| Oh Dear Labour on 13:40 - Jul 23 with 3408 views | Darth_Koont |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:36 - Jul 23 by GlasgowBlue |
I already linked the Lansman piece saying that most cases had nothing to do with conflation between Israel and Palestine.
It’s an opinion piece from somebody not in the Labour Party. And one you agree with, hence you’ve linked it.
The EHRC will be more than one man’s opinion. |
The real cases are real cases. Which are what reach the National Executive. No-one disputes that. Or that these members and opinions aren't welcome in the party.
I'll repeat: where are the inaccuracies in how Michael Rosen describes the narrative that goes far beyond that? |  |
|  |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:44 - Jul 23 with 3403 views | giant_stow |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:25 - Jul 22 by Darth_Koont |
No. What's utterly sick about it is that it appears to be ignoring primary source evidence in the Labour Leaks document.
I haven't seen anyone on here address that primary source evidence either. Which is a pretty similar approach to the government's non-investigation of Russian interference i.e. Don't look for evidence that incriminates you. |
A genuine attempt to understand where you’re coming from: which bits of the leaked report do you find most damning specifically? |  |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:45 - Jul 23 with 3398 views | lowhouseblue |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:15 - Jul 23 by Darth_Koont |
It's primary source evidence. And far more than you've ever produced to promote your version.
Your utter reliance on a narrative rather than evidence (for or against) is shoddy and dishonest. |
it's not primary source material. it's selective, biased, editorialised and is a pure slash and burn tactic as the corbynite's were pushed out the door. jeez you really are determined to go down with the ship. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:54 - Jul 23 with 3377 views | Darth_Koont |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:44 - Jul 23 by giant_stow |
A genuine attempt to understand where you’re coming from: which bits of the leaked report do you find most damning specifically? |
Why don't you tell me what isn't damning?
I've linked to coverage of it on several occasions and you can even find it yourself if you want. | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:55 - Jul 23 with 3374 views | Darth_Koont |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:45 - Jul 23 by lowhouseblue |
it's not primary source material. it's selective, biased, editorialised and is a pure slash and burn tactic as the corbynite's were pushed out the door. jeez you really are determined to go down with the ship. |
You're delusional.
The primary source evidence is intact and hasn't been denied. | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:57 - Jul 23 with 3360 views | hampstead_blue |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:54 - Jul 23 by Darth_Koont |
Why don't you tell me what isn't damning?
I've linked to coverage of it on several occasions and you can even find it yourself if you want. |
Help us all and if you'd be so kind and share once more.
I'd like to understand, in a peaceful and not argumentative manner, why people support JC and his group so vehemently.
They are nasty people and only have a voice because of our tolerance and democracy.
Help us understand your view please. |  |
| Assumption is to make an ass out of you and me.
Those who assume they know you, when they don't are just guessing.
Those who assume and insist they know are daft and in denial.
Those who assume, insist, and deny the truth are plain stupid.
Those who assume, insist, deny the truth and tell YOU they know you (when they don't) have an IQ in the range of 35-49.
| | Poll: | Best Blackpool goal |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:58 - Jul 23 with 3356 views | giant_stow |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:54 - Jul 23 by Darth_Koont |
Why don't you tell me what isn't damning?
I've linked to coverage of it on several occasions and you can even find it yourself if you want. |
Ah, i asked in a genuine effort to know what *you* find so bad!
This wasn't some sort of trick question - i really have had enough to sqabbling with you (its no fun), so no worries, leave it. | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 14:06 - Jul 23 with 3334 views | Darth_Koont |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:58 - Jul 23 by giant_stow |
Ah, i asked in a genuine effort to know what *you* find so bad!
This wasn't some sort of trick question - i really have had enough to sqabbling with you (its no fun), so no worries, leave it. |
And I’m tired of having to repeat myself and do your and others’ work for you. And then you ignore it anyway.
You’ve known about this since the middle of April FFS. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Oh Dear Labour on 17:18 - Jul 23 with 3269 views | Ryorry |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:01 - Jul 23 by Darth_Koont |
Who is saying there aren’t many cases of antisemitism in the Labour Party? And nasty old-fashioned Jew hate at that. Those are the cases that get to Lansman and the others on the National Executive. I agree with him.
