BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 06:53 AM

Dave,
So, just what was everyone proved wrong about, Keith?

You were wrong to challenge Bobad's statement.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 07:08 AM

Going from your last three posts, Keith, it appears that you (a) wish to have total control over what we talk about, (b) have adopted an intriguingly-new style of "debate" that involves your saying absolutely nothing except "you're wrong." Very novel!

I didn't get to watch the flippin' match after all as my sis facetimed me 30 seconds after kickoff! She's worth it though. Then I had to chop up all the veg for my crudités. My avocado dip was a sensational success. You'll be getting the recipe later. Looks like City lost courage last night. Better not do schadenfreude as my cousin has a City season ticket...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 07:35 AM

You were wrong to challenge Bobad's statement.

Did I challenge his statement in any way that was wrong? I am pretty sure I just asked some pertinent questions. So what has everyone been proved wrong about Keith?

I don't think you missed much apart from a humiliating defeat, Steve, from what I gather. Sorry I can't provide any links to that so I suppose it could be an unsubstantiated allegation but, then again, I have been told I am shit and have no morals :-) Maybe I should just admit defeat seeing as I have no idea what the rules are

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 08:29 AM

Always good to admit that you lose before Keith tells you that you lose, Dave!

________________________________________________________________

AVOCADO DIP A LA SHAW

A generous amount of dip for two or even three people:

Two decidedly ripe but not blackened or stringy avocados (Morrisons, Lidl and M&S unreliable, Sainsbury's and Waitrose haven't let me down)

Juice of 3/4 of a fresh lime

Half a small green chilli, not a very hot one, chopped very finely

Some chopped fresh parsley

Salt (a fair bit, more than I expected I needed)

Six cherry tomatoes, best you can get (you can't get good ones in Morrisons - sorry, Dave!), finely diced

Scoop out the avocados into a dish and mush up the flesh with a fork, as rough or smooth as you like, but the texture is paramount - you don't want it like those abject little pots of guacamole you buy in supermarkets. Then just chuck in all the other ingredients and mix in. I chilled mine for an hour or two with a bit of cling film on the surface to avoid oxidation.

I used the parsley in place of coriander as Mrs Steve doesn't like the latter, and it worked a treat. A lot of recipes call for chopped onion but my instincts persuaded me to leave it out.

We LOVED it! 🥑 🥑 🥑

And this is 100% on-topic as making it was a "Labour" of love and we will have it at our next "Party!"

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 09:18 AM

Did I challenge his statement in any way that was wrong?

It is not wrong to challenge anything, but anyone reading your response to his statement would be quite clear that you were challenging it, and your denial just taken as more evidence of your dishonesty.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 09:20 AM

So, give me an example of what was wrong. Or, as Steve says, have you just retreated into "you're wrong' mode? In which case. You're wrong.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 09:23 AM

I said it is not wrong to challenge anything, but anyone reading your response to his statement would be quite clear that you were challenging it, and your denial just taken as more evidence of your dishonesty.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 09:36 AM

"We were not discussing Israel or Irish history.
"Irish nationalist/republicans (mainly Roman Catholic) and unionist/loyalist (mainly Protestant).""
And both of those represent he two religions"
Will you sto attemptiong to censor this thread because it is not going your way Keith
Thwe title of the thread is UK LaBOUR PARTY DISCUSSION PART II - WHAT THE **** has "Returning to the issue of anti-Semitic hate crime in the West" got to do with that?
That is certainly nothing to do with the thread topic _ Israeli interference has got relevance
Letr me once again let me rermind you - you have no authority of this forum - by most decent contributors you are treated with contempt for your dishonesty, you racist extremism and your clumsy attempts to manipulate information and - in this case, democratic discussion.
Are you sure you're not on Trump's payroll!!
If you attempt to interfere with what I write again shall attempt to have you stopped
WHO THE **** DO YOU THINK YOU ARE TELLING US WHAT WE CAN AND CAN'T DISCUSS
You were quite happy to comment on Ireland until your idiocy got you in trouble again.
Of course the Irish Question is a religious one
How could a six county Protestant State that has repressed the Catholic Minority for half a century be other than religiously influenced?

