum, and political supporter of Corbyn, a prominent jew....????

Can't remember if bob 'n' keith ever actively quoted his informed opinions...????

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 08:44 AM

I distinctly remember the poster you are obsessing over stating that he/she was a regular member who was going to post anonymously to thwart those mentally defective obsessives who become fixated on the individual rather than the content of their post.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 08:25 AM

We have enough liars here without you joining their ranks, akenaton, thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 07:30 AM

"Who said there was?"
Yo implied there was by inventing "large numbers of Labour people, including their NEC who were claiming there was a problem - there were so such numbers - you invented it.
Your "prominent people" amounted to either supporters of the Israeli propaganda campaign or those who saw the problem as an accusation which needed dealing with - at no time has there been anybody claiming there to be a serious problem with Antisemitism within Labour
There is no serious problem with Antisemitism within the Labour Party, there has never been such a problem, Jews helped to establish the Labour Party, may of them remain members and hold senior positions - they would not continue to do so if there was a serios problem.
The recent enquiry established that there was not a problem
The "problem" has been engineered by the Israeli propaganda campaign to cover up its own behaviour - you know this, which is why yo have attempted to have it removed from this discussion and refuse to respond to it yourself
If there are "examples of hateful ignorance" that has been generated by Israel's claiming that the atrocities that they have committed are either "Jewish" or have been carried out on behalf of the Jewish People - whoever committed them, they are atrocities.
The Conservative Party is the traditional home of Antisemitism.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 07:19 AM

Sorry Akenaton you are wrong. The Muskets never made any secret of the fact that 3 of them posted under the same name. If anything they enjoyed the confusion it may have caused to some people on here.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 07:12 AM

"They made no secret of it"........after the shits had been found out!

All water under the bridge now of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 06:56 AM

What a stupid post, Keith, even for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 06:46 AM

There is a VAST difference between "having to educate themselves a little bit" and "hateful ignorance"

Well in all minds except those that are blinkered of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 06:19 AM

I did, stated often in your silly thread, that there is no institutional antisemitism in the party

Who said there was?
I repeated what prominent Labour people said, that there was a problem within the party.

but there are people who need to educate themselves a little before opening their big mouths.

Exactly. Examples of hateful ignorance from members on the left, as I claimed and you denied Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 05:54 AM

The report doesn't even mention our names. Actually, it came to the exact same conclusion as I did, stated often in your silly thread, that there is no institutional antisemitism in the party but there are people who need to educate themselves a little before opening their big mouths. Go on, it's your thread, go and find it so that it will help you to stop telling lies. That thread was your attempt to smear the Labour Party with second-hand accusations of antisemitism. Your mission was to open a Pandora's box for the right-wing bigots here to go to town on Labour. You must think we're thick or something. Well we're not and we can see straight through you.

My "late friends" are far from dead. They made absolutely no secret of the fact that three of them were using the same pseudonym. I didn't like that any more than you did, and I said so, but if you think that is the same thing as one person posting secretly under two identities, then you're seriously deluded.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 04:00 AM

Steve,
Keith never mentions the extremely strong and healthy Labour Friends Of Israel

Jim did. He dismissed their views on this.

The report said that Labour was not "overrun" by antisemitism.
No-one said it was, in the media or here.
We said there was a problem, you and Jim denied it, but now the report says you were wrong and we were right.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 03:42 AM

"I am definitely not a member of a party that allies itself with anti-semitic"
Nor is anybody else here, I don't think there are too many Conservatives who post to these threads.
It is they who have either supported or kept silent about Israel's war crimes and mass murder, I've never heard that party condemn Sabra/Shatila, or try to persuade Apartheid South Asrical to acquire nuclear weapons, or drive Bedouins on to poison filled rubbish dumps....
Describing critics of Israel as 'antisemitic' implicates the entire Jewish People in all of the crimes Israel has ever committed - you are a rabid and bilious antisemite - the most vociferous that has ever posted to this forum.
I could suggest a party you would feel comfortable - begins with a B, end with a P.
"I note that Shami Chakrabarti is a member of the Labour Party."
I've always noticed that the most prominent cut-'n-pastes you have ever put up come from rabidly racist racist extremist forums such as Jihad Watch - was Muslim Watch or The White Supremist or Gatestone
You appear to be arguing that organisations such as these are to be believed rather than the conclusions of a representative of a democratically elected British political party - do we have that right?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Jul 16 - 03:28 AM

You were quite happy with that when it was regularly practiced by your late friends Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 08:37 PM

And, Greg, this is the bloke who the mods defend. A bigot and a forum cheat, hiding behind two identities at once, who calls people names whilst bleating pathetically about his right to be anonymous so that "we'll address the issue, not the man." They do say that scum always manages to rise to the top. I think we have the evidence here.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 08:10 PM

Same old spew, Boo.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 05:54 PM

I am definitely not a member of a party that allies itself with anti-semitic, genocidal, terrorist groups.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 03:47 PM