But the narrative as you know is not hundreds of cases as you’d expect in any organization with half a million members. The narrative is tens of thousands of cases. Pushed by you and others as the scale of antisemitism in the Labour Party, when they are Labour Party members (which they frequently aren’t) these are predominantly anti-Israel criticisms because that’s what the ethnic-religious nationalist extremists like Collier and Gnasher etc. really care about. That’s what the Campaign Against Antisemitism was set up to counter following Gaza in 2014.
Point out any factual inaccuracies in this or Rosen’s summary if you can. |
You continue to be disappointingly disingenuous, including your reply directly to me earlier that cited Michael Rosen (what he said there was only stating part of the problem). "Hundreds of cases as you’d expect in any organization with half a million members", even if it was only that number (which I doubt), is something I *wouldn't* expect in any organisation, esp the Labour Party which historically had always been the party that championed minorities & disadvantaged people.
That the Labour party then went on to persecute those who called the AS out is then another level of shocking discrimination and abuse. Did you see Sam Matthews with tears in his eyes as he described his horrendous experiences & those of the other 6 whistleblowers in last night's BBC1 News interview?
For JC to react by shrugging his shoulders & refusing to apologise is absolutely scandalous & summarises exactly why millions of people thought him to be unfit to be leader of the opposition and refused to vote for him (which you swerved commenting on in your reply to me on p1 of this thread btw). [Post edited 23 Jul 2020 17:22]
|  |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 17:30 - Jul 23 with 3256 views | Darth_Koont |
| Oh Dear Labour on 17:18 - Jul 23 by Ryorry |
You continue to be disappointingly disingenuous, including your reply directly to me earlier that cited Michael Rosen (what he said there was only stating part of the problem). "Hundreds of cases as you’d expect in any organization with half a million members", even if it was only that number (which I doubt), is something I *wouldn't* expect in any organisation, esp the Labour Party which historically had always been the party that championed minorities & disadvantaged people.
That the Labour party then went on to persecute those who called the AS out is then another level of shocking discrimination and abuse. Did you see Sam Matthews with tears in his eyes as he described his horrendous experiences & those of the other 6 whistleblowers in last night's BBC1 News interview?
For JC to react by shrugging his shoulders & refusing to apologise is absolutely scandalous & summarises exactly why millions of people thought him to be unfit to be leader of the opposition and refused to vote for him (which you swerved commenting on in your reply to me on p1 of this thread btw). [Post edited 23 Jul 2020 17:22]
|
Yes, and I know that side of the story. I'm balancing it with the other side of the story, and further primary source evidence (including his own e-mails) that puts Matthews' testimony into doubt.
I'm disappointed in people who choose a narrative rather than accept there's a truer, more objective story here. Yes, with genuine antisemitism cases in the Labour Party but also a politically motivated campaign to exaggerate them and embarrass the leadership.
There's no point going round in circles on this. You think Corbyn is guilty and should apologise, I think you're wrong and need some actual evidence. | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 17:58 - Jul 23 with 3220 views | GaryCooper |
| Oh Dear Labour on 12:11 - Jul 22 by Darth_Koont |
I agree that it's disturbing. Probably not for the same reasons as you. |
Those receiving the payments from the Labour party acquired full insurance against loss, JC and his extremists could not gain such insurance. That is pretty telling.
The sooner you and your compatriots decide the Labour party is no longer a vehicle of choice for your brand, the sooner the Labour party can represent real achievable change, KS has nurtured green shoots. |  | | |
| Oh Dear Labour on 18:06 - Jul 23 with 3210 views | Darth_Koont |
| Oh Dear Labour on 17:58 - Jul 23 by GaryCooper |
Those receiving the payments from the Labour party acquired full insurance against loss, JC and his extremists could not gain such insurance. That is pretty telling.
The sooner you and your compatriots decide the Labour party is no longer a vehicle of choice for your brand, the sooner the Labour party can represent real achievable change, KS has nurtured green shoots. |
Cheers, Gary.
I'll file that appropriately. | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 18:06 - Jul 23 with 3211 views | Ryorry |
| Oh Dear Labour on 17:30 - Jul 23 by Darth_Koont |
Yes, and I know that side of the story. I'm balancing it with the other side of the story, and further primary source evidence (including his own e-mails) that puts Matthews' testimony into doubt.
