comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 6 minutes ago
The reaction to this debate on here says it all. You're trying to frame the debate to give a binary 'either JC is antisemitic or he isn't', which is far too simplistic and ignores the key issue
----------------
This is where you're going wrong. The initial comment that sparked this was calling JC anti-semetic and a terrorist. Nobody is saying the Labour party doesn't have these issues, as the report you reference states. The argument and it very much is as simple as is JC anti semetic, as has been clearly stated, and the answer is no, he isn't.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, you're wrong.
Trying reading back and see where my part of this conversation started.
Good luck with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. Sorry Winston. I am not. But we can agree to disagree on this one and keep things civil.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are wrong.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 51 seconds ago
Amazing how the anti-semitism debate in Labour has had so much air time but very little on Islamaphobia within the Tory party.
They had promised an independent inquiry but have now shelved it....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And there is a nice bit of whataboutery, right on cue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't want to defend the Tories.
Probably because cancelling an enquiry into Islamaphobia in their own party after acknowledging the issue is pretty indefensible
At least Labour are making progress to get rid of the bad apples. The Tories content to plough on without doing so speaks volumes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I want to stick to the discussion I was having, but thanks ever so for proving my point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You wanted to square off the discussion so you were immune from having to defend the stance of the Tories.
Who on earth would agree to debate like that. Like a boxer agreeing to fight with his hands behind his back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, that's it.
Big Tory fan me.
FFS.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 51 seconds ago
Amazing how the anti-semitism debate in Labour has had so much air time but very little on Islamaphobia within the Tory party.
They had promised an independent inquiry but have now shelved it....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And there is a nice bit of whataboutery, right on cue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't want to defend the Tories.
Probably because cancelling an enquiry into Islamaphobia in their own party after acknowledging the issue is pretty indefensible
At least Labour are making progress to get rid of the bad apples. The Tories content to plough on without doing so speaks volumes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I want to stick to the discussion I was having, but thanks ever so for proving my point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You wanted to square off the discussion so you were immune from having to defend the stance of the Tories.
Who on earth would agree to debate like that. Like a boxer agreeing to fight with his hands behind his back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, that's it.
Big Tory fan me.
FFS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your what we call in Scotland
A Walloper.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 51 seconds ago
Amazing how the anti-semitism debate in Labour has had so much air time but very little on Islamaphobia within the Tory party.
They had promised an independent inquiry but have now shelved it....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And there is a nice bit of whataboutery, right on cue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't want to defend the Tories.
Probably because cancelling an enquiry into Islamaphobia in their own party after acknowledging the issue is pretty indefensible
At least Labour are making progress to get rid of the bad apples. The Tories content to plough on without doing so speaks volumes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I want to stick to the discussion I was having, but thanks ever so for proving my point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You wanted to square off the discussion so you were immune from having to defend the stance of the Tories.
Who on earth would agree to debate like that. Like a boxer agreeing to fight with his hands behind his back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, that's it.
Big Tory fan me.
FFS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and a Trump supporter. Go on, deny it
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 6 minutes ago
The reaction to this debate on here says it all. You're trying to frame the debate to give a binary 'either JC is antisemitic or he isn't', which is far too simplistic and ignores the key issue
----------------
This is where you're going wrong. The initial comment that sparked this was calling JC anti-semetic and a terrorist. Nobody is saying the Labour party doesn't have these issues, as the report you reference states. The argument and it very much is as simple as is JC anti semetic, as has been clearly stated, and the answer is no, he isn't.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, you're wrong.
Trying reading back and see where my part of this conversation started.
Good luck with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. Sorry Winston. I am not. But we can agree to disagree on this one and keep things civil.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sigh. Okay Winston. Okay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, you are.
If you read back it was my comment about how some sections of the country don't regard JC as a better person than BJ.
That sparked the discussion I was having with kneerash and others.
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 51 seconds ago
Amazing how the anti-semitism debate in Labour has had so much air time but very little on Islamaphobia within the Tory party.
They had promised an independent inquiry but have now shelved it....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And there is a nice bit of whataboutery, right on cue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't want to defend the Tories.