Unlike you, Shami is far and away one of the most respected and fair-minded citizens of this country and you, being the cheating little scumbag you are, are completely unworthy to even mention her name, let alone try to smear her as you've just done. Tell us, what party are you a member of, cheat?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 03:37 PM

I note that Shami Chakrabarti's report did not find Labour to be awash with racism,

I note that Shami Chakrabarti is a member of the Labour Party.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 03:22 PM

Israeli propaganda campaign

Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 03:18 PM

Quite so, Jim. Keith never mentions the extremely strong and healthy Labour Friends Of Israel (good luck to 'em - no objection from me, as long as they carry on aligning themselves with the Israeli Labor Party and not, unlike the party Keith supports, Bibi and his stinking henchmen) who have a damn sight more MPs in tow than have ever had to be suspended for cod-antisemitism. So hypocritical, Keith. Ever looked round at your fellow Sunday worshippers and wondered how many of 'em harbour antisemitic or otherwise racist views? Would you like to suggest an honest enquiry, as Labour has just had? Nah, thought not. Thick carpet, handy broom.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: robomatic
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 02:56 PM

NYTimes- The British Left's Jewish Problem

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 02:55 PM

Not quite sure the point of your link Keith unless it's a way of admitting you were wrong about there being a great deal of Antisemitism in the Labour Party and suggesting that "many" Labour members and "The NEC were worried that there aws - though I think we've seen the last of your apologising for anything after your appalling slurs on Jo Cox.
There never was a worrying amount of Atisemitism in the labour Party and what there was is down to the Israeli propaganda machine using the Jewish People as a whole as an excuse for their crimes.
I think Corbyn is wrong in attempting to silence those who use Nazi comparisons for what is happening in modern Israel - if Holocaust survivors, ex Mossad chiefs and Jews throughout the world can make such a comparison, so can the rest of us.
Israel has made the ter4m "Antisemitism" totally meaningless - in doing so, they have painted targets on all Jews and cleared a path for real Antisemites.
Ruth Smeeth
is the director of The Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre (BICOM) which is a UK-based organisation which acts to promote awareness of Israel and the Middle East in the United Kingdom. BICOM publishes materials on the history, economy, culture and politics of Israel, Middle East peace plans, terrorism in the Middle-East, UK-Israel relations and foreign policy.
She is a pro Isreali activist - proof that the Labour Party is riddled with such people rather than with Antisemites.
This whole thing has been an exercise in pro-Israeli propaganda from day one.
"but this thread is not about Israel."
Not to you maybe Keith, but you are a pro-Israeli activist - what else would you do?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 02:22 PM

And the Tory Party, UKIP and the Church of England? Or is there no toxic atmosphere because they all agree? Do tell us.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 01:43 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36672022

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-antisemitism-jeremy-corbyn-ruth-smeeth-jewish-mp-accused-of-colluding-with-media-a7111061.html

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 01:40 PM

I note that Shami Chakrabarti's report did not find Labour to be awash with racism,

The Independent 2 hours ago,
"The MP (Ruth Smeeth)called for Mr Corbyn to resign after the incident, saying he failed to intervene.

"Until today I had made no public comment about Jeremy's ability to lead our party, but the fact that he failed to intervene is final proof for me that he is unfit to lead, and that a Labour Party under his stewardship cannot be a safe space for British Jews," Ms Smeeth added."
BBC 3 hours ago,
"The Labour Party is not overrun by anti-Semitism or other forms of racism but there is an "occasionally toxic atmosphere", an inquiry has found.
Shami Chakrabarti, the chairwoman of Labour's inquiry into anti-Semitism, said there was "too much clear evidence... of ignorant attitudes".

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 01:34 PM

Islamophobia, like antisemitism, applies to people, not organised religion. You have never expressed an ounce of sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians and, along with the cheat otherwise known as bobad, have always squarely blamed them for their predicament, blind to the fact that the vast majority of them are completely innocent people. You deny every atrocity perpetrated on them by the Israeli regime, including massacres of refugees that are generally recognised as such. You think it's fine for Israel to steal their land. That's Islamophobia. I have expressed my sympathy so many times on this forum for all the people of Israel and wished them prosperity and security. I've condemned both Hamas and Israel for attacking each other. I have never heard the converse from you, always denying that Israel has done anything wrong, even when they shell areas where they know there will be children. You have a one-track mind that we have all seen here over and over again ad nauseam. I'm sorry that mentioning Israel in this thread makes you feel uncomfortable. What you don't realise is that that shows how threadbare and bigoted your thinking is. You recently started a thread linking the Labour Party with anti-Israel comments and smeared the party with antisemitism slurs. You can't complain when people bring up Israel in a thread in which it may be relevant to do so. Tell your cheating friend to stop calling a perfectly decent man a Nazi because he mentioned Israel. Otherwise your credibility is even more shot then it already is.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 12:21 PM

I would give you Israel's side of those stories again, but this thread is not about Israel.
Do start one or reopen one of the dozens we already have.