I'm disappointed in people who choose a narrative rather than accept there's a truer, more objective story here. Yes, with genuine antisemitism cases in the Labour Party but also a politically motivated campaign to exaggerate them and embarrass the leadership.
There's no point going round in circles on this. You think Corbyn is guilty and should apologise, I think you're wrong and need some actual evidence. |
Unfortunately you keep ignoring "actual evidence" such as the personal experiences of Matthews & his 6 whistleblowing colleagues - related straight from themselves in interview.
Can't get much more primary source than that. If this were a driving test you'd fail on the basis of your persistent blind spot & consequent crashing on reverses & the 3-point turn. | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 18:18 - Jul 23 with 3194 views | lowhouseblue |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:55 - Jul 23 by Darth_Koont |
You're delusional.
The primary source evidence is intact and hasn't been denied. |
absolute nonsense. it doesn't prove in any way what you want it to prove. it doesn't prove that anyone in the labour party used the handling of disciplinary matters to undermine corbyn. there is zero evidence of that and it is the personal slant of the corbynite who cobbled it together. that there were people in the labour party admin who realised that corbyn was a disaster is undoubtedly true and to their credit. it doesn't prove that they misused the disciplinary process. so nonsense - absolute nonsense.
what it is proven beyond question is the huge number of anti-semitism complaints and the utter failure under corbyn's leadership - pre-2018 and post-2018 - to tackle it. let's see what the ehrc says. i suspect a cobbled together report - the one you constantly champion - which effectively blames those making complaints about anti-semitism for corbyn's failure won't impress them much. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 18:25 - Jul 23 with 3187 views | Darth_Koont |
| Oh Dear Labour on 18:06 - Jul 23 by Ryorry |
Unfortunately you keep ignoring "actual evidence" such as the personal experiences of Matthews & his 6 whistleblowing colleagues - related straight from themselves in interview.
Can't get much more primary source than that. If this were a driving test you'd fail on the basis of your persistent blind spot & consequent crashing on reverses & the 3-point turn. |
Testimony that Schneider contradicts, which the complaints handling data contradicts and, most importantly, which Matthews' and others' e-mails contradict.
So why is his Panorama testimony your definitive version of events? | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 18:34 - Jul 23 with 3177 views | Darth_Koont |
| Oh Dear Labour on 18:18 - Jul 23 by lowhouseblue |
absolute nonsense. it doesn't prove in any way what you want it to prove. it doesn't prove that anyone in the labour party used the handling of disciplinary matters to undermine corbyn. there is zero evidence of that and it is the personal slant of the corbynite who cobbled it together. that there were people in the labour party admin who realised that corbyn was a disaster is undoubtedly true and to their credit. it doesn't prove that they misused the disciplinary process. so nonsense - absolute nonsense.
what it is proven beyond question is the huge number of anti-semitism complaints and the utter failure under corbyn's leadership - pre-2018 and post-2018 - to tackle it. let's see what the ehrc says. i suspect a cobbled together report - the one you constantly champion - which effectively blames those making complaints about anti-semitism for corbyn's failure won't impress them much. |
It proves that the complaints process was a mess under McNicol and Matthews' time. And that all this narrative of Corbyn not getting to grips with it was nonsense.
Whether that was sheer incompetence on Matthews' part, he and the complaints team were just spending too much of their time "hunting Trots" or this really was sabotage to embarrass the leadership isn't immediately clear. But given how much the HQ were working against the leadership in all other areas then I think there's certainly a case to answer.
I know you don't like it but this report was more detailed and with more primary source evidence than the vast majority of your accusations and counter-claims. As you'd know if you've read it. So unless you've got better facts then you'll just have to deal with it. | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 19:24 - Jul 23 with 3144 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Oh Dear Labour on 13:45 - Jul 23 by lowhouseblue |
it's not primary source material. it's selective, biased, editorialised and is a pure slash and burn tactic as the corbynite's were pushed out the door. jeez you really are determined to go down with the ship. |
I’m not really sure what DK’s end game is with this or what he’s trying to achieve.
When the subject of antisemitism is the a Labour Party started to be discussed more widely on here, DK was one of a number of people who tried to shout it down as “smears”.
When I highlighted case after case of Labour members being caught posting antisemitic material online or complaints from a Jewish members being abused at CLP meeting, a few of those shouting “smear” fell by the wayside, and we were left with a more hardcore group of posters who then called into question my motives for raising the subject. I was accused of political point scoring (which is odd, as nobody accuses people from the left on here who highlight Tory Islamophobia of political point scoring).