This summing up from the BBC gives a reasionablte background to the religious suppression of the rights of Catholics in the Six Counties which led to the Troubles.
If you have trouble understanding it I'll throw in a few illustrations and put in a glossary of the big words.
I'd
recommend a few books but I know from your whineing about long posts, that your attention span doesn't go beyond sound-bite size.
Jim Carroll

Background
In 1963, the prime minister of Northern Ireland, Viscount Brookeborough, stepped down after 20 years in office.
His extraordinarily long tenure was a product of the Ulster Unionist domination of politics in the north since partition in 1921.
'There was little indication in 1963 of the turmoil that was about to engulf Northern Ireland.'
By contrast, the Catholic minority had been politically marginalised. This was largely a product of Northern Ireland's two-thirds Protestant majority, but was exacerbated by the drawing of local government electoral boundaries to favour unionist candidates, even in predominantly Catholic areas like Derry.
Additionally, the right to vote in local government elections was restricted to ratepayers - again favouring Protestants - with those holding or renting properties in more than one ward receiving more than one vote, up to a maximum of six.
This bias was preserved by unequal allocation of council houses to Protestant families. Catholic areas also received less government investment than their Protestant neighbours.
Police harassment, exclusion from public service appointments and other forms of discrimination were factors of daily life, and the refusal of Catholic political representatives in parliament to recognise partition only increased the community's sense of alienation.
But there had been improvements. Post-war Britain's new Labour government had introduced the Welfare State to the north, and it was implemented with few, if any, concessions to old sectarian divisions.
As a result, Catholic children in the 1950s could reap the benefits of further and higher education for the first time. It would, in time, expose them to a world of new ideas and create a generation unwilling to tolerate the status quo.
But for now, anti-partition forces had been neutralised and the unionists were firmly in control. There was little indication in 1963 of the turmoil that was about to engulf Northern Ireland"

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 09:41 AM

Steve and Jim,
you (a) wish to have total control over what we talk about,

Sadly I have no control over what you talk about, but I will resist being drawn in to yet another discussion on Irish history or Israel, unless you reopen one of the many existing threads or start a new one.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 10:11 AM

I said it is not wrong to challenge anything, but anyone reading your response to his statement would be quite clear that you were challenging it, and your denial just taken as more evidence of your dishonesty.

It is OK to challenge anything and it was quite clear that I was challenging something but that is dishonest?

Different morality
Different language
Different planet

Glad there are some more sensible discussions going on here. The avocado dip sounds great. Never tried it before so I may try it out this weekend. I am not going to get my evening meal until late so just had a snack of the co-ops edamame beans in soy sauce. They were very nice but I could not eat any more than the snack pot they come in.

DtG

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 10:21 AM

"Sadly I have no control over what you talk about,"
What do you mean "sadly" - do you mean you wish you7 had, you nasty little Stalinist?European antisemitism has sweet fuck all to do with The Larbour party, but you are quite keen to talk about that.
You and you fick mate weer quite happy to discuss Ireland until your ignorance (and sectarianism) dropped you in a hole, than you cried "foul"
Stop attempting to control discussions, you little fascist
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 10:29 AM

Dave,
It is OK to challenge anything and it was quite clear that I was challenging something but that is dishonest?

Read it slowly this time Dave.
I said it is not wrong to challenge anything, but anyone reading your response to his statement would be quite clear that you were challenging it, and your denial just taken as more evidence of your dishonesty.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 10:52 AM

"Read it slowly this time Dave."
Stop talking down to people Keith - you're not good enough and we already have two of them.
And with your record, don't call anybody dishonest
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 11:07 AM

I can read it as slowly as you like Keith. It still doesn't make sense to me and just what is it I am supposed to have denied? Challenging his statement? I fully admit I challenged his statement and you have confirmed that there is nothing wrong with challenging anything.