Steve, you again accuse me of "rampant Islamophobia" when, unlike you and Jim, I have never offered even the mildest criticism of Islam or any other religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 11:26 AM

Spot on, Jim. They both abuse this forum's inclusive nature, which I don't object to as it happens, by spouting this intolerance. Keith, you dress up your rampant Islamophobia by pretending that you're "just putting Israel's side of the story." You defend and ally yourself with a man who calls decent people Jew-haters and who accuses Hamas of killing the Gaza civilians slaughtered by the IDF. He has just referred to Jeremy Corbyn as a Nazi. Anything to say about that, Keith? You defend well-catalogued massacres of Palestinian refugees even though their main facilitator Sharon was widely condemned and was forced to step down from his post of defence minister. Silence and denial in the face of clear injustices meted out to Palestinians and the company you keep here so uncritically makes you Islamophobic. Then there was the shameful Rochdale episode here... By your fruits do we know you.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 11:10 AM

Corbyn's statement was reasonable and conciliatory. Of course, there are plenty of empty-headed opportunist hawks around him who will jump on his every word. There was no equivalence between ISIS and Israel in that comment whatsoever. For that, you'd be saying that Israel is like ISIS. Which was neither said nor implied. If you disagree, explain it in your own words, not by some unlinked reference to a a gutter newspaper in Israel.

I note that Shami Chakrabarti's report did not find Labour to be awash with racism, as Keith and Bobad hoped it would. Wonder what she'd find in the Tory party or the Church of England. Or Keith's favourite, UKIP. The mind boggles.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 11:06 AM

"Just answer his points if you can, and hold the abuse when you can't."
As usual Keith, you have been answered over and over again - the fact that you have been given the answers that don't suit you is your problemIt is you who refuses to respond to what is put up - as usual.
You and Bobad are a pair of racist Antisemites who have chosen to Attack a democratically elected leadership riding Israel's propaganda bike and have made up some of your own propaganda on the way - says it all really!!.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 11:00 AM

Steve,
Your suspect-Islamophobe credentials are, after all, well known to us here

No they are not. I have never so much as criticised Islam or any other religion. That is just another smear.

Come on, Keith, tell us why we should respect a single word he says.

You don't.
Just answer his points if you can, and hold the abuse when you can't.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 10:53 AM

makes equivalence between Israel and ISIS.

Only in your mind, Boo - your English comprehension skills need work.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 10:53 AM

2Do you think Fidel Castro built his society on tolerance and compassion."
Not tolerance certainly - too near the U.S. to take that chance (87 attempts to assassinate Castro).
Compassion is a different matter altogether
Prior to the Revolution, Cuba was a place where American tourists went to see stage performances of Cuban women being fucked by donkeys, it was referred to as "America's open sewer".
Despite decades of Trade embargo, attempted invasions, and the constant threat from the world's most powerful nation, the Castro regime has improved the lot of the Cuban people, has and education system the envy of the Third World (fancy educating slaves!!!) and a health service also regarded as among the best among nations in a similar situation and with Cuba's history.
The people of Vietnam are probably still traumatised by having burning jellified petrol and cancer-causing chemicals poured on them for nearly half a century by the "tolerant and compassionate" Yanks.
I don't suppose for one moment you'll even bother acknowledging any of this, so much is your concern for "tolerance and compassion!!"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 10:48 AM

Going well, all this.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 10:44 AM

From the Times of Israel:

Israel's Labor leader Herzog slams Jeremy Corbyn's 'betrayal of Labour values, hatred of Israel'; Lapid urges Labor to sever ties with UK counterpart, so long as 'anti-Semitism'-spouting Corbyn is in charge.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 10:40 AM

Oops, Herr Corbyn puts his foot into it again, makes equivalence between Israel and ISIS.

From the Independant:

"Our Jewish friends are no more responsible for the actions of Israel or the Netanyahu government than our Muslim friends are for those various self-styled Islamic states or organisations".


Sam Stopp, a Labour councillor in Wembley, said Mr Corbyn had compared Israel to Isis, writing on Twitter: "For that alone, he should resign. I am red with fury."

Ruth Smeeth, the Labour MP for Stoke-on-Trent North and Kidsgrove, who is Jewish, reportedly left the event in tears after a member of the Momentum group "accused her of colluding with the Daily Telegraph".

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 10:03 AM

a strong charismatic leader and winner....

Like The Trumpshit!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 09:10 AM

Stalin wasn't that bad a bloke really...
Just what the Labour party needs..
a strong charismatic leader and winner.... 🙄

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 09:04 AM

Ake - these are socialist societies in name only, not practice, and very few socialists in this country would want a dictatorship or authoritarian regime in charge of us.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 08:49 AM

why can you not just answer his points?

Well, Professor, because it would be just about as productive as debating with a Holocaust denier, and would legitimize his bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 08:41 AM

Do you think Fidel Castro built his society on tolerance and compassion.......Or the People of Vietnam?