Even after I revealed that this was an issue that affected me greatly as I am of a Jewish descent and my wife’s father was born Jewish, this grouping started to ask why I’d never mentioned it before (I had, as far back as 2010 as Ryorry confirmed a few occasions, and to Phil when discussing a thread on Gilad Atzmon circa 2012) or “what are your views on Palestine”?
DK would usually reply with “I don’t trust or believe you” during this period when I discussed my family background.
When the accusations of “smear” became untenable the group got smaller, but DK hung in there. Antisemitism in the Labour Party did exist (we got there eventually) but it was a small pocket of members and the majority of those who were being accused of antisemitism were lifelong anti racists and people were conflating legitimate criticism of Israel with antisemitism.
And anyway, I don’t accept the IHRA definition of antisemitism.
Even worse, the accusations of antisemitism were being organised by the Israeli lobby. British Jews were incapable of deciding for themselves that they were the victims of antisemitism. They were being led by the Israel lobby.
DK started defending the likes of Chris Williamson and Pete Willsman, going as far as to repeat the accusation made by the latter that the 68 Rabbis who had written an open letter to the Labour Party about antisemitism had done so at the behest of the Israeli government.
It was no longer a smear, it was a conspiracy. He would then attempt explain why it wasn’t antisemitic to defend an antisemite who made an antisemitic statement whilst agreeing with that antisemitic statement.
Eventually we had the EHRC launch an investigation. The merry band of men were now just DK. But the EHRC were comprised.
Those giving evidence, the BoD, JLM etc were pro Israel stooges with an agenda. People like Luciana editorialised the antisemitic abuse they received.”I don’t trust her”.
Hope Not Hate. Compromised. The Panorama documentary. Comprised. John Ware. Compromised. The whistleblowers. Compromised. And look here, I’ll throw in a token Jew to support my view that the above are all acting in bad faith in order to remove Jeremy Corbyn because he is a staunch advocate of a Palestinian rights and a two state solution.
Rather embarrassing that during the Labour Leadership election the group who supposedly wanted rid of Corbyn because he is a staunch advocate of a Palestinian rights and a two state solution threw their weight behind Lisa Nandy who is, umm, the Chair of Labour Friends of Palestine. Yeah but no but yeah but no.
Anyway. Here we are and I’m confused as hell what DK believes.
Me? Well I’ve been consistent from day one.
1. There has always been a fringe element on the left who engaged in antisemtism. It existed in the Labour Party before Jeremy Corbyn was elected leader.
2. Jeremy Corbyn had a shameful history of associating with Holocaust deniers, blood libellers and antisemites. “Well he never told me he was a Holocaust denier” chuckle.
3. The election of Jeremy Corbyn was a catalyst for a high number of people who held antisemitic views to join Labour, who had previously spent their political lives on the fringes.
4. Labour has/had a massive issue with antisemitism.
5. Jeremy Corbyn was either unable or unwilling to address the antisemitism issue within the Labour Party. This was due to incompetence or the fact that he held similar views to those who were under investigation.
6. A change of leader would see a purge of antisemitism new the a Labour Party.
I challenge anyone to disagree that I was incorrect on any of the above six points.
As for DK. Was it all a smear? Were those complaining of antisemitism being directed by the Israel lobby? Was there genuinely an issue with antisemitism in the Labour Party but those who were tasked into disciplining the antisemites (who didn’t exist because it was a Smear/ were small in number and it was being exaggerated by a British Jews at the behest if the Israeli government) sat in those cases in order to discredit Jeremy Corbyn?
Confused? You will be. |  |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 19:45 - Jul 23 with 3120 views | Darth_Koont |
| Oh Dear Labour on 19:24 - Jul 23 by GlasgowBlue |
I’m not really sure what DK’s end game is with this or what he’s trying to achieve.
When the subject of antisemitism is the a Labour Party started to be discussed more widely on here, DK was one of a number of people who tried to shout it down as “smears”.
When I highlighted case after case of Labour members being caught posting antisemitic material online or complaints from a Jewish members being abused at CLP meeting, a few of those shouting “smear” fell by the wayside, and we were left with a more hardcore group of posters who then called into question my motives for raising the subject. I was accused of political point scoring (which is odd, as nobody accuses people from the left on here who highlight Tory Islamophobia of political point scoring).
