BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Mar 17 - 09:26 PM

Ooh darling! Hard to get is what I am! I'm not your type! I poo-poo you, booboo!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 03 Mar 17 - 09:39 PM

Poo poo is it Stevie, sorry but that's not my predilection, but whatever turns you on. Who am I to judge?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 01:06 AM

Further examples of what you consider to be "measured and careful argument" there Shaw?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 03:30 AM

I think Steve has finally found his true level, Mr T.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 03:53 AM

"This perfectly illustrates the persistence and obsessiveness of Jew hating ideologue"
Do I have to remind you of your claiming that all Palestinians refusing to leave the area Israel claims as its own should be exterminated, or that Bedouins should be herded into compounds and made to wear identification tags, or chemical weapons should be used to keep pPalestinians in order, or the massive cut-'n-paste you7 dredged from fascist sites like Muslim Watch and The White Supremacist claiming that Arabs were't fit to de described as humans?
Please take your antisemitic linking of criticism of Israel with hatred of the Jews elsewhere and come back when you are prepared to criticise your friend's claim that Jews in Parliament would rather defend their party than expose antisemitism
You are a hypoctite as well as an antisemite
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 04:03 AM

Like a spiral in a spiral
Like a wheel within a wheel
Never ending or beginning
On an ever spinning reel

I am sure that everything that is going to be said has been, everything that is going to be misrepresented has been misrepresented and everyone has accused everyone else of everything by now. Best just get on with things that have not been introduced yet. Just by way of ideas -

1. Quantum mechanics
2. The role of the pigs bladder in medieval mystery plays
3. James Bond

Knock, knock.
Who's there?
Bigish
Bigish who?
No thanks I have already bought one.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 04:22 AM

"I am sure that everything that is going to be said has been, "
I couldn't agree more Dave - then why prolong it and continue to give this squalid bunch the attention they are seeking ?
They'll die of the bordome generated by their own company if we don't respond to tham
To borrow Keith's memorable phrase "my job's done here"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 05:08 AM

I know, Jim, but I feel we are doing a service. Bit like care in the community I suppose.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 05:30 AM

"I know, Jim, but I feel we are doing a service."
I'd let 'Mind' or 'The Percy Bilton' charities deal with that one if I were you Dave
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 09:45 AM

So, I've been away for a week or two - what conclusion have you all come to? Reached any kind of agreement, compromise or accommodation?

Thought not. See ya in another couple of weeks...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 01:11 PM

Well, BWM, I have reached the conclusion that it is not worth trying to communicate with some and is is far easier just to sit back and enjoy the ride :-)

Speaking of which. Been anywhere nice?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 02:48 PM

"enjoy the ride :-)
Speaking of which. Been anywhere nice?"
Bet he want to Alton Towers!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 04:13 PM

Never been to Alton Towers in my life, Jim - my idea of absolute hell!

When I said I'd been away, I meant 'away from Mudcat'. I've been trying to wean myself off this mad-house, and this is about the longest I've ever managed.

But, if you regard sessions, a singaround or two, playing a couple of gigs, and attending an Archie Fisher concert as 'nice' (and I do!), then I've been to several 'somewheres nice'!

TTFN. I'll try not to be back, but I can't guarantee it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 04:21 PM

Knock knock

Who's there?

Big Issue!

Bless you!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 06:13 PM

I've decided, in my infinite wisdom, to not ask the mods to shut this thread. There are far better ways of defeating the gentlemen to our far-right. Ridicule, recipes, wild flowers, joviality, Yorkshire Dales, jokes, calling them piles of poo...that's the way to do it! Show them that we are humanity personified and invite them to join the human race! They lose! There can be no more vile threads! Sherlock Steve and his merry band/gang/mob/pack will subvert at will! Mods, you can retire!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 07:02 PM

Had a fabulous weekend raising monies for the Runswick Bay Rescue Boat.