When fighting the system you have to fight it tooth and claw......remember Mr Blair's tolerant society.....It brought us war and rabid privatisation.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 08:37 AM

"Whatever impression you have of Bobad as a person, why can you not just answer his points?"
Whatever impression you have of Bobad as a person, why can you not just answer his points?"
Because he is an antisemitic racist troll - I try not to respond to trolls of any persuasion (present company accepted, of course).
You asked exactly the same question about his epic scanning of half a dozen pages lifted directly from the Islamophobic/racist Muslim Watch filth
You and he have made yourself an active part of the Israeli propaganda attack on British democracy - patriots - who'd have them!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 07:04 AM

Damn, I'm sure that I'm a socialist anymore. I haven't drifted to the right like so many old white people have, but I'm not sure that any of the political ideologies extant provide any answers to the problems our society faces.

I'd love a genuine anti-establishment candidate and party to exist, but there isn't one. Corbyn is the closest we have but he's a thinker, not a leader. We need someone to challenge the culture of the Little Englanders, xenophobia and 'me first' attitude that is nurtured by unaccountable media moguls, global corporations and their political shills and the elite and establishment of a now totally dead empire.

I just don't know. I think perhaps a local, community-based approach is the way forward, encompassing the local economy, the social and heritage sectors and redefining our indentities at a local, even parochial level so we can find our place in the wider world whilst preserving our core values of equality, tolerance, compassion and the joy of a country that enjoys it's own diversity and welcoming to all who want to live here.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 06:27 AM

Kindly spell out what "points" you wish me to address, Keith. Until you do, and quite possibly after you do, by defending him you tar yourself with the same racist, bigoted brush as he is. Your suspect-Islamophobe credentials are, after all, well known to us here. As for getting old, etc., pfr, well he sounds to me like a petulant thirteen-year-old who's copycatting out the same brainless racism as his racist school chums. And let's never forget, in spite of the indulgent and forgiving nature of our mods, that this person only stopped cheating us with his secret dual identities when he was forced to by the rule change. That is not a claim from me, that is confirmed. Come on, Keith, tell us why we should respect a single word he says. You want to put yourself in bed with liars and cheats, so let me turn it round on you and challenge YOU to tell us what opinions he has that you agree with. Until then, kindly stop asking us to "address his points." You may as well ask me to list Saddam's good attributes.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 06:08 AM

"I am not a "liberal", but a Socialist so can see both sides."

I'm sorry Ake, but you're arguments show are not a socialist. A Socialist would never, ever support Farage as you have on these threads. He is polar opposite of a socialist: regressive, xenophobic, devoid of tolerance, compassion and bereft of intellectual integrity but full of guile and deceit.


No socialist would ever, ever offer support for that odious, lying old soak.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 04:42 AM

I wonder if Bobad understands the term "a figure of speech" in relation to calling someone "our friends"

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 04:16 AM

Whatever impression you have of Bobad as a person, why can you not just answer his points?
Abuse is cheap and means nothing.
Do you challenge those quotes he gave from Corbyn and Johnson?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 02:57 AM

Labour needs to learn the recent lessons of The Irish Labour Party who voluntarily eclipsed itself out of existence by throwing its support behind right-wing parties.
The British Labour Party has been under attack from the Antisemitic
, extreme right-wing Israeli dirty-tricks campaign and those Antisemites (led by Bobad and his ilk), all all present and correct of this thread - no problem in choosing sides here - you only have to look at the old usuals.
Labour many need stronger leadership (always a suspicions phrase when you look back at Hitler, Pinochet and his friend Thatcher and such 'strong leaders' of the past, but above all, it needs principle and compassion based on the old values.
The mob of careerist jackals at present scrabbling for leadership is the last thing Britain or Labour needs.
I stopped voting altogether when Blair's sun rose - he reduced Britain's politics to the Tweedledum-Tweedledee level in one fell swoop
Had I still been in Britain I might have reversed that decision with the advent of Corbyn - a new broom with real values and compassion long lacking in British politics.
Without and alternative Britain is heading for racist-based isolationism and a same-as-ever social policy of continuing to make the less-well-off pay.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Jun 16 - 02:51 AM

Looking from a "liberal" stance, Bobad has a point, I suppose that is why none of you challenge his actual statements.

I am not a "liberal", but a Socialist so can see both sides.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 11:58 PM

.. I suppose bobad's random spurts of bile do serve one useful purpose...

..at the very least he reminds me why I should strive to not grow old and bitter wallowing in hate & resentment...


cheers bob.... 🙄

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 09:39 PM

Well, you certainly don't stand up for the labour movement (you have been crowing over the problems of the Labour Party), anti-racism (the precise opposite in fact), enlightenment (you don't know the meaning of the word) or reason (you're a blind bigot). And you certainly don't stand up for honest dealing with people, as you've shown repeatedly on this forum with your secret second identity.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 09:35 PM

Do you absolutely HAVE to post that puke, Boo? Can't you just give it a rest for once?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 09:18 PM

Jeremy Corbyn speaking as patron of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign 2009: "It will be my pleasure and honor to host an event in Parliament where our friends from Hezbollah will be speaking. I've also invited our friends from Hamas to come and speak as well"

Of course, in addition to their antisemitism, both groups, as Professor Alan Johnson has noted, oppose "everything the labour movement has ever stood for: trade union rights, freedom of speech and organisation, women's equality, gay and lesbian rights, anti-racism, the enlightenment, and reason".

