| Polanski on 17:45 - May 6 with 1260 views | NthQldITFC |
| Polanski on 17:40 - May 6 by giant_stow |
Fair enough Nth. |
I love you, like I love Glasgow, like I love people with soul. We're all one. We've got a small space and it's hard not to want to try to grab more of it, but we're all better off if we share and help each other to be happy. That makes us all happy. |  |
|  |
| Polanski on 17:49 - May 6 with 1238 views | Dubtractor |
| Polanski on 17:36 - May 6 by giant_stow |
I can only speak for myself on that, but its a given that Reform are racist good-for-nothing haters and doesn't really need repeating. Whereas Its sad and desperate when a party of the left is infected by racism. |
But one of those parties has a very real chance of getting into power, whereas the other is just a noisy distraction, so why all the focus on the noisy distraction? |  |
| |
| Polanski on 17:52 - May 6 with 1207 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Polanski on 16:52 - May 6 by Clapham_Junction |
What we're seeing now (as we did from 2015-2019) is a case of playing the man, not the ball. Because their policies are (with some notable exceptions) quite popular, those who are terrified of a bit of social democracy are left with having to relentlessly try and discredit the individuals in the party.
Personally I am more interested in a party's policies and what they're going to do for the people of the country than the people leading the party - there are scoundrels and scumbags in all of them - the current Prime Minister lied to his own party membership to get elected as leader for a start. |
I wonder why a former supporter of Corbyn’s Labour Party would be attracted to a party being infiltrated by the people who were members of Corbyn’s Labour Party? I’m shocked. |  |
| |
| Polanski on 17:53 - May 6 with 1209 views | giant_stow |
| Polanski on 17:49 - May 6 by Dubtractor |
But one of those parties has a very real chance of getting into power, whereas the other is just a noisy distraction, so why all the focus on the noisy distraction? |
Because their 'our' noisy distraction, really. (Realise that might sound strange coming from me). [Post edited 6 May 18:02]
|  |
| |
| Polanski on 17:56 - May 6 with 1206 views | Camul123 |
|  | | |
| Polanski on 18:00 - May 6 with 1176 views | GlasgowBlue |
Deeply antisemitic images. Has Steve Bell moved to the Times? | |
| |
| Polanski on 18:10 - May 6 with 1138 views | Camul123 |
| Polanski on 18:00 - May 6 by GlasgowBlue |
Deeply antisemitic images. Has Steve Bell moved to the Times? |
Indeed.
I've no idea re Bell. He stopped being funny around the end of the Falklands escapade. | | | |
| Polanski on 18:26 - May 6 with 1089 views | DJR |
As I've said before it's open season on Polanski, and things like that would be condemned if it were any other Jewish person, or at least any Jewish person supportive of Israel.
Where's the Campaign Against Antisemitism (to which I'm signed up) when you need them?  |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Polanski on 18:30 - May 6 with 1062 views | NthQldITFC |
| Polanski on 18:26 - May 6 by DJR |
As I've said before it's open season on Polanski, and things like that would be condemned if it were any other Jewish person, or at least any Jewish person supportive of Israel.
Where's the Campaign Against Antisemitism (to which I'm signed up) when you need them? |
Me too. | |
| |
| Polanski on 18:34 - May 6 with 1037 views | DJR |
| Polanski on 18:00 - May 6 by GlasgowBlue |
Deeply antisemitic images. Has Steve Bell moved to the Times? |
Surely the issue is that Bell's cartoon(s) was/were condemned (and he ultimately lost his job), but these haven't been condemned apart from by people like me? [Post edited 6 May 18:39]
| | | |
| Polanski on 18:39 - May 6 with 1006 views | Camul123 |
| Polanski on 18:26 - May 6 by DJR |
As I've said before it's open season on Polanski, and things like that would be condemned if it were any other Jewish person, or at least any Jewish person supportive of Israel.
Where's the Campaign Against Antisemitism (to which I'm signed up) when you need them? |
Quite. It's an orchestrated racist pile on. | | | |
| Polanski on 18:59 - May 6 with 962 views | gtsb1966 |
| Polanski on 18:39 - May 6 by Camul123 |
Quite. It's an orchestrated racist pile on. |
No it's not. You're one of the "let's play the racist card" lot when you dont agree with something on here. |  | | |
| Polanski on 19:07 - May 6 with 947 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Polanski on 18:39 - May 6 by Camul123 |
Quite. It's an orchestrated racist pile on. |
And yet oddly enough the people bringing these antisemitic cartoons to the board haven’t said a word about the green party candidate who called Jews cockroaches. Or the Green Party candidate who was posting antisemitic imagery on x. Or the Green Party candidate who said that “ramming a synagogue is antisemitism, it’s revenge”. Or the Green Party candidate who said “Jews fear hate because they know they should be hated”. Etc etc.