Brill !!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Mar 17 - 07:49 PM

I was with you in spirit, Raggytash, and I was even up north, but I had to give Mother priority (as ever). Just to say that the rather flippant-sounding account of the incident outside Prestwich M&S Simply Food was accurate in every detail!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Mar 17 - 04:18 AM

"TTFN. I'll try not to be back, but I can't guarantee it."
Ah Cmon Backie
Is it something we said?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Mar 17 - 01:28 PM

Sounds better than spittle flecked rants, lies and historians, Steve. If we are going to be an official band of outlaws can we all have new names? If so can I be Friar Tuck? Spoonerised if possible :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Mar 17 - 01:37 PM

BTW. Don't follow that link I gave you for underpants. You will be plagued by adverts for what I can only refer to as gentleman's lingerie. Unless you want to buy something special to wear for Mrs Steve?:-)

Are spittle flecked rants like little speckled pants?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Mar 17 - 03:42 PM

Well without underpants I would have unsupported assertions, though things are getting less assertive the older I get... 😳 Unfortunately, I still have an unopened five-pairs-for eight-quid Asda pack of bebuttoned boxers, so I'm currently not in the knicker market. Friar Tuck? Tria F**k? I'm not offering to be Maid Marian, pal!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Mar 17 - 04:13 PM

You can be Robin of the Hood, yo Steve. Raggy - Fancy the job of Will Scarlett? Jim, that leaves Little John for you.

Anyone can make Marion. (Sexist, I know. Sorry. Poor puns are my forte.)

Keith can be The Sheriff of Knotty Ash, Teribus can be Prince John (American terminology) and Ake can be a cute Guy of Gisbum posing in see through boxers :-)

Boy, this beats politics into a cocked hat.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 05 Mar 17 - 04:22 PM

Could I opt to be Alan-a-Dale

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Mar 17 - 04:27 PM

You can be anything you like, Raggy, but I must warn you that the anagram of Alan-a-Dale is AA Land Ale.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Mar 17 - 04:52 PM

Reminds me of an incident in the late seventies when I was an Inner London Teachers' Association delegate at a London NUT meeting. My old mucker Blair Peach was my co-conspirator at that meeting and we sat at the back of the hall as the chairperson called a register, forced by the right wing (aka the communists - honest! 😂), in order to make sure that the upcoming vote on industrial action was going to be fair (things were fraught like that in those gloriously militant times). It took ages for all eighty names to be called and there was a goodly amount of insolent piss-taking during the proceedings. One of the delegates was called Littlejohn (he lived on a canal narrowboat as I recall). The chairman called "Littlejohn?" and yer man called "Present!" Before the chairman could call the next name, Blair, who had a bad stammer but triumphantly overcame it on that occasion, bellowed "Friar Tuck?" and the whole place collapsed in utter mirth. Those were the days!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 Mar 17 - 06:01 PM

I would not normally refresh a thread that had run it's course (several times over), however time and time again we read of child abuse by the clergy and by teachers.

Here is yet another, was this person doing the abuse because of "culture" or was he doing it because he was both a TEACHER and a VICAR. Is the culture of these groups responsible.

Link

Could I suggest that each time you read of such an occurance that they are posted here in order to get a balanced view of this problem.

Teachers and vicars do seem to be a major factor in child abuse, perhaps someone who has been a teacher and is a practicing member of a church could throw light on this.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 02:27 AM

What problem would that be Raggy?

Let's make sure we are comparing apples to apples

On-street grooming, abduction, multiple-rape, prostitution, human trafficking, torture. Those were the catalogue of charges successfully brought against 125 men in eleven English cities. In Rotherham alone it involved over 1,400 victims whose predators were protected by "political correctness" gone mad. When the case in Rotherham broke after years of social services, the local authority and the police "looking the other way" there were over 300 suspects.

Now what "balanced view" are you attempting to illustrate?

According to your link two instances of child abuse over an 18 month period over 30 years ago. Same person found NOT Guilty of a further six instances during the same period.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 03:38 AM

T, If you do not understand my reference you are even dimmer than I took you to be.

