Next GE

[srb7677]

The Corbyn Labour Party did take a totally balanced view of it all, instead of being totally pro-Israeli. Which is what Netanyahu could never countenance. He relies on the backing of the big boys in the west - or at least their tacit compliance - for his continued land thefts, internal racist division, and mass oppression. Curious and depressing how a state in large measure founded by the victims of the holocaust could behave in a manner so reminiscent of the Nazis, if not quite to the same extent.

I believe that you actually BELIEVE corbyn was honest and sincere over israel and that none of whaty happend in your party ( more or less) was anti semitic.

We have discussed this before , so no need to rehash our views , but if this is actually your sincere belief , how can you stand on this forum and give keir starmer the time of day?

That man , as much as brexit , the tories , the snp or anyone else , destroyed corbyn  and corbynite labours chances at the GE.

?

We are where we are. He was not my choice but he is Labour leader now. And I remain a Labour Party member right now. Thus far as leader he has made some dubious internal decisions, but externally done little except spout empty platitudes. I will give him enough rope to hang himself with, especially re policy. And I will not be told this is wrong by political enemies. I am guided much more by my political friends inside the party and on it's left. All of whom mostly believe in standing and fighting from the inside for what we believe is right. And we will not publicly turn on Starmer until he gives us very solid reasons for doing so, because we need a majority of the membership behind us to effect change.

I know you SNP guys would love to sit back and enjoy the spectacle of WW3 taking place inside Labour, grinning as you munch your popcorn. But we will not dance to your tune on that. I will not.

[Thomas]

The Corbyn Labour Party did take a totally balanced view of it all, instead of being totally pro-Israeli. Which is what Netanyahu could never countenance. He relies on the backing of the big boys in the west - or at least their tacit compliance - for his continued land thefts, internal racist division, and mass oppression. Curious and depressing how a state in large measure founded by the victims of the holocaust could behave in a manner so reminiscent of the Nazis, if not quite to the same extent.

I believe that you actually BELIEVE corbyn was honest and sincere over israel and that none of whaty happend in your party ( more or less) was anti semitic.

We have discussed this before , so no need to rehash our views , but if this is actually your sincere belief , how can you stand on this forum and give keir starmer the time of day?

That man , as much as brexit , the tories , the snp or anyone else , destroyed corbyn  and corbynite labours chances at the GE.

?

[Sheepy]

I'm not a Lab activist mate. I thought about joining the party in 2015 (after Siliband was done and Corbo got in) and may have donated a quid or something, but never went to meetings or participated.

A slight digression, but elsewhere you refuted my description of you as left wing. But even thinking about joining in 2015 as a result of Corbyn getting in, and donating money, and I believe you have said elsewhere that you voted for Labour under him once, is all a very strange course of action for someone not alt all left wing. Doth you protest too much?

LMAO

[srb7677]

I'm not a Lab activist mate. I thought about joining the party in 2015 (after Siliband was done and Corbo got in) and may have donated a quid or something, but never went to meetings or participated.

A slight digression, but elsewhere you refuted my description of you as left wing. But even thinking about joining in 2015 as a result of Corbyn getting in, and donating money, and I believe you have said elsewhere that you voted for Labour under him once, is all a very strange course of action for someone not at all left wing. Doth you protest too much?

[srb7677]

Btw, good points were raised about Stammer being in the pocket of Bibi, it's true.

And your contribution to the Palestinians over the decades has been what exactly? apart from winding the Israelis right up that is?

Wat? ...Winding the Israelis right up?

Are you in contact with Mossad monsieur mouton, do you have their file on me in front of you at sheep HQ as we speak? 

Well, I had western liberal guilt for them which is enough by itself.

.... and bought a fairtrade bottle of Palestinian olive oil in 2008 I think, also donated £3.75 around ten years ago.

So a lot actually. I've single handedly changed the delicate balance of power with my armchair rants on obscure forums as the good sheep I am.

It was a genuine question as it happens, if the Corbyn Labour party had taken a balanced view of it all instead of being totally anti-Israel Starmer and Blair may have found it  a tougher job.

The Corbyn Labour Party did take a totally balanced view of it all, instead of being totally pro-Israeli. Which is what Netanyahu could never countenance. He relies on the backing of the big boys in the west - or at least their tacit compliance - for his continued land thefts, internal racist division, and mass oppression. Curious and depressing how a state in large measure founded by the victims of the holocaust could behave in a manner so reminiscent of the Nazis, if not quite to the same extent.

[Borg Refinery]

Btw, good points were raised about Stammer being in the pocket of Bibi, it's true.

And your contribution to the Palestinians over the decades has been what exactly? apart from winding the Israelis right up that is?

Wat? ...Winding the Israelis right up?

Are you in contact with Mossad monsieur mouton, do you have their file on me in front of you at sheep HQ as we speak? 

Well, I had western liberal guilt for them which is enough by itself.

.... and bought a fairtrade bottle of Palestinian olive oil in 2008 I think, also donated £3.75 around ten years ago.

So a lot actually. I've single handedly changed the delicate balance of power with my armchair rants on obscure forums as the good sheep I am.

It was a genuine question as it happens, if the Corbyn Labour party had taken a balanced view of it all instead of being totally anti-Israel Starmer and Blair may have found it  a tougher job.

I'm not a Lab activist mate. I thought about joining the party in 2015 (after Siliband was done and Corbo got in) and may have donated a quid or something, but never went to meetings or participated.

You pointed out yourself what a bucket of cac the Hastings Labour party is. Everyone hates Clowney.

