BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 05:22 AM

Dave,
I know you will never agree but I believe that this is all Keith is trying to put across.

It was and I said so. We were in complete agreement on that thread.
What I never did and never would do is "defend" such signs.
Jim lied.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 03:51 AM

Please note that, as ever, I am trying to provide a reasonable answer to why some say one thing and some say another while both are, in part, right. As I said 4 years ago, to the travellers who they affect, the signs are common. To those who are not looking for them, such as us, they are not. Why is it that others cannot see that? Can you, Keith? Jim? It was the same with the cultural implant debacle. My problem is that I am too reasonable. Although I am sure many would disagree :-)

We have a brilliant butcher in the village, Steve, although I must say that I have not tried Tebay pork as a comparison. Should be passing in April so may give it a try. We also have a Booth's supermarket just up the road in Settle. They seem to do the same range as Tebay so may give them a try and risk excommication from Morrisons. Very stormy weather here today so no outdoor activities for me. Pretty much a fair weather hiker nowadays.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 02:55 AM

From: Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 07:44 PM

I can only re-iterate what I have said before. In my experience such signs are not common. I have neen in a lot of pubs, all over the country for many years, and the only one I have ever seem in respect of travellers was in the Morning Star, Wardley, Mancheter which said 'Travellers Welcome!'

I have no doubt that you are right, Jim, and to travellers who do see the signs they are more common than they should be. But that is no evidence whatsover to say the signs are common. I know you will never agree but I believe that this is all Keith is trying to put across.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 02:45 AM

Steve,
So tiny a proportion of the populations of countries mentioned, according to your stats, Keith, that I have to wonder what the song and dance is about

Hate crime effects a tiny proportion Steve, and so does rape.

It is still a serious issue worthy of serious concern.
You only suggest dismissing it because the main victims are Jews.
You did not make that argument when hate crimes against EU citizens following Brexit were discussed here, or when Islamophobic crimes have been discussed.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 02:45 AM

"No Travellers signs common??

Never seen one in my life.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 02:40 AM

Jim,
violent sectarian marches which you tried to pass of as a pleasant day out?

If I said that about any violent march, QUOTE ME SAYING IT!!

You quoted me, ""They described the Twelfth as their St Patrick's Day, a community day out that gives them a chance to celebrate their culture and history."

They did describe it thus, and the parades were overwhelmingly peaceful. Now they all are.
You lie. I do not.

As usual Jim, you give up trying to make a case, and start making up lies about me personally instead.
You do it every time!
You might as well hoist a white flag.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 02:31 AM

Jim,
or the three days of rioting in Belfast which you attempted to blame on children,

If you are not lying and I said anything untrue, QUOTE ME SAYING IT!!

Your quote of me does not do that.

"Date: 02 Sep 10 - 06:48 AM
"All the reports and witnesses refer to that. So many children that the Northern Ireland Children's Commissioner felt the need to make statements about it.
Put up some evidence that there were not large numbers of kids Jim?
You can't because they were there."

I provided the reports and witness statements.
I quoted the Northern Ireland Children's Commissioner.
It was all true.
You lied. I do not.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 17 - 02:24 AM

Jim, You accused me of defending "no travellers signs."

You lied. I never would or did.
What I did was deny your ludicrous, lying claim that such signs "are common throughout Britain."

You lie. I do not.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 08:40 PM

By the way, and you'll probably like this, Dave, we had pork chops for tea tonight, done Delia-style with mushrooms, thyme, lemon and cream, baked in the oven. Glorious. The key fact here is that I'd bought the chops from the Gloucester Services butcher. In fact, the carrier bag had "Tebay Services" on it. It seems bloody ridiculous that I should be singing the praises of a motorway services, but I don't buy my pork from anywhere else these days. Our local butcher used to sell us pork that he got from the farm of Mary Quicke MBE, her of Quicke's cheddar. Unfortunately, he retired and Mrs Quicke stopped doing her amazing whey-fed pigs, so decent pork is impossible to get in Bude these days. Thank God for Gloucester Services! I have pork belly from there in my freezer, as well as a beautiful hunk of boned and rolled shoulder with a mass of crackling. All Gloucester Old Spot, free-range. Life is good.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 07:26 PM

Been here many times before, boobs. Israeli Arabs have poorer housing, poorer schooling, poorer pay, poorer job prospects, higher unemployment, have to endure school transport that refuses to pass through their towns, only round the margins, are subject to checkpoints that can hold them up without good reason for days, may well be separated from their families by a concrete wall... I suppose you think it's all their fault, that they're all just lazy, feckless Arabs. Open your eyes. I've documented these facts before.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 07:01 PM