Different morality
Different language
Different planet

I feel I am entering some sort of twilight zone...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 12:26 PM

As the subject of recism and bigotry seems to be OK with Keith, with his permission, of course, perhaps this articcle from todat's Irish Times might be acceptable
What do people think - does it pass the censor's blue pencil, or aren't there enough "decent countries in the U.N.?
Jim Carroll

Middle East
ISRAEL IMPOSES 'APARTHEID REGIME' ON PALESTINIANS, SAYS UN
A UN agency published a report yesterday accusing Israel of imposing an "apartheid regime" of racial discrimination on the Palestinian people, and said it was the first time a UN body had clearly made the charge.
Israel's foreign ministry spokesman likened the report, publish ed by the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), to DerStiirmer-a Nazi propaganda publication that was strongly anti-Semitic.
The report concluded that "Israel has established an apartheid regime that domi¬nates the Palestinian people as a whole". The accusation is fiercely rejected by Israel.
ESCWA executive secretary Rima Khalaf said the report "clearly and frankly concludes that Israel is a racist state that has established an apartheid system".
UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric told reporters the report was published without any prior consultation with the UN secretariat. "The report as it stands does not reflect the views of the secre¬tary-general." –
(Reuters)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 01:23 PM

Dave,
I wrote, "You were wrong to challenge Bobad's statement." because it was proved correct and your "pertinent questions" all dealt with.

When you said, "Did I challenge his statement in any way that was wrong?" I took that as a denial that you had challenged.

Others have commented on how confusing your posts can be.
As you say, different language.

Anyway, sorted out now.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 01:38 PM

Jim, from your cut and paste,
publish ed by the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA),

Who are ESCWA?
"ESCWA comprises 18 Arab states"

So no bias there then!

"The United States, an ally of Israel, said it was outraged by the report.
"The United Nations secretariat was right to distance itself from this report, but it must go further and withdraw the report altogether," the US ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, said in a statement.
The Israeli ministry spokesman, Emmanuel Nahshonâ€쳌, commenting on Twitter, also noted the report had not been endorsed by the UN secretary-general.
"The attempt to smear and falsely label the only true democracy in the Middle East by creating a false analogy is despicable and constitutes a blatant lie," Israel's UN Ambassador Danny Danon said in a statement."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/un-israel-report-apartheid-palestinians-gaza-a7632336.html

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 01:59 PM

Who are ESCWA?

Eighteen anti-Semitic Arab states led by Israel hater and 9/11 conspiracy theory espouser extraordinaire Richard Falk.

Eeven the Secretary General of the UN distanced himself from the report.

Good catch Carroll......lol.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 02:15 PM

"UNESCP
Just because a bunch of Israeli Nazis accuse a report of being bu Nazis doesn't make it so.
Sort of like Bobad and his "Jew Hater"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 02:34 PM

What you pair of Arab Haters extremists appear to be saying is that Arabs have no right to comment on what is happening to their fellow Arabs
Now why am I not surprised?
The report was written by Jewish RICHARD FALK
Is he a Nazi too, or is he just a "Self Hating Jew"?
What a shower of racist shit you pare
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 03:36 PM

THIS REPORT SAYS NOTHING NEW, OF COURSE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 03:40 PM

Richard Falk compares Israel to the Nazis - he is an anti-Semite.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 03:41 PM

I really have no idea how that question could be misinterpreted as a denial of anything by anyone but you, Keith. Still, as you say it is now sorted. Apology for calling it dishonest accepted. Oh, hang on... :-(

At least you seem to have no interest in the important stuff. That means we can discuss sensible subjects without having to use linguistic gymnastics anyway:-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 03:44 PM

Carroll, as an Anti-Semite your opinions on Israel have no credibility.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 04:47 PM