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 09:17 PM

London bus syndrome.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 08:53 PM

Troll. Doubtless I'll get a PM telling me that you're harmless really and that the mods mildly disagree with you but that your voice must be heard. You're disgusting and you blight this forum constantly with your racist bile. And you're a forum cheat to boot.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 08:53 PM

Troll. Doubtless I'll get a PM telling me that you're harmless really and that the mods mildly disagree with you but that your voice must be heard. You're disgusting and you blight this forum constantly with your racist bile. And you're a confirmed forum cheat to boot.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 07:52 PM

Oh, I wouldn't feel sorry for him as I'm sure his friends in Hamas and Hezbollah will find something to accommodate him.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stanron
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 07:44 PM

So should he stay or should he go? As a non Labour supporter I don't have to make a choice. What do you lot think?

I never thought I'd say this but I'm beginning to feel quite sorry for him.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 04:10 PM

The Benns have been very good at dividing the labour party, however i think Tony was sincere whereas his son is a career politician.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 04:05 PM

Corbyn seems to have found himself a band!!!
Screaming Lord Corbyn & The Savages!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jack Campin
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 01:32 PM

They won't be here legally any more once the UK is not bound by EU conventions.

More to the point, the people who voted for the UKIP racists wanted them out, and won't be satisfied until the freight wagons start rolling.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Brian May
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 01:00 PM

"Who said anything about deportation? The migrants who arrived here under "free movement" are here quite legally and will not be deported.

More scaremongering!!"

Correct.

There isn't half a lot of absolute bollocks being spoken by people of all opinions flavoured by either political hue!

I truly believe as yet, nobody knows what's going to happen next. When a leader finally emerges from the morass, we may get somewhere.

We await the results of the two party's feeding frenzy (generally known as leadership contests).

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 12:32 PM

Who said anything about deportation? The migrants who arrived here under "free movement" are here quite legally and will not be deported.

More scaremongering!!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Jack Campin
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 11:22 AM

The SWP regarded entryism as a disastrous strategy and had nothing but contempt for Trotskyist fractions (like Militant and the IMG) who tried it. Les is seriously misinformed.

On the other hand, the SWP was prepared to take part in united front groupings, of which the anti-racist movements of the 1980s were the most successful. Labour Party members with no Trotskyist affiliation have to take a lot of the credit for what they achieved. But that doesn't happen any more, and it's Labour that failed. If they had been prepared to give the UKIP racists the same sort of kicking the National Front got, we wouldn't now have over a million European citizens living in the UK facing deportation. The sheer gutlessness of Labour's response to the racists' campaign beggars belief.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 11:02 AM

I'd rather have a Red in my Bed... Cor.. those Welsh socialist women.....

My mum warned me about them.... now I'm married to one.... 😜

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 07:42 AM

Cor ................ those Bolsheviks are everywhere! Help! Help! panic everyone !!

It said on the Brexit battlebus that the money saved by leaving the EU would be used for the NHS doesn't mean it's going to happen though, does it.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 07:34 AM

Most of the placards at the Corbyn rally outside Westminster the other night were SWP.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 06:49 AM

Keith is spot on. You only have to look at posters and stuff at Labour Party events to see that the SWP (3 men + a dog) supplies these posters and placards via some secret deal with print unions.

Although I am more convinced by the rumour that the SWP is a recipient of Heritage Lottery Funding, The National Trust and the selling of very small parts of Trotsky's body.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Raggytash
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 06:06 AM

Cor ............. are there reds under the beds????

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 05:34 AM

Why does Momentum and SWP need the Labour party?
Because they are unelectable and need it as a vehicle and a disguise.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: DMcG
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 05:00 AM

There was an interesting comment from one of the momentum supporters yesterday. He said there was no cult of Jeremy but there is a cult for what he stands for. You may or may not agree that what he stands for is desirable, but that would be to miss the point. Any leader who rejects that position will not have their support. And also anyone who has that stance but "is more of a leader" than Jeremy would get it.

Until that person arrives, they will stick with Jeremy.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 02:47 AM

Of course Teribus is correct, but what is the point of Socialists returning another "Blairite" government.

Probably the odious Benn has the best "chance" of forming a Quisling government, but it would only last till the money ran out and the Tories took over again.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 02:15 AM

"Is there anyone here who would seriously try to tell me that any of those three would stand a better chance of winning the next election than Jeremy Corbyn?"

Yes - Me.