To call Israel an apartheid state is an expression of ignorance, anti-Semitism, and malice. Israel is by far the most racially mixed and tolerant nation in the entire Muslim Middle East. Arabs, who are about 20% of Israel's population, enjoy, without any exception, the same rights and opportunities in all fields as their Jewish fellow citizens. The total equality of all Israelis is assured in Israel's founding document. All non-Jews (which means primarily Muslim Arabs) have full voting rights. At present, seventeen Arabs sit in Israel's Knesset (parliament): Three Arabs are deputy speakers. Arabs are represented in Israel's diplomatic service all over the world. Arab students may and do study in all Israeli universities. All children in Israel are entitled to subsidized education until graduation, without any restrictions based on color or religions. In short, Muslim Arabs and other non-Jews are allowed everything that Jews are allowed, everything that non-Whites were not allowed in apartheid South Africa.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 04:49 PM

to pull a report authored by Richard Falk which condemns Israel for 'apartheid'.

Plenty of other reports, Boo, that definatively document Israel as an apartheid state.

Of course, you could fall back on Trumpist "alternative facts" to dispute reality.....

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 03:58 PM

Great news: Rima Khalaf, head of that obscure U.N. agency ECSWA, comprised of 18 Arab states, has just resigned under pressure from the U.N. chief to pull a report authored by Richard Falk which condemns Israel for 'apartheid'.

Better news: seems that the U.N. has just deleted from the #ESCWA website the despicable Richard Falk report accusing Israel of 'apartheid'

I hope Carroll can bear his disappointment.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 02:20 PM

Professor, if you not understand the significance of Green, White and Gold and Red, White and Blue in religious terms in Ireland you are utterly, utterly ignorant.

I would suggest you try to learn something about the country but I know it would be a complete waste of time.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 01:42 PM

THis is how you tried to describe the Twelfth of July in a discussion of sectarian rioting
"They described the Twelfth as their St Patrick's Day, a community day out that gives them a chance to celebrate their culture and history."
And lest we forget - this is how you dsescribed the brainwashing of Irish schoolchildren of the 'Potato Blight' thread
"Not surprising when generations of school children have been brainwashed to believe Britain should be blamed, keeping hate alive.
Likewise for both of these - no revisiting these disgusting arguments for me
Last time was plenty

Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 01:20 PM

This – about three nights of rioting that took place in Belfast 2010 which you attempted to prove were the fault of young children and "outside influences"
Date: 02 Sep 10 - 06:48 AM
"All the reports and witnesses refer to that. So many children that the Northern Ireland Children's Commissioner felt the need to make statements about it.
Put up some evidence that there were not large numbers of kids Jim?
You can't because they were there."
As with the "No Traveller" signs – I have no doubt that, having denied you said this, you will now attempt to re-open the argument that children were responsible for three nights of rioting.
Not for me I'm afraid Keith
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 01:09 PM

Ah - what the hell - I can do this and carry on with the desk work.
No Traveller signs.
I explained I had been part of a photographing campaign that lasted for several years, trying to get the practice of putting these signs up
I linked you to one of these photographs which had been part of the notes to a CD of Travellers we had put out
I provided documented evidence from organisations like The Runnymede Trust, who had documented these signs and produced descriptions of court cases
I even described having visited 2 pubs in the Bristol area which were still displaying those notices at the time of out argument
I provided links to a book entitled 'Gypsies' by prominent civil servant, Sir Angus Fraser, which features a chapter of these signs and points out that they were common because Travelers were not protected under the race- discrimination laws.
After all of this, you still denied that they were common and at several stages, became abusive and called me a liar and a bigot.
If this is not defending these signs, I don;t know what is
These are some of the samples of around 90 postings you made on the 'No Travellers site
I have little doubt that, having denied defending these signs, you will now attempt to reopen the argument and claim they were not around as I said they were.
I thinl 90 postings from you are quite enough - don't you?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 03:16 PM
Jim, you said they were common, I said I had never seen one, and you accused me of lying.
I am no liar, and nor are the others who have never seen one.
You know that they have been illegal here for fourty four years.
Your contention is that the people here are so racist they ignore the law, and the police so racist they allow it.
You are wrong about our people.
Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 03:21 PM
Sorry, illegal for FOURTY SIX YEARS !
Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 02:57 AM
Jim Carroll, you were wrong to state that" "No Travellers Served" is a common notice throughout Britain "
It is not
Most of us have never seen one in our lives, and to say that does not make us liars or racists.
Far from being common, they are extraordinarily rare, and probably do not exist any more.
You were wrong to suggest that the British people are so racist they ignore the laws.
You were wrong to suggest that the British police are so racist they allow it.
You were wrong about us.
You were wrong about me.
Thank you.
keith.
Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 03:38 AM
I have never seen one, and most contributors have not.
That means they are not common.
I am challenging nothing else Jim, but you stated they were common and I disagree.
They are not common.
If they exist at all they are extraordinarily rare.
You were wrong.
Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 03:40 AM
You are in England now right?
Found any?
Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:29 AM
You said " "No Travellers Served" is a common notice throughout Britain "
I know from my own experience that it is not.
You said "Because a handful of individuals here have not seen them is no proof whatever that they do not exist in the numbers that have been quoted"
I think it is proof.
How many "individuals" accepted that the notice IS common throughout Britain?
Answer NONE.
You were wrong about us, and about me.
(AGAIN!)