Did I tell you about the long-forgotten boneless smoked loin of pork I found when de-icing my freezer that had been in there buried in snow since September 2013? Bloody delicious! "Freeze on day of purchase and consume within one month" my arse! We had it just now with Nigella's cheat version of dauphinoise and purple sprouting from the garden. A gastronomic triumph! AND there's enough left over for a butty! AND I managed to persuade Mrs Steve to let me open a bottle even though it's Thursday! Only happy posts from me tonight, ladies, gents, fellow pack members and unreconstructed bigots!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 05:01 PM

I went to the gym after work hence the earlier snack and late tea. Just had some noodles with left over polish smoked ham, celery, peppers, olives and West Indian hot sauce. Washed down with a cup of tea. Very nice too. Of to finish off Pratchetts 'Wyrd Sisters' soon. Got the first 16 or so books over Christmas and Birthday so catching up on all of them and thoroughly enjoying that too. Very good for a laugh. Not quite as laughable as the shenanigans in Westminster but let's not speak of politics and spoil a perfectly civil discussion :-D

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 06:52 PM

Eyup, flippin' 'eck! Just seen Mount Etna on the news blowing its top! People being bombarded by lumps of red-hot rock! Thing is, just 21 months ago I was standing in that self-same spot!!! Shit! Etna was fuming in a good-tempered kind of way when we were up it, but we lamented the lack of a real good show. But this is a bit much! Been up Vesuvius (twice), Mount Teide on Tenerife, Vulcano in be Aeolian islands, on one of which Il Postino was filmed (me favourite), and we spent a couple of smelly, exciting hours in the crater at La Solfatara at Pozzuoli, near Naples. Also had a boat trip round Stromboli (which is utterly beautiful) and had a couple hours in the town there. Full of tourist shops selling lumps of volcano fashioned into all sorts of cute objects, but who cares? I LOVE volcanoes!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 06:57 PM

U.N. chief Antonió Guterres rejected a report published by ECSWA, a Beirut-based agency of the world body— ECSWA—comprised entirely of 18 Arab states, which accuses Israel of "apartheid."

The report's chief author is Richard Falk, a former U.N. official who was condemned repeatedly by the UK and other governments for antisemitism.

In 2011, Falk was also denounced by his own boss, former U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon, for espousing 9/11 conspiracy theories which accused the U.S. government, instead of Al Qaeda, of perpetrating the 9/11 terror attacks.

The new report, said Guterres' spokesman, "does not reflect the views of the Secretary‑General."

UN Watch

Yep, Richard Falk, champion of nut jobs, conspiracy theorists and anti-Semites everywhere. Carroll is in good company.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 07:25 PM

From wiki:

A snipe is any of about 25 wading bird species in three genera in the family Scolopacidae. They are characterized by a very long, slender bill and crypsis, or camouflage, plumage. The Gallinago snipes have a nearly worldwide distribution, the Lymnocryptes snipe is restricted to Asia and Europe and the Coenocorypha snipes are found only in the Outlying Islands of New Zealand. The three species of painted snipe are not closely related to the typical snipes, and are placed in their own family, the Rostratulidae. There is also a different species of snipe, found only on the Mudcat website. This species, uniquely, displays phenotypic plasticity in that it exists not only in its normal manifestation (known as "bobad"), which lives up perfectly to its name in that it spends its whole existence just "sniping," but also as a disguised entity which effects to be a different species in order to indulge in deception (as distinct from camouflage) but which is in fact identical to "bobad." Fortunately, it has been successfully identified as a mere bottom-feeder with no real role in its ecosystem, and is well on its way to extinction.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 07:53 PM

From Jim Carroll
"What you pair of Arab Haters extremists appear to be saying is that Arabs have no right to comment on what is happening to their fellow Arabs
Now why am I not surprised?
The report was written by Jewish RICHARD FALK
Is he a Nazi too, or is he just a "Self Hating Jew"?
What a shower of racist shit you pare"
Jim Carroll"