If you don't comprehend this, I would suggest you stay out of the discussion/debate (delete as applicable)and leave it to people who do.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 04:49 AM

What's to understand Raggy - you are, as usual, comparing apples to oranges. As to demonstrating dimness

"Here is yet another, was this person doing the abuse because of "culture" or was he doing it because he was both a TEACHER and a VICAR. Is the culture of these groups responsible."

What groups? What is the "culture" of a vicar or a teacher when it's at home Raggy?

"I would suggest you stay out of the discussion/debate (delete as applicable)and leave it to people who do."

And I would suggest Raggy that you take your own pig-ignorant advice.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 04:57 AM

Well bless my soul, Teri cannot figure out what culture means.

Look it up.

(Mind you, when he has the intelligence you would normally find in a culture in a Petri dish, it is not too surprising.)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 05:12 AM

"On-street grooming, abduction, multiple-rape, prostitution, human trafficking, torture."
Caried out by a handful of criminals - nothing to do with a culture - certainly not one which condemns sex outside of marriage
Ignoring the facts of tehse crimes and blaming it on a racial/cultural group makes you and Keiuth the racists that you are
Ninety odd percent of crimes against children are commited by members of the indideonous culture - making British culture - what exactly?
On-street grooming is an opportunist technique usd by a small number of criminals in a certain situation - no-one has at any time suggested it is a cultural trait, other than those of the rabid right, such as yourself
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 05:13 AM

OK Raggy I understand that you are incapable of answering even the simplest of questions raised by your "contribution"

1: Islam is a religion practiced by over 1.8 billion people spread throughout the world - there is no such thing as "Muslim" culture.

2: Being a vicar is a job/calling/vocation as such it is supposedly governed by Christian principles and teaching - not a "culture"

3: Being a teacher is a job/profession/vocation there is no specific "culture" among those employed as such.

The only culture you probably ever encountered would be those thriving at the bottom of those pots and pans you did such a poor job of cleaning.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 05:31 AM

"On-street grooming, abduction, multiple-rape, prostitution, human trafficking, torture."
Caried out by a handful of criminals - nothing to do with a culture - certainly not one which condemns sex outside of marriage
Ignoring the facts of tehse crimes and blaming it on a racial/cultural group makes you and Keiuth the racists that you are

That's precisely it in a nutshell. Well said, Jim. Succinct, to the point. I can't think that anything else needs to be said on this issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 05:32 AM

Got me italicising in a muddle there!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 05:42 AM

Teri, look up the definition of culture.

I think you will find that any group of people can have one, be they teachers or vicars.

OK just this once, just for you.

"As a defining aspect of what it means to be human, culture is a central concept in anthropology, encompassing the range of phenomena that are transmitted through social learning in human societies. The word is used in a general sense as the evolved ability to categorize and represent experiences with symbols and to act imaginatively and creatively. This ability arose with the evolution of behavioral modernity in humans around 50,000 years ago, and is often thought to be unique to humans, although some other species have demonstrated similar, though much less complex, abilities for social learning. It is also used to denote the complex networks of practices and accumulated knowledge and ideas that is transmitted through social interaction and EXIST IN SPECIFIC HUMAN GROUPS, or cultures, using the plural form. Some aspects of human behavior, such as language, social practices such as kinship, gender and marriage, expressive forms such as art, music, dance, ritual and religion, and technologies such as cooking, shelter and clothing are said to be cultural universals, found in all human societies. The concept of material culture covers the physical expressions of culture, such as technology, architecture and art, whereas the immaterial aspects of culture such as principles of social organisation (including practices of political organization and social institutions), mythology, philosophy, literature (both written and oral), and science make up the intangible cultural heritage of a society.[6]

(ps my emphasis in capitals)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 06:16 AM