From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 06:22 AM
"YOU HAVE BEEN GIVEN ACCESS TO HUNDREDS OF PAGES OF OFFICIALLY RESEARCHED AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE"
Jim, those of us who live in this country do not need your experts to tell us what it is like.
We live here.
I rate the objectivity of a cross section of Mudcatters way above that of your agenda ridden spokespersons trying to justify their pay-packets.
"No Travellers Served" is NOT a common notice throughout Britain.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 01:52 PM
There are lots of pitches around Hertford.
Just no signs.
Your Glasgow friend said they WERE common once.
None now then.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:19 PM
Are you implying that the poster is lying and not that the notice was taken down so as not to spoil the photograph and frighten the horses?
Yes I am.
He is a troll.
There is nothing on streetview picture either.
If it were a real post I would check further.
Just a troll.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 04:10 AM
Jim, are we British "deeply racist" by our genes or are we culturally implanted with it?
Keith has just accused a poster of lying on the basis that a publican wishing to publicise his pub could quite possibly have removed a 'no Traveller' notice before taking a publicity photograph
No Jim.
I was prepared to believe it and began looking in to it.
Then I noticed that the troll had never posted here before.
He was just winding us up, but you could give the place a call or visit them next week.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 03:33 AM
I just said that the signs are not "common throughout Britain."

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 05:58 AM
Jim, you stated that ""No Travellers Served" is a common notice throughout Britain "
I denied it.
I was right and you were wrong, as usual.
All the evidence you put up was gone through by CS, and found not to be evidence at all.
The first hand evidence of numerous Mudcatters actual experience clearly showed that the signs are NOT common throughout Britain.
You were wrong about that Jim, and that is all I have argued.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 06:02 AM
Which "two pubs in the Bristol area" Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 08:47 AM
He started this thread in order to challenge the documented abuse of Travellers
No.
It was to find out if "no travellers" signs are common throughout Britain as you claimed.
We found they are not.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 12 Sep 12 - 05:04 AM
"An ad hominem is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or unrelated belief of the person supporting it"
I am not a racist.
The British are not deeply racist.
Those signs are not remotely common throughout Britain.
There are not two pubs in Bristol displaying those signs.
Jim is a shocking liar and a deeply prejudiced bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 03:02 AM
So you have finally stopped trying to defend the ludicrously indefensible Jim.
We have hundreds of Mudcatter years of never seeing one, yet you claim to have found two in less than a week.
If you want to be believed, identify the pubs so someone can discreetly check.
Re the ad hominem thing;
It was not a racist theory because the proponents had impeccable anti-racist credentials and most were Pakistanis.
Certainly not racist to just report it!
The question is not why I came to believe them, but why anyone should imagine they know better.
To be blunt, why would any sentient, rational person dismiss all those lifetimes of experience, and listen to a twat like you?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 04:21 AM
I sincerely wish you well with your medical troubles Jim.
No-one here would cause any trouble over those pubs if they exist.
We could circulate it by pm and be very discreet, as I said.
I think you made them up Jim, but am prepared to be proved wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 01:04 PM

