BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 06:32 AM

He could certainly be "Kinder" in his posts, Dave. In fact, unless he improves we should shun him. And I can be a "Great Shunner" when I want to be. Anyway, enough of this "Bleak, low" form of humour. Don't want to "Dent" his ego too much. Catch you later, me old "Cove." Are you "Wharfe" anywhere nice this afternoon, by the way?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 06:35 AM

From the Times: a well established source of false news for the ferrets.

"During the general election campaign, Jeremy Corbyn thought Labour's tuition fee policy was one of the finest feathers in his cap. But as the policy unravels, it is increasingly looking like an albatross around his neck."

I also notice Shaw you chose not to correct Joe's statement about the age of consent. That also could be elaborated on. I am surprised a vacuous pedant such as yourself would let such an opportunity pass you by.
However nit picking was not germane to the thrust of his argument, as was not mine. Have you chosen which thread you will poison next with the aid of your motley crew?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 06:53 AM

Always somewhere nice when not in the office, Steve. Airedale if nowhere else :-) The office itself is OK it is just the environs that leave a lot to be desired!

I think we should continue to let him make a Devil's Arse of himself. I am sure it is not what his Mam Tor-t him but if he can Rushup and Speedwell to oblivion this place will be much happier. As to who will Win and Lose, we can only Hope they get the pun.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 06:55 AM

Keith. I don't give a monkey's flying fart about those two issues in the context of this thread.

If you mean paedophilia, I don't either but the behaviour of those Labour councillors who kept it quiet was despicable.
I do not believe Labour has a particular problem with it.

I do believe they have a particular problem with anti-Semitism because so many prominent and authoritative Labour people have said they do.

You were prepared to discuss that, and you denied that Shah advocated transporting the Jews out of M.E. even though she freely admits she did.
You called me a liar over it.
Why will you not admit you were wrong to do that?

Dave, you called me "a devious sociopath" so do not complain to me about other people's abusiveness.

Why will you not say if you agree with Steve that Shah did not advocate transporting Jews when she freely admits she did?

Why do you come to this thread when you never comment on the issues, only on the contributors?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 07:03 AM

Dave, you called me "a devious sociopath" so do not complain to me about other people's abusiveness.

And you stated I had shitty morals and told me to fuck off, Keith but let us not get bogged down with who started what. I am not complaining, Just wondering if you will join me in condemning Inanes tirade of abuse against me and Steve or do you not believe that abuse is an indication of having lost an argument when someone who is supporting you resorts to it?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 07:31 AM

Dave, I know that you and your friends always resort to abuse and name calling when you have no other reply.

Ians is quite new to me. We have little in common.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 07:40 AM

So do you condemn his abuse as well?

D.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 08:35 AM

Your Mam Tor one was a masterstroke, Dave! Eyam peeved I didn't think of it first!

You have a lot more in common with Iains than you think, Keith. I know how embarrasssing it must be.

That's just a random piece of opinion from The Times, Iains, which comes from the same stable as The Sun. I see that the right wing still haven't learned their lesson from the election campaign that trying to tie albatrosses around Corbyn's neck was the shortcut to losing a Commons majority. They all seemed to fall off, didn't they. Including the one that poor Keith is still trying to reattach with a piece of sellotape.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 08:36 AM

And I am now swooping in....

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 08:37 AM

...to claim post 3310, The Saddle! Next stop, Liathach at the magic number 3456!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 08:51 AM

Good bit of albatross with some abuse thrown in here

Monty Python live at the Hollywood Bowl

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 09:55 AM

Another great day at the Regatta yesterday, the weather was sublime, barely a cloud in the sky and the sight of Galway Hookers (no naughty comments please) racing down the bay keeled over in the breeze was breath-takingly beautiful.

They are truly fantastic vessels and achieve a very good rate of knots, some of those racing were over 100 years old though you'd not know it to look at them.

In addition there were some Naomhogs a smaller version of the hooker and plenty of currach racing.

A lovely, lovely day.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 11:12 AM

Dave, I disapprove of abuse, but Ians' can not be linked to losing a debate as yours can.
Steve, one thing I do have in common with Ians is a contempt for your bullying attempts to dominate this thread as so many others.

That's just a random piece of opinion from The Times, Iains,

No Steve. Corbyn has been criticised widely for changing his stance on student debt.

guardian,
"Jeremy Corbyn denies promising to wipe graduates' student debts
Labour leader said before election he would 'deal with' debts, but now says that was not a commitment to write them off"
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jul/23/jeremy-corbyn-denies-promising-to-wipe-student-debts

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 12:07 PM

Just so long as you agree that all abuse is wrong, the reason for it does not matter. The volume of it does and if you check the ammount emenating from inanes against that emenating from anyone else I think you will be quite alarmed to have him as an ally.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 01:47 PM

Agree? Not with you.
I do not approve of abuse.

Please tell us if you agree with Steve that Shah did not advocate transporting Jews when she freely admits she did?