The is a crude racist dejavu aspect to all this
Both of these right-wing fanatics have put in a great deal of effort trying to prove that the actions of several hundred criminals means that an entire population of a million and a half people are infected with a trend to rape underage girls
Just like all those "darkies" over here to take our women and jobs
Their attitude to racism is transparently politically motivated.
The Labour party is accused of racism - howls in support, despite the lack of basic evidence = "We accuse you of being a thief, but we are not going to tell you what you've stolen".
When the Conservatives are accused of Islamophobia and do nothing about ti - total silence, despite requests to respond.
So their "racism" appears to only be racist when it's carried out by the left.
When the Tories are accused of similar and appoint a racist Foreign Secretary, that's just Tories being Tories.
Wonder where the victims of racism feature in all of this, other than being used as political pawns in a game of racist and right wing extremism?
Keith's disgusting suggestion, far from helping rid Britain of criminals, encourages other crimes such as racial persecution.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 07:24 AM

"Ignoring the facts of tehse crimes and blaming it on a racial/cultural group makes you and Keiuth the racists that you are"

My prediction here is that the question I am about to ask will go unanswered as so many have done before but here goes anyway:

When Sherlock have either Keith A or myself blamed any crime on a "racial/cultural" group as you put it? I certainly know that both Keith A and myself have quoted various spokespersons from the British Muslim community who very publicly have asked the question as to why there seems to be a disproportionate number of perpetrators from a specific group among the 125 men convicted, but that was as far as it goes, their question still remains unanswered (It was that question that Keith A asked for comments on).

One single post of mine where I apportioning blame will suffice.

I believe that the complaint related to Islamophobia directed at the Conservative Party that was made by a member of the British Council of Muslims was investigated and found to be groundless. This was a complaint by someone outside the Conservative Party as opposed to the complaints of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party that were made by Jews who were members of the Labour Party.

Oh Raggy - Culture in the context we are talking about:

the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular people or society:
e.g. - "Afro-Caribbean culture" · "people from many different cultures"

synonyms: civilization · society · way of life · lifestyle · customs · traditions · heritage · habits · ways · mores · values"

Sorry Raggy Vicars and Teachers ain't listed. Vicars and Teachers are not in themselves "a particular people or society"

By the way Raggy is it typical of "liberal Left wing socialists" who are supposed to respect worth, equality and the dignity of labour to denigrate fellow workers as, how did you put it? - dead beats and no-hopers - as you have done on another thread. But there again Raggy you are only the "little Sir Echo" of that other champion of the left - Jim Carroll - who believes that people should "know their place" and that there is such a thing as a "pecking order". Hypocrites and liars seem to be the qualifications for your little band.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 07:33 AM

Don't tell him, Pike!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 07:58 AM

Unsurprisingly your knowledge of sociology is as limited as your knowledge of anything even vaguely academic. A typical response from an uneducated oaf ........... I don't understand it, it must be crap. Thus your inclusion of it in "Liberal left wing socialists"

If you could understand it you would find that a culture can be defined in many ways and for many groups, e.g. a nation of people or a group who meet down the pub on a Friday night.

I don't expect you to be able to understand it nor to realise there are some right wing sociologist even one who claimed that the Black American population were educationally inferior.

Needless to say when other people checked his findings he had deliberately skewed the figure to back up his assumptions.

Sort of thing you and the professor do.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 08:14 AM

Correction.

The research I was referring to was about the working class population of Britain. (Professor Cyril Burt)

Other research has been used to claim a racial inferiority of Black Americans.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 09:54 AM

"Needless to say when other people checked his findings he had deliberately skewed the figure to back up his assumptions.

Sort of thing you and the professor do." - Raggy

Only thing is Raggy the lot of you have been trying for years now and you have yet to come up with anything that can contradict any details, figures or facts that we have used in argument against the crap posted by such as yourself.

Vicars and Teachers still do not constitute what is commonly understood to be a "culture" - no matter how much you waffle on Raggy - what were you doing at that college in Oxford Raggy? Cleaning the corridors? For someone who keeps telling us all about his supposed education you show very little signs of showing any grasp of detail or of being able to muster any sort of counter argument in debate/discussion (Delete as you see fit).

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 10:01 AM

I sense a slight change there from Vicars and Teachers do not have a culture to not having a culture that is "commonly understood"

Make your mind up.