So tiny a proportion of the populations of countries mentioned, according to your stats, Keith, that I have to wonder what the song and dance is about. Just about four times more likely to be a Jewish victim of a hate crime than to be struck by lightning. Sounds like a pretty safe country in which to be a Jew to me. You are talking this up in the same way as you talk up the "serious antisemitism problem" in Labour (the one party that has been honest enough to put the issue in the spotlight) in which there have been a few handfuls of mostly unproven cases out of a membership of six hundred thousand. By highlighting and tirelessly publicising what seem to be minor issues, according to your stats at least, it seems to me that you are trying to portray Jews as perpetual victims, thereby putting them more in harm's way. Of course, it may be that you regard the stats as just the tip of the iceberg. If so, you seriously need better stats.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 01:03 PM

No wriggling here. I guess he is in the same mold as some others I could mention, Steve. Has his own meaning for everyday words.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone. "It means just what I choose it to mean - neither more or less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's all."

The rain did keep off in Haworth. Lovely drive over the tops. Could not see much from the car but the daffs are out in force everywhere and some of the trees are blossoming. Definitely springlike.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 12:49 PM

Piss off Keith
All this is old history - I linkyou to what you actually said, you go on offending it
I don't lie - I don't need to
Your racist and sectarian behaviur makes it unnecesary to do so
Your technique of prolonging these arguments if beginning to look like attention seeking
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 12:21 PM

Steve,
they show that the problem they are supposed to be demonstrating is almost negligible.

Not true Steve.
You made the obvious point that hate crime victims are a tiny proportion of the population, but they unequivocally showed that in the West Jews are more likely to be such victims than any other group, exactly as Bobad claimed.

Jim,
How does the post of mine you quoted support your lie, "You have the evidence of the massive series of human rights abuses carried out by the Israelis and you have h
ve denied every single one without fail
I hope you enjoy your inhumanity as much as I have enjoyed exposing it."

Did I mention the "no Travellers served here" signs you spent weeks defending,

If that is not another lie Jim, QUOTE ME DEFENDING THEM!!

or the three days of rioting in Belfast which you attempted to blame on children,

If you are not lying and I said anything untrue, QUOTE ME SAYING IT!!,

If I said that about any violent march, QUOTE ME SAYING IT!!

As usual Jim, you give up trying to make a case, and start making up lies about me personally instead.
You do it every time!
You might as well hoist a white flag.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 09:53 AM

So lies, damn lies and threadbare statistics! Who's doing the wriggling, boobs? 🤠

Missed the chance to do 1500, Dave, as I was in Bude Morrisons. I note that the firm is steadfastly refusing to put Signature Nero d'Avola back down to its five quid offer price. However, I had a e-voucher giving me 5000 Match 'n' More points if I spent forty quid, in effect a free fiver. Therefore, after some mental creative accounting, I decided to buy six bottles at six quid. My bill thereby crept above the forty quid mark and my points are on the way. That's the way to do it! But come on, Dave, 'ave a word about the Nero d'Avola, will you? 🍷🍷🍷

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 09:15 AM

Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 09:13 AM

So, you misrepresented what I said to suit your agenda. What is new in that?

Off to do something better for the afternoon. Was hoping to come back with tales of a glorious spring day in Haworth but it looks like it is going to piss down. May just make something up instead. Looks like that is what most people do.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 09:10 AM

No cop out at all. You seem to learning form the master of changing the rules to suit. You misrepresented what I said so I have asked you to provide evidence. What is the matter? Do you not think you can?

Tell you what though. I will make a start if you like. Would you care to look up the statement Up until such a time, if they wish to slaughter one another then they'd best restrict their efforts to their own countries and tell us who made it? If you can interpret whatever I said as "most hate crimes etc." that I am pretty sure we have a case to interpret 'if they wish to slaughter each other' as it is OK for them to do as as long as they keep it local.

Now, would you care to provide evidence of where I said "the most anti-Muslim hate crimes being committed today are by Muslims in the Middle East". In Keith's words, good luck with that.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 09:04 AM

You are saying exactly what I stated here Dave, but of course you will try to wriggle out by the usual twisting and dissembling that you have learned so well from your fellow pack members.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome - PM
Date: 14 Mar 17 - 04:28 PM

Another strange assertion

but hate crimes directed against Muslims are but a fraction of those directed against Jews

Have you the remotest idea how many Muslims have been killed in hate crimes against their religion? How many Shia have been killed in Jihads by Sunnis? How many Sunni Muslims killed by Shias? Just because they believe a different version of the same fairy story. Or, because it is Muslim killing Muslim, is that OK?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 08:52 AM

Nice cop out there Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 08:41 AM

Tell you what poobad. I will provide evidence of that when you provide evidence that I said "the most anti-Muslim hate crimes being committed today are by Muslims in the Middle East".