Why do you come to this thread when you never comment on the issues, only on the contributors?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 02:40 PM

I have commeneted on the issues many times. The Labour party is no more antosemitic than any other organisation. I have linked a survey that backs that up but you did not believe that. I said that Shah was a prat (note not just a prat) but you did not believe that. A discusion such as this also calls the contributors to account. I have done that but you did not like it. I wish to calm things down by discussing things far more pleasant than politics. You don't. I refuse to be drawn into circular arguments about things I have already made clear. You, for some reason, want to repeat the same old shite ad infinitum. You want to play by your own rules. I don't. End of.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 04:34 PM

We "comment on the issues" until we're blue in the face. Been there, done it, got ten thousand t-shirts. There comes a time when sane people realise that you are not worth discussing things with. Your mind is fixed from the outset. You think that you're the debating dog's bollocks. You tell people who disagree with you that they lose. It's stupid, Keith. You're on your own. Why don't you ring Naz and ask her to marry you?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 04:43 PM

Has this ever been about the labor party?

I think you are all blind.
If you are blind you do NOT SEE.

Steve; a NOT SEE
Greg; a NOT SEE
You're all NOT SEES ;^)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 04:52 PM

I'm a member of the party, I can spell its name and I'm critical about a lot of what goes on. But I'm not giving the likes of Keith the oxygen he needs to go to town on the party
because he has a one-track mind and he's a bigot. I like your posts, Donuel, but this last one is not your finest hour.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Shakey
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 06:17 PM

I've been member of the LP since '76, currently it's a cesspit with idiots in charge.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 06:31 PM

Meanwhile here on the Connemara there have been sessions going in eight of the pubs, three of which are still on-going at 11.30 and will be for a while yet.

The sun has been shining all day, good conversation in the bars, no bitterness no bile ..........

Now which would I prefer to discuss ............ no contest the beauties of this area without doubt.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: bobad
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 07:14 PM

Nice to see an LP member with integrity on the forum, Shakey.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Shakey
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 07:23 PM

I remember the '80s, the idiot in Coventry, the idiot in Liverpool. I won't dignify them with names but I understand at least one of them has applied to re-join. Jesus it was a struggle to remove MT & clean up the party and now it has to be done again.

But they won't win in the end 'cause they're wrong :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 07:36 PM

Well why are you in it, then? Get out there and bloody well fight to get it changed. Get down to your local branch and meet the grassroots members and give them hell. The Labour Party is not bigger than its grassroots. I've never in my life been a member of anything that there wasn't a lot wrong with. You have a choice. Roll your sleeves up, get involved and change it. Or just get out. Or do what you do, stay put and whinge. The latter is known as the Chuka Umunna syndrome.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Shakey
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 07:49 PM

"Or do what you do, stay put and whinge."

You have no idea what I do, I have no idea about you but I'm learning.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 08:03 PM

You've just told us that you've been a member of a party you appear to hate for forty years. You tell us what you hate but there's not a word about what you've done to change things. Do apprise us.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 08:09 PM

Steve thank you, Out of character I stole that joke from Steven Colbert

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Shakey
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 08:17 PM

That's an interesting debating tactic you have Steve, first criticize someone and then ask for their standpoint.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Shakey
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 08:26 PM

You used the word hate twice in quick succession when actually I never said it once.

You've just told us that you've been a member of a party you appear to hate for forty years.

Now did you mean this, if you did please quote where I've said I have hated the LP for 40 years.

Or did you mean

You've just told us that you've been a member of a party for forty years you appear to hate

which I think you'll agree has a different meaning. No matter but if this is what you meant then please quote where I simply hate the LP - slightly easier except that I never said that either did I?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 08:36 PM

I'm a very simple man, Shakey. You told us that you've been a member since 1976 yet you haven't had a single good word to say about it. Forgive me for thinking that your standpoint is distinctly odd. I don't generally play word games and the only tactic I tend to employ is to ask people what they actually mean by what they've said. I invite you to clarify your apparently strange relationship with the Labour Party. If you don't bother, I won't say another word.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Shakey
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 08:45 PM

Hatchet has been buried and I've even laid a nice piece of turf over it so you can't even tell it's there.

Yes I've had a strange relationship with LP, no I'm not going to go into it now.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Shakey
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 08:48 PM

I did of course count the number of paces to the shed just in case I ever need to dig it up

:-)

Nighty night

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Jul 17 - 09:12 PM

Well in a way I suppose that independently-minded people always have a sort of arms-length relationship with anything they decide to join, whether it's the pub session, the bowling club, a trade union or a political party. On the whole, though, you might have thought that the person joining would see at least some good...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 02:57 AM

Iains - No posts between Aug 00 and Apr 16

Shakey - No posts between Sept 05 and Jul 17

Iains - Stops posting on this thread 24-Jul-17 - 06:45 AM

Shakey - Starts posting on this thread 24-Jul-17 - 06:17 PM

Not that I am one for conspiracy theories or anything...