2...""Sadly I have no control over what you talk about,"
What do you mean "sadly" - do you mean you wish you7 had, you nasty little Stalinist?European antisemitism has sweet fuck all to do with The Larbour party, but you are quite keen to talk about that.
You and you fick mate weer quite happy to discuss Ireland until your ignorance (and sectarianism) dropped you in a hole, than you cried "foul"
Stop attempting to control discussions, you little fascist
Jim Carroll"

Going by these two recent "contributions" from Jim, I fear you are correct Bobad.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 08:01 PM

Best to come here without fear! Most of the people who come here who would like us to "fear" them are actually laughing stocks! You included! Nothing personal, Rob Roy! Och the bleedin' noo!   😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 08:55 PM

"Going by these two recent "contributions" from Jim, I fear you are correct Bobad."
I take it you have become one of the Trolls fan club
I don't suppose you would like to put up an argument to what I produced
No?
Thought not Not you style.!!
It seems everybody who recognises Israel's criminal behaviour is an antisemite
Just as some people who are happy to wallow in their Islamophobia are happy to see the ethnic cleansing of Arabs and are incapable of recognising the fact that the world has seen it before
Bet the Wilders result was a real let-down for you Ake
Never mind - there's always hope in LePen
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Mar 17 - 09:18 PM

What Falk actually said about 9/11 which was deliberately misreported by the extremist press
Others who questioned the handling of 9/11 can be found HERE
Jim Carroll

WHY THE FUSS? THE CALL TO ARMS AGAINST UN RAPPORTEUR RICHARD FALK FOR ALLUDING TO GAPS IN THE 9/11 OFFICIAL STORY
A former Princeton international law professor has been condemned by the UN Secretary General and the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations for alluding to "an apparent cover-up" of the events of September 11th, 2001.
On January 11, 2011, UN Special Envoy to Palestine Richard Falk posted on his personal blog an article entitled "Interrogating the Arizona Killings from a Safe Distance."
Dr. Falk made a tangential point in his blog-post that governments too often abuse their authority by treating "awkward knowledge as a matter of state secrets".
To illustrate the point, he referred to gaps and contradictions in the official account of the 9/11 attacks, which have been documented in the scholarly works of Dr. David Ray Griffin, a professor emeritus of philosophy of religion and theology.
"What seems most disturbing about the 9/11 controversy is the widespread aversion by government and media to the evidence that suggests, at the very least, the need for an independent investigation that proceeds with no holds barred," wrote Falk.
On January 20th, executive director Hillel Neuer of UN Watch, a European NGO, called upon UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to condemn the remarks made by Falk, and to fire him, claiming that Falk had "endorsed the conspiracy theory that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were orchestrated by the U.S. government and not Al Qaeda terrorists."
On January 24th, in a reply to Hillel Neuer, Vijay Nambiar, Ban Ki-moon's Chief of Staff, responded that the Secretary-General "condemns these remarks. He has repeatedly stated his view that any such suggestion is preposterous — and an affront to the memory of the more than 3,000 people who died in the attack."
The US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, called for Falk's removal, stating that "Mr. Falk's comments are despicable and deeply offensive, and I condemn them in the strongest terms."
Surely, in light of what Falk actually said, these indignant cries on behalf of the victims seem more than a little apoplectic.
If Falk's suggestions were so "preposterous" and "offensive", they might have been dismissed as the ravings of a madman.
So why did officials bring out their cannons to shoot at a sparrow?
Well, turning to the work of Professor Griffin we find that there were 115 omissions and distortions in the 9/11 Commission Report, though Falk did not, in his brief remarks, provide details.
A search of the Internet reveals 12 professional organizations calling for a new investigation, including Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (with over 1,400 professional members), Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, Intelligence Officers for 9/11 Truth, Lawyers for 9/11 Truth, Medical Professionals for 9/11 Truth, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth, Military Officers for 9/11 Truth, and Scientists for 9/11 Truth.
In August, 2005, the New York Times printed the oral testimonies of 118 firefighters and emergency workers who reported stunning, graphic evidence of enormous explosions, including mysterious blasts in the deep sub-basements of the buildings long before the towers fell.
More recently, a nine-author peer-reviewed study, which showed that the World Trade Center dust appeared to contain residue of explosive material (nanothermite), made headlines for the first week of February 2010 in major Danish newspapers.
This news never reached the North American media.
A December 2010 poll by the prestigious Emnid Institute showed that 89.5% of Germans doubt the US official story about the September 11th attacks.
The 9/11 commissioners themselves, in a 2008 op-ed piece to the New York Times, bemoaned the withholding of witness evidence to the 9/11 Commission by the CIA: "What we do know is that government officials decided not to inform a lawfully constituted body, created by Congress and the president, to investigate one the greatest tragedies to confront this country. We call that obstruction."
Perhaps this sparrow is worth a cannon or two.
In other words, was Falk attacked so strongly to try to make people fear suggesting in public even the possibility that the official story is problematic?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 03:53 AM