I’ve been posting links to antisemitic imagery here for years only for people to defend and excuse it because it came from their side. Or pointing out people using antisemitic tropes such as the puppet master or puppeteer and only one person, DJR put his head above the parapet and called it out.
I remember when the people condemning these cartoons were bending over backwards to find a reason why the antisemitic Mear One mural just coincidentally featured people with hook noses.
So please excuse me whilst I reach for the sick bucket. | |
| |
| Polanski on 19:21 - May 6 with 903 views | Camul123 |
| Polanski on 19:07 - May 6 by GlasgowBlue |
And yet oddly enough the people bringing these antisemitic cartoons to the board haven’t said a word about the green party candidate who called Jews cockroaches. Or the Green Party candidate who was posting antisemitic imagery on x. Or the Green Party candidate who said that “ramming a synagogue is antisemitism, it’s revenge”. Or the Green Party candidate who said “Jews fear hate because they know they should be hated”. Etc etc.
I’ve been posting links to antisemitic imagery here for years only for people to defend and excuse it because it came from their side. Or pointing out people using antisemitic tropes such as the puppet master or puppeteer and only one person, DJR put his head above the parapet and called it out.
I remember when the people condemning these cartoons were bending over backwards to find a reason why the antisemitic Mear One mural just coincidentally featured people with hook noses.
So please excuse me whilst I reach for the sick bucket. |
Are you accusing people who don't come on here and actively post agreement with you of being anti-semitic?
That's several thousand posters at a guess.
This attack on Polanski is quite obviously a racist pile on. | | | |
| Polanski on 19:29 - May 6 with 875 views | Clapham_Junction |
| Polanski on 17:52 - May 6 by GlasgowBlue |
I wonder why a former supporter of Corbyn’s Labour Party would be attracted to a party being infiltrated by the people who were members of Corbyn’s Labour Party? I’m shocked. |
Because I am consistent in my beliefs and my support shifts between parties depending on what their policies are at any given point in time, rather than being blindly loyal to party regardless of what their policies are?
I was actually a Green Party member (and local government election candidate) during Corbyn's time as Labour leader, long before Polanski became leader (or even a Green Party member). |  | | |
| Polanski on 19:33 - May 6 with 864 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Polanski on 19:21 - May 6 by Camul123 |
Are you accusing people who don't come on here and actively post agreement with you of being anti-semitic?
That's several thousand posters at a guess.
This attack on Polanski is quite obviously a racist pile on. |
Where have I said that? I'm asking why have certain people only just discovered antisemitism when it is aimed at Polanski but ignored the numerous other examples, some of which I highlighted in my post.
If people have remained silent over decades of antisemitism, especially when it has come from people on their side of the political spectrum, but suddenly start complaining when its aimed at Polanski I would suggest that they kindly shut the fcuk up. [Post edited 6 May 19:39]
| |
| |
| Polanski on 20:02 - May 6 with 803 views | Camul123 |
| Polanski on 19:33 - May 6 by GlasgowBlue |
Where have I said that? I'm asking why have certain people only just discovered antisemitism when it is aimed at Polanski but ignored the numerous other examples, some of which I highlighted in my post.
If people have remained silent over decades of antisemitism, especially when it has come from people on their side of the political spectrum, but suddenly start complaining when its aimed at Polanski I would suggest that they kindly shut the fcuk up. [Post edited 6 May 19:39]
|
It was a question.
Quite a telling response, though. More partisan political than anti-racist. | | | |
| Polanski on 20:20 - May 6 with 753 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Polanski on 20:02 - May 6 by Camul123 |
It was a question.
Quite a telling response, though. More partisan political than anti-racist. |
You're right. Those suddenly jumping in the antisemitism bandwagon are definitely partisan political rather than anti-racist. | |
| |
| Polanski on 22:59 - May 6 with 632 views | Camul123 |
| Polanski on 20:20 - May 6 by GlasgowBlue |
You're right. Those suddenly jumping in the antisemitism bandwagon are definitely partisan political rather than anti-racist. |
Whatever.
At least it appears that the anti-semitic pile on against Polanski is being recognised for what it is now.
And yes, the Greens need to sharpen up their due diligence on candidates to protect against racist insurgents. | | | |
| Polanski on 00:02 - May 7 with 571 views | reusersfreekicks |
| Polanski on 18:34 - May 6 by DJR |
Surely the issue is that Bell's cartoon(s) was/were condemned (and he ultimately lost his job), but these haven't been condemned apart from by people like me? [Post edited 6 May 18:39]
|
Don't spoil the required narrative.