Probably because cancelling an enquiry into Islamaphobia in their own party after acknowledging the issue is pretty indefensible
At least Labour are making progress to get rid of the bad apples. The Tories content to plough on without doing so speaks volumes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I want to stick to the discussion I was having, but thanks ever so for proving my point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You wanted to square off the discussion so you were immune from having to defend the stance of the Tories.
Who on earth would agree to debate like that. Like a boxer agreeing to fight with his hands behind his back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, that's it.
Big Tory fan me.
FFS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your what we call in Scotland
A Walloper.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, thanks for bringing the much needed maturity to the discussion.
An excellent demonstration of exactly what I was referring to just a page ago.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 25 minutes ago
I'm sure why it's worth bothering on a thread like this, with so many entrenched views, but here goes.
Apparently none of your have come across the Jewish Labour Movement's investigation into this issue? (Must have missed it in your research, right?)
Well this week they submitted their final submission. Nearly 2 years work. 70 witnesses - activists, officers, staff and even politicians who have given a sworn testimony.
130 outstanding antisemitism cases from many years, left uninvestigated by the Labour Party, which are before the NCC. That's the tip of the iceberg, and there are thousands that are unresolved.
The reaction to this debate on here says it all. You're trying to frame the debate to give a binary 'either JC is antisemitic or he isn't', which is far too simplistic and ignores the key issues.
Too many people on here and in general are so entrenched in their views that they'll dismiss this type of thing without question.
Before you defend JC on this subject, do some research and take a long hard look at yourself. Can you honestly claim to look at these things objectively?
And you know what really irritates me? That just because I have read and shared these things, some people will snap back about how bad Boris Johnson is.
As if this somehow makes me a supporter of that lying, self serving buffoon. It's all so pathetic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not a single response to this.
You see, most people come to forums to express their entrenched views. They 'research' subjects to find things that back up those views.
When there's a credible alternative view, they either dismiss it out of hand, employ whataboutery or just make things personal.
So disappointing yet so depressingly predictable.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 second ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 6 minutes ago
The reaction to this debate on here says it all. You're trying to frame the debate to give a binary 'either JC is antisemitic or he isn't', which is far too simplistic and ignores the key issue
----------------
This is where you're going wrong. The initial comment that sparked this was calling JC anti-semetic and a terrorist. Nobody is saying the Labour party doesn't have these issues, as the report you reference states. The argument and it very much is as simple as is JC anti semetic, as has been clearly stated, and the answer is no, he isn't.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, you're wrong.
Trying reading back and see where my part of this conversation started.
Good luck with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. Sorry Winston. I am not. But we can agree to disagree on this one and keep things civil.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sigh. Okay Winston. Okay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, you are.
If you read back it was my comment about how some sections of the country don't regard JC as a better person than BJ.
That sparked the discussion I was having with kneerash and others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So your discussion was about how some people don't regard JC as a better person than BJ.
And you were prepared to dive into the Labour party anti-semitism stuff but weren't prepared to defend the Tories cancelling an inquiry into Islamaphobia.
So for one side of the debate you want scrutiny and the other you want to stick to the scrutinising JC.
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 6 minutes ago
The reaction to this debate on here says it all. You're trying to frame the debate to give a binary 'either JC is antisemitic or he isn't', which is far too simplistic and ignores the key issue
----------------
This is where you're going wrong. The initial comment that sparked this was calling JC anti-semetic and a terrorist. Nobody is saying the Labour party doesn't have these issues, as the report you reference states. The argument and it very much is as simple as is JC anti semetic, as has been clearly stated, and the answer is no, he isn't.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, you're wrong.
Trying reading back and see where my part of this conversation started.
Good luck with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. Sorry Winston. I am not. But we can agree to disagree on this one and keep things civil.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sigh. Okay Winston. Okay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, you are.
If you read back it was my comment about how some sections of the country don't regard JC as a better person than BJ.
That sparked the discussion I was having with kneerash and others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said Okay. Lets leave it there shall we?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We can leave it at a conclusion you're wrong, yes.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
HB Fash (U21935)
No, I made a comment that whilst I see JC as a better person, some sections of the population don't.
You're clearly too immature to be having this discussion.