Jim, my point was that your posts are becoming more and more incoherent.
Screaming and shouting insults does not help your cause.

There is no reason why this issue cannot be discussed without "losing the heid".

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 04:50 AM

"Jim, my point was that your posts are becoming more and more incoherent"
If they are, your failure to respond with statements of your own which contradict what I have put up, or at the very least, have the good manners to point out what you don't understand, otherwise your hit-and-run interventions in this discussion are no more than trollish spoilers without the courage to back up what you are criticising.
You do this all the time Ake - you pronounce your support fotr the most ourageously right wing causes and, when challenged, you refuse to offer any substantial argument whatever, using as a feeble excuse that you will not respond to being insulted
Nobody is asking you to - you are being asked to put up an argument for your beliefs - the insulting comes when you refuse to do so
Put your money where your mouth is.
Now - you have masses of information on the charges laid against Israel - all backed up by previous evidence going back years, showing that Israel is in the process of ethnically cleansing the area of Palestinians
These charges have been made by Israeli Jews as well as respectable Human Rights Groups.
You have claimed in te past that you have never taken sides ofver Israel, yet here you8 are
What is it I have put up that is incoherent, or what is difficult for you to understand?
Otherwise, stop making feeble accusations without the courage to substantiate them.
Any moron can respond to argument with insult - let's see how you go here!
I'll take your refusal to respond as confirmation that you have no case.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 05:06 AM

It seems everybody who recognises Israel's criminal behaviour is an anti-Semite

In terms of nation states, that does seem to be true.
Do Scandinavian states "recognise Israel's criminal behaviour?"
No they do not.
EU states?
No.
USA or Canada?
No.
Australia or New Zealand?
No.
India?
No.

What do the regimes that do have in common?
They are nasty, undemocratic regimes with human rights records far worse than Israel's.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 05:08 AM

Well, I suppose it has as much to do with the UK Labour Party as do wild flowers, beautiful scenery and good food. Not as interesting though.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 05:27 AM

I listed all the liberal democracies Jim.
Who is on your list?
Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, non-democratic Arab states (i.e. all of them), ......

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 06:12 AM

"I listed all the liberal democracies Jim."
My list includes virtually every civil rights and ant-war crime organisation in the world including those of those "decent countries" on your list
They have a word for people who prefer to take the word of the establishment over that of the voices of the groups who protect our rights and freedoms from abuses by the various establishments.
We know where you stand on that one.
Even if we didn't have them, we have the evidence of the daily reports we were getting out of Gaza - the chemicals and anti personel weapons, the hospitals being bombed with patients in them, the mass destruction and the massacres of civilians, the Israeli death squads mopping up the survivors
We've seen film of Palestinians being driven out of their homes because the settlers fancied living there
We've had reports of Bedouins being driven onto toxic sites and having their farms sprayed with chemicals
There is no dispute about what is happening to the Palestinian people - we've seen it
Only a fanatical sadist could possibly defend what is happeing with the silence of politicians
WHERE IS THE ACTUAL SUPPORT FROM THESE "DECENT COUNTRIES"AND IF IT ISN'T FORTHCOMING, WHY NOT? - YOU CAN HARDLY CLAIM THAT ISRAEL DOESN'T NEED IT
Even OBAMA'S America decided not to veto in favour of Israel - now it has a fascist President it has reversed that decision
That says everything that needs to be said.
The silence of politicians is no defence
Pathetic
SWEDEN
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 06:16 AM