Your three potential candidates all stand a better chance of winning the next election purely by dint of the fact that none of them is Jeremy Corbyn.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Jun 16 - 01:44 AM

Well so far I've heard Angela Eagle, Tom Watson and Yvette Cooper mentioned as potential replacements. Is there anyone here who would seriously try to tell me that any of those three would stand a better chance of winning the next election than Jeremy Corbyn?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: ripov
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 07:54 PM

probably I shall dip in and then disappear - life givs me those options and bugger all else.
1. Bonzo refers to 34 resignations - good, the party is cleansing itself. Jeremy doesn't even have to do anything.
2. Why do certain people complain about jeremy not being prime minister material, when no-one with any sense would put the existing bunch of blairites in the position of needing a prime minister anyway?
3. Why has he started ironing his shirts? Is that the start of the rot?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 02:21 PM

.. also remembering back to the 80s when yuppie PR gurus started imposing a culture of suits and ties on the Labour Party..

well.. f@ck 'em..!!!

So refreshing to see the recent mass influx of youth members who dress and talk exactly how they want to.... 😎

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 11:54 AM

Penny - glad you mentioned that..

Couple of days ago I was also working on a post drawing parallels with "Kristallnacht" and "Beer Hall Putsch",
but mudcat was too erratic, and I was too tired to be bothered checking historic facts..
so I gave up and had a 😴 on the sofa...

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Penny S.
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 11:09 AM

I keep feeling that on Friday morning I woke up down the other trouser leg of the universe. And I'm stuck here till I die, with a shattered Labour party and the brown shorts (I think I'll stick with that) re-enacting Kristallnacht on the streets of Lewisham.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 10:56 AM

Personally, I'm surprised Corbyn has survived as leader this long,
We all knew from day one, the plotters and backstabbers would be out to usurp him.

I also doubt he will ever lead Labour into a general election, let alone be Prime Minister.

But I think he is what the party needs as an interim force for positive re-evaluation of purpose and direction.

Plus losing some of the moribund careerists at the top of the party,
as painful as it may be, will be for the good in the long run.

How tragic it was to lose Jo Cox at a time when new blood of her calibre is essential for Labour's continued existence.....

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Brian May
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 10:39 AM

"He's been too lenient and patient with flagrant disloyalty for far too long..

Time for a good clear out...."

Well, he's been shown the same kind of loyalty he gave to HIS party leaders throughout the years. His own performance has been no better and often worse than those HE didn't support.

He displays charisma-free leadership qualities and for me, will always be the man who, throughout the years has called known terrorists his friends.

His business as normal approach is not acceptable as a party leader (in name not action in his case).

Karma is such a bitch . . .

BTW: The other lot are no better. Something happens and the political parties go into a feeding frenzy.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: DMcG
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 10:33 AM

"we still do yards, feet and inches here"

I suggested we should be more wholehearted. Let's get rid of all these calorie-counting diets. Foot-pounds, that's what we need!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 10:18 AM

eight metres high ...???

hold on there... I might have voted "remain" as a Labour Party endorsed pragmatic compromise..

.. But I'm British.. and we still do yards, feet and inches here....!!!!!! 😜

Still, as the son of an unskilled factory machinist trade union shop steward,
I welcome a battle to regain & revitalise the soul of the Labour Party....

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 10:17 AM

"The EU has never been a body that supports a democratic internationalist socialist outlook or programme"

Tough question, but who ever said it was?

The central problem for JC was Remain was Labour Party Policy. He didn't seem too keen to support it did he?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stu
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 10:17 AM

Jeremy declined to say which way he voted. Hmmm.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 10:06 AM

"The writing on the wall is eight metres high and if he can't see it, he needs to go to Specsavers," said one MP. "This is a battle for the soul of the Labour Party."

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: ced2
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 10:06 AM

Why would Jeremy Corbyn or any other decent left member of the labour party or socialist campaign whole heartedly for remaining in the EU?

At best the reaction to the question of "should we stay or should we go" is a luke warm yes to remaining. It was therefore of no surprise to hear Jeremy Corbyn, when pushed, to say that on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being to leave & 10 overwhelming support) he was about 7 for remaining a member, (about one point up from my own position).

The EU has never been a body that supports a democratic internationalist socialist outlook or programme. It was and remains at heart a club for the free movement of capital and the only reason for the free movement of labour was that that was necessary of the free movement of capital.

It is not democratic, and the actions of Blair, Mandelson, et al made this even worse for the British Electorate by introducing the "list" system for candidates.

They turned what were already too large constituencies into even larger ones where local labour party members had no say in selection. Acceptance onto the list, and then crucially position on the list, being determined by the party machine. The most essential qualification being that of who was the most sebaceous sycophant with the longest brown nose. It was designed to get ride of the "awkward squad" on labour MEPs, ensuring that those who remained were always "on message". In so doing they also wrecked an already weak link between MEPs in their electorate. (The Euro constituency where I live covers most of Yorkshire and the Humber.)

The E U was for a small number of people the greatest gravy train in the world. It was over bureaucratic and took far too much power to itself.