When it comes to Polanski all criticism and prejudice is ok. |  | | |
| Polanski on 00:57 - May 7 with 508 views | Ryorry |
| Polanski on 14:05 - May 6 by DJR |
From what I've seen and heard he has been under constant attack and thus not able to properly advocate policies.
And if Green policies do come up, it's things like the legalisation of drugs or its economic policies which are then used to beat him and the Greens.
As an aside, I was looking at the Wikipedia page on the German Greens, a country where the Greens have been a force for many years. There the Greens have never got more than 14% of the vote, and I can't see that figure ever being beaten in this country.
But the assumption in the way that the Greens are criticised here is that the Greens will be the only or main party in government and thus able to implement their policies, when the best they could hope for is a minority place in a coalition government with the prospect of getting a couple of their policies accepted, and that probably only under PR.
Indeed, Nick Robinson even asked Polanski this morning if he thought he was ready to be Prime Minister, when that just ain't ever going to happen.
For my own part (and leaving aside any missteps on the part of Polanski) I think there are two things going on here in all this, one an attempt by or on behalf of Labour to prevent people voting for the Greens, and the other an attempt by the right wing media to get people not wanting to vote for Starmer to vote Reform rather than Green because by all accounts those switching away from Starmer are going in one of those two directions.
Indeed, Reform go into the polls with the heat completely off them so far as I can see, and with papers like the Mail and Telegraph not even reporting their detention camp plans.
Nigel must very pleased with the way things have panned out. [Post edited 6 May 14:11]
|
Agree with a lot of that, ep the second half. Fwiw I thought ZP dealt with that question from Nick Robinson very well.
I just wish there were a non-squabbling, united, left of centre party with well-screened good candidates sound ideas (a green economy supporting renewables including R & D; ensuring sustainable farming & food security; nationalising water & power, prioritising reclaiming & refurbishing of derelict housing, new building of affordable housing including kit builds that are very successful in other countries eg.) - that ordinary, intelligent, decent people could see the rationale for and get behind.
If a large bunch of those voters then had the courage of their convictions, I reckon there'd be a great chance of that kind of party getting a helluva lot more seats in a GE. What's particularly sad is that Labour *could* have been such a govt. with this administration, but chose to take a right turn instead.
The squabbling within this thread between so many people who are obviously in broad-ish agreement with each other, but divided by comparatively narrow disagreements, their energies taken up by in-fighting instead of action on the real issues (apols to anyone who also does that) seems like a microcosm of 2026 UK politics tome. |  |
| |
| Polanski on 05:07 - May 7 with 429 views | Benters |
| Polanski on 18:59 - May 6 by gtsb1966 |
No it's not. You're one of the "let's play the racist card" lot when you dont agree with something on here. |
Spot on. |  |
| |
| Polanski on 05:08 - May 7 with 428 views | Benters |
| Polanski on 00:02 - May 7 by reusersfreekicks |
Don't spoil the required narrative.
When it comes to Polanski all criticism and prejudice is ok. |
He’s a mentalist buh. | |
| |
| Polanski on 08:39 - May 7 with 319 views | DJR |
| Polanski on 00:57 - May 7 by Ryorry |
Agree with a lot of that, ep the second half. Fwiw I thought ZP dealt with that question from Nick Robinson very well.
I just wish there were a non-squabbling, united, left of centre party with well-screened good candidates sound ideas (a green economy supporting renewables including R & D; ensuring sustainable farming & food security; nationalising water & power, prioritising reclaiming & refurbishing of derelict housing, new building of affordable housing including kit builds that are very successful in other countries eg.) - that ordinary, intelligent, decent people could see the rationale for and get behind.
If a large bunch of those voters then had the courage of their convictions, I reckon there'd be a great chance of that kind of party getting a helluva lot more seats in a GE. What's particularly sad is that Labour *could* have been such a govt. with this administration, but chose to take a right turn instead.
The squabbling within this thread between so many people who are obviously in broad-ish agreement with each other, but divided by comparatively narrow disagreements, their energies taken up by in-fighting instead of action on the real issues (apols to anyone who also does that) seems like a microcosm of 2026 UK politics tome. |
The problem with Labour under Starmer is that it decided that the Parliamentary party should not be the broad church it had always been.
Leaving aside the undemocratic nature of that (eg parachuting at the last minute Torsten Bell into Swansea West given he had probably never left the Home Counties), it clearly led to a narrowness in terms of both policy and thinking which I don't think has helped, and it has meant a focus on attracting "hero voters" and complete contempt for many who would be its natural supporters.
As a strategy it has been a complete disaster (which I predicted), and it was the undemocratic nature in particular that led me to leave the Labour Party a year or so before the election, although in fact it was the Labour Party which left me. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