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 18 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 6 minutes ago
The reaction to this debate on here says it all. You're trying to frame the debate to give a binary 'either JC is antisemitic or he isn't', which is far too simplistic and ignores the key issue
----------------
This is where you're going wrong. The initial comment that sparked this was calling JC anti-semetic and a terrorist. Nobody is saying the Labour party doesn't have these issues, as the report you reference states. The argument and it very much is as simple as is JC anti semetic, as has been clearly stated, and the answer is no, he isn't.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, you're wrong.
Trying reading back and see where my part of this conversation started.
Good luck with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. Sorry Winston. I am not. But we can agree to disagree on this one and keep things civil.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sigh. Okay Winston. Okay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, you are.
If you read back it was my comment about how some sections of the country don't regard JC as a better person than BJ.
That sparked the discussion I was having with kneerash and others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said Okay. Lets leave it there shall we?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We can leave it at a conclusion you're wrong, yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Great.
I think this thread can be bookmarked and saved as an example of why debate on this forum is often pointless.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 51 seconds ago
Amazing how the anti-semitism debate in Labour has had so much air time but very little on Islamaphobia within the Tory party.
They had promised an independent inquiry but have now shelved it....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And there is a nice bit of whataboutery, right on cue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't want to defend the Tories.
Probably because cancelling an enquiry into Islamaphobia in their own party after acknowledging the issue is pretty indefensible
At least Labour are making progress to get rid of the bad apples. The Tories content to plough on without doing so speaks volumes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I want to stick to the discussion I was having, but thanks ever so for proving my point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You wanted to square off the discussion so you were immune from having to defend the stance of the Tories.
Who on earth would agree to debate like that. Like a boxer agreeing to fight with his hands behind his back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, that's it.
Big Tory fan me.
FFS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your what we call in Scotland
A Walloper.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, thanks for bringing the much needed maturity to the discussion.
An excellent demonstration of exactly what I was referring to just a page ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maturity, i prefer accuracy
If only you had been mature enough to take criticism of the Tories to provide balance to the statements you are making but you decided that was whataboutery
It's no surprise to see your getting short shrift for your attitude from a multitude of posters.
comment by Winston (U16525)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not a single response to this.
You see, most people come to forums to express their entrenched views. They 'research' subjects to find things that back up those views.
When there's a credible alternative view, they either dismiss it out of hand, employ whataboutery or just make things personal.
So disappointing yet so depressingly predictable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, this was partly addressed in Scruttocks long copy paste - there was a backlog of cases from the prior General Secretary which were processed within 6 months under Jennie Formby.
The preceding Gen Sec is also, coincidentally, the one who was on the recent expose on anti-semitism in the Labour party, having himself sat on those complaints.
Also, you seem to rail against people saying 'do your own research' etc but then take a single press release at face value.
Hope this helps.
HB Fash (U21935)
The discussion became about why some sections of the public regard JC as unfavourable.
It was already accepted why much of the public view BJ as unfavourable.
You're trying to make this something it isn't.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by The Duality of Van (Dijk) (U21747)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not a single response to this.
You see, most people come to forums to express their entrenched views. They 'research' subjects to find things that back up those views.
When there's a credible alternative view, they either dismiss it out of hand, employ whataboutery or just make things personal.
So disappointing yet so depressingly predictable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, this was partly addressed in Scruttocks long copy paste - there was a backlog of cases from the prior General Secretary which were processed within 6 months under Jennie Formby.
The preceding Gen Sec is also, coincidentally, the one who was on the recent expose on anti-semitism in the Labour party, having himself sat on those complaints.
Also, you seem to rail against people saying 'do your own research' etc but then take a single press release at face value.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A single press release?
Where's your evidence my comments are based on one press release? You'll no doubt show us the basis for that comment.
Good luck with that.
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 22 seconds ago
Can everyone please just agree with Winston. Please.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here you are to spoil another thread, with the help of a couple of other children.
So in conclusion, there's no discussion to be had about antisemitism in the Labour Party and the large sections of the Jewish community who are concerned about the subject should just be told that they're wrong.
Great work everyone.
Sign in if you want to comment
Labour
Page 12 of 53
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17
posted on 22/11/19
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 6 minutes ago
The reaction to this debate on here says it all. You're trying to frame the debate to give a binary 'either JC is antisemitic or he isn't', which is far too simplistic and ignores the key issue
----------------
This is where you're going wrong. The initial comment that sparked this was calling JC anti-semetic and a terrorist. Nobody is saying the Labour party doesn't have these issues, as the report you reference states. The argument and it very much is as simple as is JC anti semetic, as has been clearly stated, and the answer is no, he isn't.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, you're wrong.