Something about you brings then out of the woodwork Steve :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 04:00 AM

Well wrinkled little gnome we probably don't have a compulsion to post as frequently as you and your odious little mates. Unlike some I am not obsessed by mudcat. I will admit to responding to the ridiculous stances taken by your mob and I take pride in responding to your constant insults and bullying.
   There is a reason few people contribute below the line these days. That reason is you and your little mates insisting you control the content and the direction the dialogue travels. Any counter views are belittled, mocked, bullied, ganged up on.................
Do you get the message gnome? You have a disgusting technique of playing the innocent before popping up and firing-quite the coward are you not? In reality you are so far up shaw's a***s you could have a second career as a suppository.
   When you and you pathetic little mates clean up your act we could have far more interesting debates with much wider participation.
You can hand it out but the least whiff of a response and you all start screeching, normally led by jimmy the ranter who pops up in all sorts of places just to criticise. I wonder how many appeals to the mods you all make between yourselves. The typical response of bullies.
Sad little people really, are you not? and we must not forget greg. A man with a severe medical problem of incessant trumping. Someone should tell him there is a cure for flatulence. According to recent rumours he is so full of shit he requires 2 assholes, this may account for the flatulence I suppose.
Have a nice day

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 04:32 AM

Another post full of sweetness and light from Inanes. Strange that it follows the unusual 'coincidence' that I highlighted :-) He has neither the knowledge or imagination to create a really good diatribe though.

Hope you are taking note, Keith.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 05:05 AM

If you want a shining example of what drives people away, read today's 04.00 am post on this thread. Clearly, the irony has escaped its author. And it not the most abusive of his many abusive posts by a long chalk.

It's also odd that he claims that we have driven people away. After all those years of absence he was atttracted to return to join the fray, as was Shakey. I think we may actually draw people in, Dave. Not necessarily life's greatest desirables...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 05:19 AM

I can't hear you, Steve. I am up your a***s apparently. Although how you acquired multiple ones, which one I am up and how I got there is a bit of a mystery.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 05:21 AM

Hang on, I'll pass you a snorkel...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 09:24 AM

Not a Hamster, are ya Dave? ;>)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 09:57 AM

Hamster? HAMSTER? Bloody luxury. I used to dream of being a hamster...

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 10:49 AM

I fail to see how posts to this thread prevent other posters enjoying the other threads in the be section. Perhaps you could enlighten us.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 11:27 AM

Dave,
The Labour party is no more antosemitic than any other

That is your opinion, but many promininent members have said that it is. There have been no complaints from Jews in other parties.

I said that Shah was a prat (note not just a prat) but you did not believe that.

I think that making racist comments is worse than being a prat.
You did not say she was anything but a prat, so just a prat to you.

What you refuse to say is if you believe as Jim and Steve do that her remarks were not anti-Semitic and she did not advocate the transportation even though she freely admits she did.

Will you now?
Why not?
Nothing circular or repeated. Entirely new.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 11:59 AM

Please back up your assertion that many prominent members of the Labour Party have said that the party is "more antisemitic than any other." I want their names and I want the quotes from them clearly to that effect. And I'm expecting many, which is more than several. You are the master of the throwaway remark that assumes that we're all stupid and that you'll get away with it. So, names and quotes, please. It should be a fairly lengthy post, considering that there are so many. According to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 01:19 PM

I have said my piece on antisemitism in the Labour party and on Naz Shah, Keith. No need to repeat it. And yes, I do refuse to drawn any further into you little point scoring game.

I am willing to offer a suggestion though. You believe you have won something or another so carry on believing that. I believe that you are barmy so I will carry on believing that. Neither of us are doing anyone any harm. We are both happy. It is a win-win situation and everyone can get on with talking about more interesting things.

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 02:25 PM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4728138/Nick-Gibb-says-Corbyn-apologise-student-debt.html

From the Labour manifesto:
The abolition of tuition fees and reintroduction of maintenance grants, at a cost of £11.2bn
(Latest revision 100billion+)
Labour always has been careless with other people's money!

George Osborne's Evening Standard has splashed on Guido's student debt scoop from this morning. Team Corbyn have a new line: that frontbenchers Imran Hussain and Sharon Hodgson were "mistaken" about Labour's policy and shouldn't have said that Jez was planning to wipe out debts. If Corbyn's own top team were mistaken, not sure how voters were meant to understand it.

and the icing on the cake is discredited blair's foundation poll results below.

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20170717/281814283912770

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 05:02 PM

And even with all these stories from the likes of the Daily Heil they still wiped out the Tory majority. I suspect thst is what rankles our pet right wingers on here most of all. :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 05:08 PM

Any improvement on the Standard and the Mail? 😂😂😂

Presumably I don't need a link to remind you that Cameron said that Article 50 would be triggered the day after the referendum. Or that Theresa May said she would not call an election. Grow up, Iains. It's politics, dear boy, politics. By the way, there was no promise apropos of tuition fees in the Labour manifesto. Check it out.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 05:18 PM

To clarify, there was the promise to abolish tuition fees but no promise to cancel student debt.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Shakey
Date: 25 Jul 17 - 05:40 PM

there was no promise apropos of tuition fees in the Labour manifesto. Check it out.

To clarify, there was the promise to abolish tuition fees


Well that's cleared that up