|
|
Post by see2 on Feb 14, 2024 8:51:15 GMT
Angela endorses the Rochdale candidate. She may have changed her mind now. She's probably shagged him. Is what she has between her legs that much on you mind? Time for you to grow up, although I think that advice comes too late for you. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Feb 14, 2024 8:54:41 GMT
She's probably shagged him. Is there any she hasn't? Have you still got her picture pinned up on your bathroom door? |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 14, 2024 8:57:37 GMT
Have you still got her picture pinned up on your bathroom door? Never had one but we do have very many bog rolls addorned with the slappers face... |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 14, 2024 9:01:24 GMT
Three silly posts that expose your typical Rightist approach of denigration before debate. Very childish. Just to help you out c2 as you must be running low on this item...
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Feb 14, 2024 9:04:02 GMT
You being quite naive on this one. It is an antisemtic conspiracy because (a) it seeks to blame the victim and thus justify the crime (b) it says Jewish people are so evil that it is plausible that they would do something like this. It is from the same place as Holocaust denial. I mean come on, I've heard people trot out this conspiracy on radio phone ins and pretend they are not antisemitic, then when they are challenged over the raping of women and children they say that never happened and it is IDF lies. They don't give a damn about fellow Muslims, as demonstrated by no Muslim countries wanting Palestinian refugees. I don't see Chinese restaurants being attacked over the persecution of the Uyghur people. Muslims obsess over Israel because of long-standing religious reasons, and the far-lefties hate Israel because they see Jews as a symbol of capitalism. It really is that simple. It turns on what is meant by 'they'. If the word they refers to Netanyahu and co-conspirators, then the remarks are not antisemitic. If it refers to Israelis generally, then they are.
Given the reference to 'innocent victims', I'd guess the former to be more likely. That said, we can't have prospective MPs accusing the leaders of an ally country of conspiracy to murder, and why Starmer didn't act immediately is, in my opinion, a poor reflection on his character.
What should Starmer have done "immediately"? |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Feb 14, 2024 9:07:27 GMT
Whether you agree with his analysis or not is hardly the point. He suggests that Netanyahu is a pretty brutal political operator and may have calculated that the cost of allowing the Hamas attack was worth the wider benefits for the country and for his own political career. Whether you think that supposition is credible or not is for you to decide. Surely though it only becomes anti semitic if your logic is that jewish people and politicians are more likely than people and politicians of other faith to make such a brutal calculation and hence that calculation was made because Netanyahu is jewish rather than because Netanyahu is a pretty horrbile human being who happens to be jewish. You being quite naive on this one. It is an antisemtic conspiracy because (a) it seeks to blame the victim and thus justify the crime (b) it says Jewish people are so evil that it is plausible that they would do something like this. It is from the same place as Holocaust denial. I mean come on, I've heard people trot out this conspiracy on radio phone ins and pretend they are not antisemitic, then when they are challenged over the raping of women and children they say that never happened and it is IDF lies. They don't give a damn about fellow Muslims, as demonstrated by no Muslim countries wanting Palestinian refugees. I don't see Chinese restaurants being attacked over the persecution of the Uyghur people. Muslims obsess over Israel because of long-standing religious reasons, and the far-lefties hate Israel because they see Jews as a symbol of capitalism. It really is that simple. Well indeed, they've said so enough times:
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Feb 14, 2024 9:07:31 GMT
Three silly posts that expose your typical Rightist approach of denigration before debate. Very childish. Just to help you out c2 as you must be running low on this item...
More silly childish nonsense from a Righty, it all helps to prove that Righties are not a full shilling, LOL silly boy. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Feb 14, 2024 9:09:43 GMT
You being quite naive on this one. It is an antisemtic conspiracy because (a) it seeks to blame the victim and thus justify the crime (b) it says Jewish people are so evil that it is plausible that they would do something like this. It is from the same place as Holocaust denial. I mean come on, I've heard people trot out this conspiracy on radio phone ins and pretend they are not antisemitic, then when they are challenged over the raping of women and children they say that never happened and it is IDF lies. They don't give a damn about fellow Muslims, as demonstrated by no Muslim countries wanting Palestinian refugees. I don't see Chinese restaurants being attacked over the persecution of the Uyghur people. Muslims obsess over Israel because of long-standing religious reasons, and the far-lefties hate Israel because they see Jews as a symbol of capitalism. It really is that simple. Well indeed, they've said so enough times:
More proof that Righties are not a full shilling, well done. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Feb 14, 2024 9:15:34 GMT
Whether you agree with his analysis or not is hardly the point. He suggests that Netanyahu is a pretty brutal political operator and may have calculated that the cost of allowing the Hamas attack was worth the wider benefits for the country and for his own political career. Whether you think that supposition is credible or not is for you to decide. Surely though it only becomes anti semitic if your logic is that jewish people and politicians are more likely than people and politicians of other faith to make such a brutal calculation and hence that calculation was made because Netanyahu is jewish rather than because Netanyahu is a pretty horrbile human being who happens to be jewish. You being quite naive on this one. It is an antisemtic conspiracy because (a) it seeks to blame the victim and thus justify the crime (b) it says Jewish people are so evil that it is plausible that they would do something like this. It is from the same place as Holocaust denial. I mean come on, I've heard people trot out this conspiracy on radio phone ins and pretend they are not antisemitic, then when they are challenged over the raping of women and children they say that never happened and it is IDF lies. They don't give a damn about fellow Muslims, as demonstrated by no Muslim countries wanting Palestinian refugees. I don't see Chinese restaurants being attacked over the persecution of the Uyghur people. Muslims obsess over Israel because of long-standing religious reasons, and the far-lefties hate Israel because they see Jews as a symbol of capitalism. It really is that simple. Your first paragraph really is nonsense, Dave. In respect of a) clearly the victims of the dreadful events in Israel were entirely innocent going about their daily lives. Nowhere have I remotely suggested anything else.. Nor would I ever justify rape and murder of innocent civilians. Your point is without any basis whatsoever. In respect of b) I made it very clear that in my view some human beings are "evil" and capable of dreadful acts and jewish people are just human beings exactly the same as those from other religions. you may well find the suggestion that it is implausible that a well funded highly skilled very alert very well connected intelligence service could miss such a large attack in the planning inaccurate, you are entitled to hold that opinion, I suspect you are wrong but it is not remotely antisemetic. That is not to say of course that some people who are antisemetic may hold that opinion as well. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Feb 14, 2024 9:18:18 GMT
It turns on what is meant by 'they'. If the word they refers to Netanyahu and co-conspirators, then the remarks are not antisemitic. If it refers to Israelis generally, then they are.