Trying reading back and see where my part of this conversation started.
Good luck with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. Sorry Winston. I am not. But we can agree to disagree on this one and keep things civil.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are wrong.
posted on 22/11/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 22/11/19
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 51 seconds ago
Amazing how the anti-semitism debate in Labour has had so much air time but very little on Islamaphobia within the Tory party.
They had promised an independent inquiry but have now shelved it....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And there is a nice bit of whataboutery, right on cue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't want to defend the Tories.
Probably because cancelling an enquiry into Islamaphobia in their own party after acknowledging the issue is pretty indefensible
At least Labour are making progress to get rid of the bad apples. The Tories content to plough on without doing so speaks volumes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I want to stick to the discussion I was having, but thanks ever so for proving my point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You wanted to square off the discussion so you were immune from having to defend the stance of the Tories.
Who on earth would agree to debate like that. Like a boxer agreeing to fight with his hands behind his back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, that's it.
Big Tory fan me.
FFS.
posted on 22/11/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 22/11/19
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 51 seconds ago
Amazing how the anti-semitism debate in Labour has had so much air time but very little on Islamaphobia within the Tory party.
They had promised an independent inquiry but have now shelved it....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And there is a nice bit of whataboutery, right on cue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't want to defend the Tories.
Probably because cancelling an enquiry into Islamaphobia in their own party after acknowledging the issue is pretty indefensible
At least Labour are making progress to get rid of the bad apples. The Tories content to plough on without doing so speaks volumes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I want to stick to the discussion I was having, but thanks ever so for proving my point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You wanted to square off the discussion so you were immune from having to defend the stance of the Tories.
Who on earth would agree to debate like that. Like a boxer agreeing to fight with his hands behind his back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, that's it.
Big Tory fan me.
FFS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your what we call in Scotland
A Walloper.
posted on 22/11/19
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 51 seconds ago
Amazing how the anti-semitism debate in Labour has had so much air time but very little on Islamaphobia within the Tory party.
They had promised an independent inquiry but have now shelved it....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And there is a nice bit of whataboutery, right on cue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't want to defend the Tories.
Probably because cancelling an enquiry into Islamaphobia in their own party after acknowledging the issue is pretty indefensible
At least Labour are making progress to get rid of the bad apples. The Tories content to plough on without doing so speaks volumes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I want to stick to the discussion I was having, but thanks ever so for proving my point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You wanted to square off the discussion so you were immune from having to defend the stance of the Tories.
Who on earth would agree to debate like that. Like a boxer agreeing to fight with his hands behind his back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, that's it.
Big Tory fan me.
FFS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and a Trump supporter. Go on, deny it
posted on 22/11/19
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 6 minutes ago
The reaction to this debate on here says it all. You're trying to frame the debate to give a binary 'either JC is antisemitic or he isn't', which is far too simplistic and ignores the key issue
----------------
This is where you're going wrong. The initial comment that sparked this was calling JC anti-semetic and a terrorist. Nobody is saying the Labour party doesn't have these issues, as the report you reference states. The argument and it very much is as simple as is JC anti semetic, as has been clearly stated, and the answer is no, he isn't.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, you're wrong.
Trying reading back and see where my part of this conversation started.
Good luck with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. Sorry Winston. I am not. But we can agree to disagree on this one and keep things civil.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sigh. Okay Winston. Okay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, you are.
If you read back it was my comment about how some sections of the country don't regard JC as a better person than BJ.
That sparked the discussion I was having with kneerash and others.
posted on 22/11/19
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 51 seconds ago
Amazing how the anti-semitism debate in Labour has had so much air time but very little on Islamaphobia within the Tory party.
They had promised an independent inquiry but have now shelved it....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And there is a nice bit of whataboutery, right on cue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't want to defend the Tories.
Probably because cancelling an enquiry into Islamaphobia in their own party after acknowledging the issue is pretty indefensible
At least Labour are making progress to get rid of the bad apples. The Tories content to plough on without doing so speaks volumes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I want to stick to the discussion I was having, but thanks ever so for proving my point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You wanted to square off the discussion so you were immune from having to defend the stance of the Tories.