Even after I revealed that this was an issue that affected me greatly as I am of a Jewish descent and my wife’s father was born Jewish, this grouping started to ask why I’d never mentioned it before (I had, as far back as 2010 as Ryorry confirmed a few occasions, and to Phil when discussing a thread on Gilad Atzmon circa 2012) or “what are your views on Palestine”?
DK would usually reply with “I don’t trust or believe you” during this period when I discussed my family background.
When the accusations of “smear” became untenable the group got smaller, but DK hung in there. Antisemitism in the Labour Party did exist (we got there eventually) but it was a small pocket of members and the majority of those who were being accused of antisemitism were lifelong anti racists and people were conflating legitimate criticism of Israel with antisemitism.
And anyway, I don’t accept the IHRA definition of antisemitism.
Even worse, the accusations of antisemitism were being organised by the Israeli lobby. British Jews were incapable of deciding for themselves that they were the victims of antisemitism. They were being led by the Israel lobby.
DK started defending the likes of Chris Williamson and Pete Willsman, going as far as to repeat the accusation made by the latter that the 68 Rabbis who had written an open letter to the Labour Party about antisemitism had done so at the behest of the Israeli government.
It was no longer a smear, it was a conspiracy. He would then attempt explain why it wasn’t antisemitic to defend an antisemite who made an antisemitic statement whilst agreeing with that antisemitic statement.
Eventually we had the EHRC launch an investigation. The merry band of men were now just DK. But the EHRC were comprised.
Those giving evidence, the BoD, JLM etc were pro Israel stooges with an agenda. People like Luciana editorialised the antisemitic abuse they received.”I don’t trust her”.
Hope Not Hate. Compromised. The Panorama documentary. Comprised. John Ware. Compromised. The whistleblowers. Compromised. And look here, I’ll throw in a token Jew to support my view that the above are all acting in bad faith in order to remove Jeremy Corbyn because he is a staunch advocate of a Palestinian rights and a two state solution.
Rather embarrassing that during the Labour Leadership election the group who supposedly wanted rid of Corbyn because he is a staunch advocate of a Palestinian rights and a two state solution threw their weight behind Lisa Nandy who is, umm, the Chair of Labour Friends of Palestine. Yeah but no but yeah but no.
Anyway. Here we are and I’m confused as hell what DK believes.
Me? Well I’ve been consistent from day one.
1. There has always been a fringe element on the left who engaged in antisemtism. It existed in the Labour Party before Jeremy Corbyn was elected leader.
2. Jeremy Corbyn had a shameful history of associating with Holocaust deniers, blood libellers and antisemites. “Well he never told me he was a Holocaust denier” chuckle.
3. The election of Jeremy Corbyn was a catalyst for a high number of people who held antisemitic views to join Labour, who had previously spent their political lives on the fringes.
4. Labour has/had a massive issue with antisemitism.
5. Jeremy Corbyn was either unable or unwilling to address the antisemitism issue within the Labour Party. This was due to incompetence or the fact that he held similar views to those who were under investigation.
6. A change of leader would see a purge of antisemitism new the a Labour Party.
I challenge anyone to disagree that I was incorrect on any of the above six points.
As for DK. Was it all a smear? Were those complaining of antisemitism being directed by the Israel lobby? Was there genuinely an issue with antisemitism in the Labour Party but those who were tasked into disciplining the antisemites (who didn’t exist because it was a Smear/ were small in number and it was being exaggerated by a British Jews at the behest if the Israeli government) sat in those cases in order to discredit Jeremy Corbyn?
Confused? You will be. |
I think your constant spinning and misrepresentation doesn’t have a lot of value.
In fact, it’s key to the low opinion I have of you. | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 20:00 - Jul 23 with 3099 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Oh Dear Labour on 19:45 - Jul 23 by Darth_Koont |
I think your constant spinning and misrepresentation doesn’t have a lot of value.
In fact, it’s key to the low opinion I have of you. |
Perhaps I’m mistaking you for another Darth_Koont?
Aren’t you the Darth_Koont who, when confronted with an antisemitic statement from Pete Willsman which got him suspended by Labour in which he said that the 68 Rabbis who wrote an open letter to the Labour Party complain about antisemitism were “organised by the Israeli embassy”, said “ That's pretty accurate though“?