However, it was probably large enough to stand up against some of the massive international corporations that now dominate international trade, exploiting cheap labour in one country and dodging paying their taxes in another. It has put the brakes on some of the worst right wing excesses of various governments and has helped to raise a number of social standards.

It is absolutely shameful that many labour MPs have fallen into the trap laid by the Tories who wanted to stay and their friends in the media of laying blame at the door of others. They may well live to regret this.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 06:00 AM

1. "When Jeremy was elected I remarked that the true left must be patient, his job was to educate, not win elections.

2. It will take several generations to give to the people some understanding of what socialism means and

3. to explain that many of the thing that we have been encouraged to achieve are not good for us....or society."

1. That's Ok then, we don't have to win elections we leave that to the tories.
2. "several generations" - how many years then? 10, 20 30?
3. So, all we need is some people to explain to the people of the UK why many of them are wrong - and then they will all vote Labour again.

Is that right?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: theleveller
Date: 28 Jun 16 - 03:59 AM

The Tories, meanwhile, are in great shape ;). Don't see too many people out on the streets begging Cameron to stay and Boris doesn't look too happy about taking up the poison chalice of PM because he knows that, whatever happens, he's stuffed.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: keberoxu
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 07:18 PM

As threatened, "Bi-Party Line" has its own Add Lyrics thread upstairs.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 06:59 PM

As I have said many times, while we are content to live under a "liberal" corporate capitalist economic system, socialist must concentrate on being a means of opposition.
The UK Labour Party has been hijacked by career politicians who yearn for political power and the benefits that power brings(Blair being an excellent role model).....At least two thirds of the parliamentary party are disgusting hypocrites, they have been engaged in the removal of socialism for over forty years, culminating in the present coup against a proper socialist leader.
When Jeremy was elected I remarked that the true left must be patient, his job was to educate, not win elections. It will take several generations to give to the people some understanding of what socialism means and to explain that many of the thing that we have been encouraged to achieve are not good for us....or society.

The careerists have no time to wait and basically no inclination to educate on a subject which they hold in contempt.

They are the worst, most dangerous form of scum.......more dangerous to socialist ideas than even the conservatives who at the very least believe and promote their agenda of financial aspiration as a political driving force.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 05:31 PM

He's been too lenient and patient with flagrant disloyalty for far too long..

Time for a good clear out....

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 05:27 PM

Corbyn is finished, 34 resignations is it?

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: DMcG
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 05:03 PM

Jeremy has a problem that I can't see an easy way around. He always responds to questions with considered and nuanced answers. That's the best thing to do in a rational world, but it is awful television/media. So they extract a few words, and leave out all the complexity. He could of course give them what they want, but only by omitting the thought and saying something he knows wouldn't work because it is too simple. How this circle is squared is a difficult problem. And actually it is a problem for all the other labour MPs, since he won't give the soundbite policies for them to parrot: they are obliged to give considered answers as well, which is not how they are used to working

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 04:56 PM

Correct. On occasion, Ed, I can be a man of few words. Especially when I see myself having to agree with Snail. 😉

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: theleveller
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 04:49 PM

Over 10,000 people at a rally in Parliament Square in support of Corbyn.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 04:31 PM

Very likely, the post preceeding his.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Ed.
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 04:23 PM

Agreed wholeheartedly

It might be helpful, Steve, if you mentioned who or what you agree with...

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 04:09 PM

Agreed wholeheartedly.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: TheSnail
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 03:52 PM

After a long absence, the election of Jeremy Corbyn gave me a party I coould join and vote for again.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 03:01 PM

I have been a member of the Labour Party for around 40 years - following the ups and downs and a wide range of political comment on all sorts of media. I am staggered at the quality, with a few exceptions, of the comment on here.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Stanron
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 01:03 PM

My first thought was 'Are these the same polls that predicted a Labour win last year and a Remain win last week?' And then I saw the date.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: theleveller
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 11:46 AM

Not exactly what I'd call a demise:

Labour ahead of Tories

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 11:37 AM

From Richard Seymour. Whole article
HERE



But what is being missed in all of this frenzy, what none of Corbyn's oblocutors want to admit, is that Corbyn is not the cause of the party's crisis, but an answer to it. Labour is in dire straits, and would be whoever was in the leadership. In the wake of New Labour, the party's membership had fallen to its lowest level since 1918, its vote share to its lowest level since 1983. Formerly mountainous majorities had been levelled, great swathes of former 'heartlands' had abandoned the party for the Liberals, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and even the Greens. There are deep sociological roots to this process, having to do with the decomposition of former big battalions of organised labour, the long-term shift in employment structures, and the atomisation of everyday life.

The idea that the party's problems can be blamed on one leader, one set of policies, or one campaign, is absurd. Nonetheless, if the back bench belligerents do want to look for a leadership and a set of policies that coincided with a dramatic, precipitous collapse in Labour's social base, they need only look to the era of New Labour whose politics they seem so eager to return to. Corbyn's leadership is precisely an attempt to achieve what Milibands couldn't, reverse those trends, rebuild the membership, reconstitute the core vote, anchor the party in the unions and social movements, and rescue a dying social democracy from the Blairite legacy.