Who on earth would agree to debate like that. Like a boxer agreeing to fight with his hands behind his back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, that's it.
Big Tory fan me.
FFS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your what we call in Scotland
A Walloper.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, thanks for bringing the much needed maturity to the discussion.
An excellent demonstration of exactly what I was referring to just a page ago.
posted on 22/11/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 22/11/19
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 25 minutes ago
I'm sure why it's worth bothering on a thread like this, with so many entrenched views, but here goes.
Apparently none of your have come across the Jewish Labour Movement's investigation into this issue? (Must have missed it in your research, right?)
Well this week they submitted their final submission. Nearly 2 years work. 70 witnesses - activists, officers, staff and even politicians who have given a sworn testimony.
130 outstanding antisemitism cases from many years, left uninvestigated by the Labour Party, which are before the NCC. That's the tip of the iceberg, and there are thousands that are unresolved.
The reaction to this debate on here says it all. You're trying to frame the debate to give a binary 'either JC is antisemitic or he isn't', which is far too simplistic and ignores the key issues.
Too many people on here and in general are so entrenched in their views that they'll dismiss this type of thing without question.
Before you defend JC on this subject, do some research and take a long hard look at yourself. Can you honestly claim to look at these things objectively?
And you know what really irritates me? That just because I have read and shared these things, some people will snap back about how bad Boris Johnson is.
As if this somehow makes me a supporter of that lying, self serving buffoon. It's all so pathetic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not a single response to this.
You see, most people come to forums to express their entrenched views. They 'research' subjects to find things that back up those views.
When there's a credible alternative view, they either dismiss it out of hand, employ whataboutery or just make things personal.
So disappointing yet so depressingly predictable.
posted on 22/11/19
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 second ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 6 minutes ago
The reaction to this debate on here says it all. You're trying to frame the debate to give a binary 'either JC is antisemitic or he isn't', which is far too simplistic and ignores the key issue
----------------
This is where you're going wrong. The initial comment that sparked this was calling JC anti-semetic and a terrorist. Nobody is saying the Labour party doesn't have these issues, as the report you reference states. The argument and it very much is as simple as is JC anti semetic, as has been clearly stated, and the answer is no, he isn't.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, you're wrong.
Trying reading back and see where my part of this conversation started.
Good luck with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. Sorry Winston. I am not. But we can agree to disagree on this one and keep things civil.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sigh. Okay Winston. Okay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, you are.
If you read back it was my comment about how some sections of the country don't regard JC as a better person than BJ.
That sparked the discussion I was having with kneerash and others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So your discussion was about how some people don't regard JC as a better person than BJ.
And you were prepared to dive into the Labour party anti-semitism stuff but weren't prepared to defend the Tories cancelling an inquiry into Islamaphobia.
So for one side of the debate you want scrutiny and the other you want to stick to the scrutinising JC.
posted on 22/11/19
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 6 minutes ago
The reaction to this debate on here says it all. You're trying to frame the debate to give a binary 'either JC is antisemitic or he isn't', which is far too simplistic and ignores the key issue
----------------
This is where you're going wrong. The initial comment that sparked this was calling JC anti-semetic and a terrorist. Nobody is saying the Labour party doesn't have these issues, as the report you reference states. The argument and it very much is as simple as is JC anti semetic, as has been clearly stated, and the answer is no, he isn't.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, you're wrong.
Trying reading back and see where my part of this conversation started.
Good luck with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. Sorry Winston. I am not. But we can agree to disagree on this one and keep things civil.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sigh. Okay Winston. Okay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, you are.
If you read back it was my comment about how some sections of the country don't regard JC as a better person than BJ.
That sparked the discussion I was having with kneerash and others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said Okay. Lets leave it there shall we?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We can leave it at a conclusion you're wrong, yes.
posted on 22/11/19
posted on 22/11/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 22/11/19
HB Fash (U21935)
No, I made a comment that whilst I see JC as a better person, some sections of the population don't.