If it was a different Darth_Koont then I humbly apologise for the mistake.
Was it a different DK who claimed that the accusations of antisemtism levelled at the Labour Party were being directed from Israel?
Was it some cunning DK imposter who hacked your account and accused the BOD and JLM of acting in bad faith to remove Corbyn because he was a lifelong advocate of Palestinian rights and a two state solution?
A mischievous doppelgänger who accused Luciana Berger of editorialising the antisemtic abuse she received and labelled her “untrustworthy”? | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 20:05 - Jul 23 with 3086 views | Darth_Koont |
| Oh Dear Labour on 20:00 - Jul 23 by GlasgowBlue |
Perhaps I’m mistaking you for another Darth_Koont?
Aren’t you the Darth_Koont who, when confronted with an antisemitic statement from Pete Willsman which got him suspended by Labour in which he said that the 68 Rabbis who wrote an open letter to the Labour Party complain about antisemitism were “organised by the Israeli embassy”, said “ That's pretty accurate though“?
If it was a different Darth_Koont then I humbly apologise for the mistake.
Was it a different DK who claimed that the accusations of antisemtism levelled at the Labour Party were being directed from Israel?
Was it some cunning DK imposter who hacked your account and accused the BOD and JLM of acting in bad faith to remove Corbyn because he was a lifelong advocate of Palestinian rights and a two state solution?
A mischievous doppelgänger who accused Luciana Berger of editorialising the antisemtic abuse she received and labelled her “untrustworthy”? |
I'm not getting dragged down to this level of debate. | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 20:07 - Jul 23 with 3073 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Oh Dear Labour on 20:00 - Jul 23 by GlasgowBlue |
Perhaps I’m mistaking you for another Darth_Koont?
Aren’t you the Darth_Koont who, when confronted with an antisemitic statement from Pete Willsman which got him suspended by Labour in which he said that the 68 Rabbis who wrote an open letter to the Labour Party complain about antisemitism were “organised by the Israeli embassy”, said “ That's pretty accurate though“?
If it was a different Darth_Koont then I humbly apologise for the mistake.
Was it a different DK who claimed that the accusations of antisemtism levelled at the Labour Party were being directed from Israel?
Was it some cunning DK imposter who hacked your account and accused the BOD and JLM of acting in bad faith to remove Corbyn because he was a lifelong advocate of Palestinian rights and a two state solution?
A mischievous doppelgänger who accused Luciana Berger of editorialising the antisemtic abuse she received and labelled her “untrustworthy”? |
In my considered opinion........bore off!! It's what happened to those that you delude yourself you won internet points off. |  |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 20:07 - Jul 23 with 3072 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Oh Dear Labour on 20:05 - Jul 23 by Darth_Koont |
I'm not getting dragged down to this level of debate. |
Yeah. Probably best not to considering all of those statements are in your posting history. | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 20:11 - Jul 23 with 3066 views | Darth_Koont |
| Oh Dear Labour on 20:07 - Jul 23 by GlasgowBlue |
Yeah. Probably best not to considering all of those statements are in your posting history. |
Only they're not my statements. They're your misrepresentations of what I actually said.
Glad to know I've got you spinning even faster now. | |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 21:25 - Jul 23 with 2986 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Oh Dear Labour on 20:11 - Jul 23 by Darth_Koont |
Only they're not my statements. They're your misrepresentations of what I actually said.
Glad to know I've got you spinning even faster now. |
It’s a direct quote mate. Your first reply to this thread.
Edit. Blimey. It gets worse. Still on the first page of the thread and you’re telling non Israeli Jews who are worried about antisemitism that they should put pressure on the Israeli government.
[Post edited 23 Jul 2020 21:39]
| |
| |
| Oh Dear Labour on 21:47 - Jul 23 with 2956 views | Darth_Koont |
| Oh Dear Labour on 21:25 - Jul 23 by GlasgowBlue |
It’s a direct quote mate. Your first reply to this thread.
Edit. Blimey. It gets worse. Still on the first page of the thread and you’re telling non Israeli Jews who are worried about antisemitism that they should put pressure on the Israeli government.
[Post edited 23 Jul 2020 21:39]
|
I think you've had enough.
Time to go to bed. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