The odds against success for Corbyn have always been steep, and not only due to the sullen campaign waged against him, first from the back benches and now openly from within his shadow cabinet. Labour is suffering from the same dilemma as other social democratic parties across Europe. The one distinctive social democratic policy mix that has ever enjoyed success, the postwar compromise, depended on unprecedented growth rates and a business class willing to cooperate in corporatist bargaining and state coordination — conditions which are unlikely to return. In this light, Corbyn's attempt to develop an anti-austerity solution that is intellectually coherent, electorally viable and can actually be implemented once in office, is an incredibly tall order. But the alternative, of accepting the neoliberal settlement and modulating the priorities within that framework, has been tried and led to disaster.

What the coup-mongers, in refusing to let Corbyn even try, are demonstrating is that the idea of a federal party of labour, representing all of its sections in their diversity, may have seen its day. It is increasingly implausible that the Labour Right is willing to exist in a party led from the Left. But if that is the case, the SDP option may be their only honourable way out. The only reason they haven't taken it, one suspects, is precisely because as both former SDP MP Polly Toynbee and the Blairite journalist Jon Rentoul agree, the conditions for a successful split simply don't exist. So, they are doing the only thing they can. Without a solution, without a plan, without even a plausible leadership candidate, they are embarking on a campaign of sabotage to bring the party to its knees. And thus, they hope the party will return, duly chastened, to its traditional owners. They want their party back, in other words, and they'll inflict any cost to get it.

More in #EU Referendum #labour #Brexit

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: theleveller
Date: 27 Jun 16 - 11:36 AM

Rebirth of the Labour Party, more like. Perfect opportunity to cleanse the New Labour augean stables so that Jeremy can get on with fronting a proper opposition whilst preparing to become PM at the next election. Especially as the Tory Party is in complete and utter meltdown.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Jun 16 - 07:30 PM

Only if they can enlist a large cadre of anti-BooBads.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: bobad
Date: 26 Jun 16 - 06:52 PM

Once they turf Corbyn and the anti-semites it stands a chance of becoming respectable and relevant once again.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: The Sandman
Date: 26 Jun 16 - 06:40 PM

they should feck off and form a new party and enter the political wilderness like david owen, what happened to the SDP, THEY WERE NOTHING MORE THAN A FART IN A CIRCUS

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 26 Jun 16 - 04:47 PM

Chris Bryant resigns as shadow Commons leader - how many is that now, I don't do counting above 10 on a Sunday!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Jun 16 - 04:33 PM

Well I did warn of this months ago......most of the Parliamentary Labour Party are career politicians who have only one interest ...furthering their worthless careers.
They are in reality "centre liberals"   the Labour Party is not a comfortable place for them to prosper, as it is unlikely to be re-elected for a number of years and ever since the election of Mr Corbyn, they have been sharpening their knives.

Ironic that they try to blame Mr Corbyn for the defeat of the remain campaign, a man who for his whole political life has been opposed to the charade and who was trapped into giving tacit support to save his Party.

I hope Mr Corbyn hangs on and is supported by clear thinking people in the community.....he may have to lead a minority party but at least it will be the authentic voice of democratic Socialism.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: keberoxu
Date: 26 Jun 16 - 04:06 PM

I feel a song coming on. Specifically, a musical revue number from Flanders & Swann. No, it isn't one of their little animal songs for Ian Wallace to sing, and it isn't from At the Drop of a Hat. But it is about how the Conservative and the Labour parties have rather too much in common so as to distinguish between them. Of course this was back in 1960....will have to start a music thread upstairs in order to add the lyrics to "Bi-Party Line."

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 26 Jun 16 - 03:29 PM

I wouldn't want to be in Abbott shagger's shoes right now!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Jun 16 - 01:50 PM

Good old false class consciousness rides again.

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Jun 16 - 01:37 PM

Interesting times - since the referendum, smug know all opinionated political pundits on the telly news
are predicting both the demise of the tory party and Labour.....????

Comes after the oddest of cross party allegiances during the "Let's eff up the future of UK & Europe" referendum... 🙄

Subject: RE: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Jun 16 - 01:28 PM

Demise? More like a lynching.

Subject: BS: Demise of the Labour Party
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 26 Jun 16 - 01:21 PM

Sacked (joke) - Hilary Benn, shadow foreign secretary

Resigned - Lord Falconer, shadow justice secretary

Resigned - Heidi Alexander, shadow health secretary

Resigned - Lucy Powell, shadow education secretary

Resigned - Vernon Coaker, shadow Northern Ireland secretary

Resigned - Ian Murray, shadow Scottish secretary - and Labour's only MP in Scotland

Resigned - Kerry McCarthy, shadow environment secretary

Resigned - Seema Malhotra, shadow chief secretary to the Treasury

Resigned - Lillian Greenwood, shadow transport secretary

Resigned - Gloria de Piero, shadow minister for young people and voter registration