Steve - I feel a Wheatcroft moment coming on. You can have 1500 as well if you fancy.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 08:26 AM

poobad and his friends seem to think it is OK if Muslims kill other Muslims.

Oh,do we Dave? I don't suppose you'd care to provide evidence of that. How about if I said Dave and his friends seem to think it's alright that Jews should be slaughtered by Muslims? Is that the level of discourse that you have sunk to since joining the pack of hyenas? Sad!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 07:02 AM

Keith, we've been all over those curious statistics already. If they show anything at all they show that the problem they are supposed to be demonstrating is almost negligible. Aside from that, if you wish to invoke statistics that you've already used, especially when it was days ago in a long and busy thread, you don't just say "statistics show that...". You say "the statistics that I presented on Xth March show that...". How am I supposed to know which statistics he meant? And he hasn't clarified, despite being challenged. You lose. 🤡

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 06:58 AM

I am sure you spotted it, Steve, but "your friend Dave" did not say the most anti-Muslim hate crimes being committed today are by Muslims in the Middle East. I did say that hate crimes were hate crimes regardless of who committed them but poobad and his friends seem to think it is OK if Muslims kill other Muslims.

I went to Morris dance practice last night and managed to squeeze a few tunes on the concertina. Now, there is a crime against humanity. Pity the poor dancers :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 06:04 AM

Did I mention the "no Travellers served here" signs you spent weeks defending, or the three days of rioting in Belfast which you attempted to blame on children, or the violent sectarian marches which you tried to pass of as a pleasant day out?
Don't think I did!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 05:43 AM

"IF YOU ARE NOT LYING ABOUT WHAT I HAVE SAID, QUOTE ME!"
Happy to oblige Keith - just this once
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.
The fact that self serving governments stay silent about war crimes and acts of terror when it is in their interests to do so, as they did about Assed's torture chambers, and America's slaughter off the Vietnamese people - is meaningless shite and it is stonewalling to offer it as a defence of Israel
Is THIS, and the fact that the Saudis are favourite customers for British arms and endorsement of their behavior?
If it isn't, you have no case - why should Britain look favourably on on terrorist regime and not another.
You have the facts - you are incapable if answering them honestly because of your extreme racist bigotry.
Cenre-right, my arse
You are the most extreme extremist on this forum
You have targeted Muslim culture and religion, Irish "brainwashed to hate Britain" children, immigrants and evicted and persecuted travellers with your incessant and obsessive bigotry
I can still remember the "no Dogs, no Irish" signs that were produced and you continued to deny
People like you would be dangerous if you were taken seriously
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 05:28 AM

Good morning Jim.
Are you going to quote me saying what you claimed, or do you acknowledge it was just your latest lies?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 05:25 AM

"Israel has laid siege to the Gaza Strip"
Remind us how long the BLOCKADE has been going on Bobad
"Palestinian Sirhan Sirhan "
Wonder where British Fred and Betty West leaves us Brits, or Baruch Kopel Goldstein and Nicolai Bonner leaves the Israelis, or Ted Bundy leaves the Americans
The two countries with the largest number of serial killers are The United states (Gold medal) and Britain (silver medal)
What a sicko line of argument - even for Bobad
Jim Carroll
Forgot to mention the 1,492 civilian men women and children slaughteres by the Israelis in the 2015 invasion of Gaza

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 05:19 AM

Steve,
"Statistics do show that..." Weasel words.
"...the statistics also show that..." More weasel words.

As Bobad has actually produced those statistics, he is reminding you of facts, not using "weasel words."
Look it up Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Mar 17 - 05:15 AM

Jim,

"As usual Jim, you give up trying to make a case,"
I've made a case Keith - you are now reduced to dishonesty
You deny the facts and have resorted with stupid stonewalling

IF YOU ARE NOT LYING ABOUT WHAT I HAVE SAID, QUOTE ME!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 10:32 PM

So, facts and inconvenient truths have got the ideologues on the run now. It must be a total bummer when you realize you've been backing the wrong horse all this time. But, hey, it's never too late to admit you're wrong and get back on the right track. Go for it Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 09:56 PM

Nothing inconvenient about knowing the bloke's nationality. Why would there be? The guy who killed his older brother was not a Palestinian. Should we mention that fact every time? The guy who killed Abe - not a Palestinian. The blokes who killed 50 people in London in July 2005 - not Palestinians. The guys who shoot up high schools in America - not Palestinians. The Hungerford and Dunblane killers - not Palestinians. Loads of people who kill other people are not Palestinians. A few are Palestinians, admittedly. John Hinckley Jr, not a Palestinian. Turkish guy who shot the Pope - dodgy one, this - not a Palestinian. Guy who shot Lennon - not a Palestinian. Bali bombers - not Palestinians. So, the question remains: why did you insert "Palestinian" into that sentence? What is that word intended to convey? If nothing, why did you use it? Answer the question! Careful now! 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 09:31 PM

Any idea why you felt the need to insert "Palestinian" into that sentence?