Given the reference to 'innocent victims', I'd guess the former to be more likely. That said, we can't have prospective MPs accusing the leaders of an ally country of conspiracy to murder, and why Starmer didn't act immediately is, in my opinion, a poor reflection on his character.
I think most people by now have got a good read on his character. He flows with the blow and has no solid conviction. He's not leader material, not be a long shot. Then again, neither is Rishi leader material. They're both two cheeks of the same arse. You really should try to be more objective with your political claims. You might at least wait for his manifesto, that might help you to see beyond the streams of insults and propaganda thrown at him. Some of which might be more than just political bias. |
|
|
|
Post by Hutchyns on Feb 14, 2024 10:09:23 GMT
see2
I think we'd be heading down a slippery slope on that one. The job of an MP is to represent his constituents, and those constituents generally elect the person who most adequately reflects the opinion of the area. Think back to how close Jeremy Corbyn came to being our Prime Minister. Under PM Corbyn, with Russia as an ally, doesn't it run against our democratic tradition, as well as our long upheld principles of freedom of expression, to prohibit all Conservative candidates at an election from accusing Putin of conspiring in murder ?
Rishi Sunak represents a North Yorkshire constituency where I'd estimate 95% of his constituents (possibly more) are categorically certain that a lad wearing a dress is still a lad. But Sunak was apparently wrong to represent the view of his constituents on the subject .... on the strength that there was one, possibly two people in the public gallery who hold a different view. Sunak's loyalty should be to his constituents and not to ditch them and pay lip service to trendy transgender dogma ...... but he was castigated for not falling into line with the transgenderists.
The Rochdale by-election is being held to ascertain, via the ballot box, the view of the people of the town. They must be allowed to elect the person who best represents their views and opinions. The electorate might want us to have new or different allies, they might want to express dissatisfaction with existing allies .... yet if we prevent any candidate from representing those views, we undermine the very fundamentals, and make a travesty of our democratic system.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Feb 14, 2024 10:15:20 GMT
UK Labour Party's lead falls to lowest since June 2023 - Savanta poll..... LONDON (Reuters) - Labour's lead over Britain's Conservatives has fallen 7 percentage points to its lowest since June 2023, a Savanta poll showed on Wednesday, after the opposition party scrapped a green spending target and struggled with anti-Semitism allegations. Polls over the past year have consistently shown Labour on course for victory in this year's national election following 14 years under the Conservatives led by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Feb 14, 2024 10:56:46 GMT
Labour antisemitism row deepens as third politician 'spoken to' over meeting...
It's all going horribly wrong...  |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Feb 14, 2024 11:12:36 GMT
If you bugged the rooms of Labour MPs by the end of the week they would be down to about 97 MPs
|
|
|
|
Post by witchfinder on Feb 14, 2024 11:30:37 GMT
TALK ABOUT BEEN OVER SENSETIVE The very last Labour Conference under Jeremy Corbyn's leadership ended with hundreds of far Left members cheering and waving Palestinian flags, which drew much criticism from the Tory press and from people on the Right of politics. It was said at the time that Palestine is not an issue on the doorsteps of Britain. TODAY, those same people who said "Palestine is not an issue" are attempting to infer that it is, and that the events in Rochdale will have a major impact on Labour support. The biggest issues on the doorsteps of Britain in 2024 are (1) The Economy (2) The NHS (3) Immigration (4) The Environment (5) Housing, others include Education, Brexit, Crime and Defence. OVER SENSETIVE In 2009 the much respected Jewish Labour MP Gerald Kaufman made one of the greatest speeches ever given in The House Of Commons, in that speech Mr Kaufman said this about a spokesman for the Israeli Army who answered questions about the conduct of the IDF in Gazza "IT WAS THE REPLY OF A N.A.Z.I" (the boards wont allow the word) Lets make that clear: In 2009 in the House Of Commons, a prominent, respected Labour MP refered to an Israeli Army spokesperson as "A very bad person". ( N.a.z.i ) Today, he would be hung, drawn and quartered, expelled, suspended, attacked by the right wing press, labelled an Anti Semite. WE are too sensetive over the Jewish - Palestine dispute, and in the grand scheme of things, no one really cares about Israel or Palestine. Watch the video AND LEARN >>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWe8gRolEJk |
|