Never mind all that. As it's St Patrick's Day, Mrs Steve's dug out a couple of ould Oirish songs to play at Bude Memory Cafe this afternoon. You probably won't approve, Jim, but one of 'em is Val Doonican singing Paddy McGinty's Goat. Haven't heard it for yonks, but it's surprisingly jolly and has a good jig in it!

The others she's using are M**ly M***ne and D***y B*y (what else!). Managed to persuade her not to play anything sung by Daniel O'Donnell, so that's something at least!

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

I'll play Planxty Irwin at Morris Dance practice. That should make a bugger of any Cotswold jigs...

:D tG

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

As it's more of a waltz, you're not wrong there, Dave! You could always try the Paddy McGinty's Goat tune. I dare you!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 08:23 AM

NORWAY
DENMARK
FRANCE
BELGIUMSWITZERLAND
BRITAIN
BRITAIN PROFITS FROM GAZA

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 08:31 AM

U.N.
U.N. AGAIN

Want any more evidence Keith
Where's yours?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 08:41 AM

One at a time Jim.
I have just used your Sweden link.
"Press TV has interviewed Anthony Hall, professor of globalization at Lethbridge University,"
Not much to do with Sweden then!
Press TV is an Iranian channel, so not much objectivity either!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 08:54 AM

You might as well say that about any source at all, Keith. Have you got a particular thing about Iranian sources? Or Al Jazeera maybe? Do apprise us as to how you assess objectivity. Not on racial grounds, surely? How about the Mail? The Telegraph? The Jewish Chronicle? I'd say that your total lack of objectivity in these discussions speaks volumes about the weakness of your assessing skills, not to speak of your excellent skills when it comes to biased selectivity.

Bit nippy today in the breeze. Thinking of patching a hole in my gravel drive. May just think about it for another hour or three before I get started....

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 08:59 AM

Press TV = propaganda mouthpiece of anti-Semitic Iranian regime.

Al Jazeera = propaganda mouthpiece of anti-Semitic government of Qatar.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 09:01 AM

Your Norway link is to a very pro-Israel piece.
Title, "Another Year of Anti-Semitism and Anti-Israelism in Norway"

Sadly it is 8 years old so out of date.

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

Well, boobs, a quick Google betrays the fact that your remark about al Jazeera is not exactly your original thought (I've caught you doing that before 😂). In fact, Al Jazeera is nothing of the sort, as anyone who watches any of their broadcasts (me, for example, when Spooks repeats are not on late at night) can attest. Don't let your blind ideology bite!

That hole in my drive isn't going to patch itself...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 09:33 AM

Steve, from Wiki
"An example(of anti-Semitism) cited from earlier years was a report in Al Jazeera that Jews had been informed in advance not to go to work on the day of the September 11 attacks, which was criticized by an October 2001 editorial in The New York Times. An often-repeated example involves an on-air birthday party organized by Al Jazeera's Beirut bureau chief for a Lebanese militant convicted of killing four Israelis, including a four-year-old girl. Al Jazeera greeted Samir Kuntar, released in a July 2008 prisoner swap, as a hero. A more recent example given by the article is the weekly show "Sharia and Life" by Yusuf Qaradawi, an Egyptian cleric who, according to a February 2011 article in The Atlantic, "argues clearly and consistently that hatred of Israel and Jews is Islamically sanctioned."[7][8]"