All groups have a culture the police, the armed forces, that set of lads in the pub on a Saturday night and teachers and vicars.

Now given that teachers and vicars are commonly found to have abused children it begs the question is it part of their culture.

Given that I only know of one person on this forum who has both been a teacher and is a practicing Christian maybe he could tell us if it is part of his culture.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 10:06 AM

"Only thing is Raggy the lot of you have been trying for years now and you have yet to come up with anything that can contradict any details, figures or facts that we have used in argument against the crap posted by such as yourself."

Only thing is Teribus that none of us ostrichocracy brigade can ever say a damn thing that you won't find a way of contradicting for ideological, bitterness or jealousy reasons (and guess what you're going to say next!). So we're getting to the point at which we find ourselves to be less and less arsed as time goes by. And yes! WE! US!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 10:11 AM

Speak for yourself Steve, like Groucho Marx I have never wanted to be a member of a club that would have me, and I will say that for all of us.

Cos I can !

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 10:17 AM

Sorry, mate. My head was in the sand there for a sec...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 01:42 PM

"was investigated and found to be groundless."
Utter crap - there is no evidence that it was ever discussed
Does it matter that it was made by somebodyt outside the party - are the Tories above any criticism
The fforts you have made to probve the non existent Antisemitism in Labour makes you a total hypocrite - your claims taht the Tory accusations make you da dishonest hypocrite
A few months after these accuasitions were made, the Tories were accused of elexction fraud - they weren't investigated either - not part of the Tory cultural "implant" it would seem
"have either Keith A or myself blamed any crime on a "racial/cultural" group as you put it"
Keith has - you seem to have forgottin his "cultural implant"
This timeless gem from Keith
"Paedophilia is not endorsed, but the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) took a child bride."
Sort of - "I've nothing against Christianity, but Jesus was a Paedo"
You couldn't make it up
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 05:25 PM

"Only thing is Teribus that none of us ostrichocracy brigade can ever say a damn thing that you won't find a way of contradicting" - Steve Shaw

That Shaw is the essence of discussion/debate (Delete as you see fit)

If you cannot present and then support the points you wish to make then don't bother making them - simple. No need for insults, baseless accusations and smears followed by massive deflections into totally unconnected subjects because you haven't the wit or intelligence to argue your corner.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 05:44 PM

Wit or intelligence you say? Why, I'm noted for both. But, as I've just been telling Keith on another thread. I'm bored. Very very bored. I'm as bored as a professor of Boredom Studies at the Univesity of Bore in Boring-Next-The-Sea in Tediumshire. The cause? Why, you and Keith! Same old same old same old same old....

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Mar 17 - 07:12 PM

Two shocking typos in there. I look for scapegoats. Bloody iPads. Mind you, I could write a 10000-word treatise on "The Proposed Causes Of My Typos" which would be a damn sight more interesting than any posts from Keith 'n' Bill. And that's despite the fact that the said treatise wouldn't even touch on my sex life. Now that would be something.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Mar 17 - 02:14 AM

I suppose the reason you are bored Shaw is that any discussion gets tiresome from the point of view of those who cannot bring anything germane to that discussion.

This intelligence and wit that you seem to think you possess only seems to work for you in groups where everyone is in agreement, or under conditions were those you are addressing cannot answer back. Under such circumstances and in such situations it is very easy to fall for and believe your own propaganda.

Unfortunately, you do not get away with it here on the 'cat. Here you have people who are prepared to confront points made by you. In doing so you present your argument in the shape of stereotypes well passed their sell-by-date and worn out ideological clichés. You and your pals are then confronted by detail and fact that for some reason you never, ever seem able to refute or counter - Why is that? You then resort to lies, smears, baseless accusations that are never substantiated and then finally you then subvert the thread by wittering on about whatever comes into your head (I suppose that is the forum equivalent of sticking a finger in each ear and yelling, "La-la-la" very loudly).

You and your pals over the last four years have all but destroyed this forum - that seems to be the only thing you have an aptitude for - Oddly enough, getting back on topic, Corbyn is exactly the same.