You're clearly too immature to be having this discussion.
posted on 22/11/19
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 18 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 6 minutes ago
The reaction to this debate on here says it all. You're trying to frame the debate to give a binary 'either JC is antisemitic or he isn't', which is far too simplistic and ignores the key issue
----------------
This is where you're going wrong. The initial comment that sparked this was calling JC anti-semetic and a terrorist. Nobody is saying the Labour party doesn't have these issues, as the report you reference states. The argument and it very much is as simple as is JC anti semetic, as has been clearly stated, and the answer is no, he isn't.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, you're wrong.
Trying reading back and see where my part of this conversation started.
Good luck with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. Sorry Winston. I am not. But we can agree to disagree on this one and keep things civil.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sigh. Okay Winston. Okay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, you are.
If you read back it was my comment about how some sections of the country don't regard JC as a better person than BJ.
That sparked the discussion I was having with kneerash and others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said Okay. Lets leave it there shall we?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We can leave it at a conclusion you're wrong, yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Great.
posted on 22/11/19
I think this thread can be bookmarked and saved as an example of why debate on this forum is often pointless.
posted on 22/11/19
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 24 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 51 seconds ago
Amazing how the anti-semitism debate in Labour has had so much air time but very little on Islamaphobia within the Tory party.
They had promised an independent inquiry but have now shelved it....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And there is a nice bit of whataboutery, right on cue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you don't want to defend the Tories.
Probably because cancelling an enquiry into Islamaphobia in their own party after acknowledging the issue is pretty indefensible
At least Labour are making progress to get rid of the bad apples. The Tories content to plough on without doing so speaks volumes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I want to stick to the discussion I was having, but thanks ever so for proving my point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You wanted to square off the discussion so you were immune from having to defend the stance of the Tories.
Who on earth would agree to debate like that. Like a boxer agreeing to fight with his hands behind his back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, that's it.
Big Tory fan me.
FFS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your what we call in Scotland
A Walloper.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, thanks for bringing the much needed maturity to the discussion.
An excellent demonstration of exactly what I was referring to just a page ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maturity, i prefer accuracy
If only you had been mature enough to take criticism of the Tories to provide balance to the statements you are making but you decided that was whataboutery
It's no surprise to see your getting short shrift for your attitude from a multitude of posters.
posted on 22/11/19
"Is the public stupid? "
posted on 22/11/19
comment by Winston (U16525)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not a single response to this.
You see, most people come to forums to express their entrenched views. They 'research' subjects to find things that back up those views.
When there's a credible alternative view, they either dismiss it out of hand, employ whataboutery or just make things personal.
So disappointing yet so depressingly predictable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, this was partly addressed in Scruttocks long copy paste - there was a backlog of cases from the prior General Secretary which were processed within 6 months under Jennie Formby.
The preceding Gen Sec is also, coincidentally, the one who was on the recent expose on anti-semitism in the Labour party, having himself sat on those complaints.
Also, you seem to rail against people saying 'do your own research' etc but then take a single press release at face value.
Hope this helps.
posted on 22/11/19
HB Fash (U21935)
The discussion became about why some sections of the public regard JC as unfavourable.
It was already accepted why much of the public view BJ as unfavourable.
You're trying to make this something it isn't.
posted on 22/11/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 22/11/19
comment by The Duality of Van (Dijk) (U21747)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not a single response to this.
You see, most people come to forums to express their entrenched views. They 'research' subjects to find things that back up those views.
When there's a credible alternative view, they either dismiss it out of hand, employ whataboutery or just make things personal.
So disappointing yet so depressingly predictable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, this was partly addressed in Scruttocks long copy paste - there was a backlog of cases from the prior General Secretary which were processed within 6 months under Jennie Formby.
The preceding Gen Sec is also, coincidentally, the one who was on the recent expose on anti-semitism in the Labour party, having himself sat on those complaints.
Also, you seem to rail against people saying 'do your own research' etc but then take a single press release at face value.
Hope this helps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A single press release?
Where's your evidence my comments are based on one press release? You'll no doubt show us the basis for that comment.
Good luck with that.
posted on 22/11/19
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 22 seconds ago
Can everyone please just agree with Winston. Please.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here you are to spoil another thread, with the help of a couple of other children.
posted on 22/11/19
So in conclusion, there's no discussion to be had about antisemitism in the Labour Party and the large sections of the Jewish community who are concerned about the subject should just be told that they're wrong.
Great work everyone.
Page 12 of 53
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17