Another inconvenient truth that upsets your prejudiced world view - good, I'll keep them coming.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 09:07 PM

Anyway, enough of this entertainment. I must to bed. I have a hole to fill in the morning. In my gravel drive, yer dirty-minded buggers! Duh!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 09:02 PM

Er, you didn't give us any statistics! All you said was that " statistics show that..." etc.! So how would I know whether I hate them or not?! Give us the statistics, I'll check 'em out (which is what you're afraid of, of course), then I'll tell you whether I love them or hate them! It's past your bedtime, fella! Try to get someone to read your bedtime book to you, The Adventures Of Spot The Dog perhaps. Oh, hang on - you probably won't be able to follow the plot...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 08:49 PM

Hate those statistics do you Shaw? It's because they show you to be full of shit and your ideology to be as phony as you are. Unmasked for the lying hypocrite you are. 😂😂😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 08:47 PM

"Robert F. Kennedy, April 5, 1968 murdered by the Palestinian Sirhan Sirhan for his vocal support for Israel."

Any idea why you felt the need to insert "Palestinian" into that sentence? It may strike you as odd, but a very large number of non-Palestinians also dislike politicians in the US who express vocal support for Israel. Would you like us to think that Palestinians are all bloodthirsty murderers at worst or supporters of Sirhan at best? You must have had your reason...

Careful now! 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 08:26 PM

Phil Ochs would shit on your silly head. You don't deserve to breathe the same air. And I'll tell you about my flowers and the hole in my drive and my grub until the cows come home at times of my choosing. In the meantime, you used weasel words in place of debate. Bang to rights. You seem to think that I'll let that pass if you spout enough obfuscating shit in the meantime. But I won't. Ask Teribus. I have this ability to focus and get the bit between my teeth. You tried to bullshit us with weasel words about what "statistics show." Well we are not that stupid. Yes, "WE!"

Actually, since you mention it, I didn't quite get the hole filled as I met with complications that I won't bore you with, but I need to access a bit of hardcore before I can add the gravel topping. I possess the right materials and am halfway there. All this digging is making my muscles big. That is not intended as a threat. And I'm in a bad mood because I had to ditch my pasta e fagioli tonight due to a batch of borlotti beans that wouldn't soften even after two hours' boiling. Bastards. Bloody Waitrose too. I should have resorted to tinned but it was too late by the time I decided to ditch the project. Had to resort to a jar of pistachio pesto stirred into short pasta with added basil and Parmesan. Bloody good it was, but I hate culinary defeat. More on that later, in the words of Kirsty Wark. As for the flowers, I'll update you tomorrow, my little petal. 😆

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 08:19 PM

"When you teach a man to hate and fear his brother, when you teach that he is a lesser man because of his color or his beliefs or the policies he pursues, when you teach that those who differ from you threaten your freedom or your job or your family, then you also learn to confront others not as fellow citizens but as enemies, to be met not with cooperation but with conquest, to be subjugated and mastered."

-Robert F. Kennedy, April 5, 1968 murdered by the Palestinian Sirhan Sirhan for his vocal support for Israel.

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

Even though you can't expect to defeat the absurdity of the world, you must make that attempt. That's morality, that's religion. That's art. That's life.

- Phil Ochs

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 07:08 PM

That's a pretty silly and immature response,

Right Shaw, tell us some more about your flowers, snobby foodism, and the holes in your gravel drive.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 07:03 PM

Greg, according to your friend Dave, the most anti-Muslim hate crimes being committed today are by Muslims in the Middle East. I would suggest that you have chosen the wrong battlefield in your championing of Islamophobia and instead are practicing knee-jerk whataboutery to the overwhelming prevalence of anti-Semitism in the world today.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 17 - 06:45 PM

That's a pretty silly and immature response, boobs. You were using weasel words. Bang to rights. Man up and deal with it.