And what's your idea of a balanced view on Israel then? I have a pretty balanced one, which goes something like this... Ayelet Shaked, Israeli justice minister around 2014 under Bibi, said she wanted every single Palestinian kid genocided.

That says it all.

Did you know that the IDF 'made' both Fatah and Hamas into what they are? They wanted to destroy the PFLP and it worked, my source is IDF generals commenting in Haaretz and times of israel BTW.

So please don't tell me any rubbish about me being an anti-semite for not stroking off Bibi, as I won't accept it. The Israeli govt under him are genocidal settlers, end of story.

[Sheepy]

Btw, good points were raised about Stammer being in the pocket of Bibi, it's true.

And your contribution to the Palestinians over the decades has been what exactly? apart from winding the Israelis right up that is?

Wat? ...Winding the Israelis right up?

Are you in contact with Mossad monsieur mouton, do you have their file on me in front of you at sheep HQ as we speak? 

Well, I had western liberal guilt for them which is enough by itself.

.... and bought a fairtrade bottle of Palestinian olive oil in 2008 I think, also donated £3.75 around ten years ago.

So a lot actually. I've single handedly changed the delicate balance of power with my armchair rants on obscure forums as the good sheep I am.

It was a genuine question as it happens, if the Corbyn Labour party had taken a balanced view of it all instead of being totally anti-Israel Starmer and Blair may have found it  a tougher job.

[Borg Refinery]

Btw, good points were raised about Stammer being in the pocket of Bibi, it's true.

And your contribution to the Palestinians over the decades has been what exactly? apart from winding the Israelis right up that is?

Wat? ...Winding the Israelis right up?

Are you in contact with Mossad monsieur mouton, do you have their file on me in front of you at sheep HQ as we speak? 

Well, I had western liberal guilt for them which is enough by itself.

.... and bought a fairtrade bottle of Palestinian olive oil in 2008 I think, also donated £3.75 around ten years ago.

So a lot actually. I've single handedly changed the delicate balance of power with my armchair rants on obscure forums as the good sheep I am.

[papasmurf]

So people who have been drinking or had a brush with the law NEVER tell the truth! Rubbish.

Sorry but I don't recognise that comment as being from me, have you misquoted?

[Nick]

under the influence or have a criminal record

So people who have been drinking or had a brush with the law NEVER tell the truth! Rubbish.

[Sheepy]

Btw, good points were raised about Stammer being in the pocket of Bibi, it's true.

And your contribution to the Palestinians over the decades has been what exactly? apart from winding the Israelis right up that is?

[Thomas]

Newspapers reprint propaganda and lies is why I ask for evidence.   

newspaper sales have fallen off a cliff in recent years and most folk get their info , which is all biased , off the interwebby.

Wings over scotland for example had more monthly views than all the scot newspapers sales put together. One single scottish website.

Stop shooting the messenger with moans about bias and address the message.

[papasmurf]

Why bother? You ignore any and all evidence when presented, when and if it goes against your beliefs, as you've just adequately demonstrated.

I guess the grauniad criticising Stammer for the same things doesn't count and is not 'evidence'.

Newspapers reprint propaganda and lies is why I ask for evidence.  The Rotherham lie was a very deliberate doctoring of the reality as I have just referenced. That the lie has been repeated on this forum show how long lasting and powerful such lies are:-

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-starmer-grooming-victims/false-claim-uk-labour-leader-keir-starmer-says-in-interview-that-grooming-victims-shouldnt-be-believed-if-they-have-misued-drugs-or-alcohol-or-have-a-criminal-record-idUSKBN22Q30F

The 22-second video clip of a TV interview with Starmer has been shared widely on social media, such as in a post (here) in which the accompanying text claims it shows Starmer "explaining in FORENSIC Details why victims of grooming gangs shouldn't be believed if they've been under the influence or have a criminal record !!"

The clip has been edited to misrepresent Starmer's meaning.




Then again Starmer alleged comments about rape do not stack up against the reality:-

https://www.thejusticegap.com/analysis-has-the-cps-changed-its-policy-on-rape/

Historically, the test for charging in rape and serious sexual assault cases was no different than that for other offences. Prosecutors would consider the likelihood of achieving a conviction in the same way for these cases as for any other.

However, under the tenure of Keir Starmer QC as DPP between 2008 and 2013, the approach shifted. Starmer oversaw the introduction of something new: the 'merits-based' approach. This was a method of applying the original test which forced prosecutors to think differently; when considering how likely a conviction was in a given case, prosecutors needed to imagine a jury free from the myths and stereotypes that often clouded their judgement in rape cases. This approach meant that decisions on the likelihood of a jury to convict should rest on how convincing the evidence is likely to appear to them, rather than, for example, whether the victim's evidence would be taken less seriously because she has struggled with mental health difficulties, or was in a relationship with her rapist at the time of the offence. The prosecutors could not simply bet on which cases would succeed based on who would appeal to jury prejudices.

Over the last three years, however, the merits-based approach has been steadily erased from CPS policy. The CPS argues that this is not a change in policy, as the merits-based approach is simply guidance for how to interpret the pre-existing Code for Crown Prosecutors. What this doesn't explain, however, is why the data shows such a drop in rape charging decisions over the same period.

[Thomas]

Why bother? You ignore any and all evidence when presented, when and if it goes against your beliefs, as you've just adequately demonstrated.

I guess the grauniad criticising Stammer for the same things doesn't count and is not 'evidence'.

dont waste your time dyno. He wont even acknowledge it if you do.

Anyway  , if you listen to the likes of len mcluskey of unite  he has no doubts whatsoever that starmer was fully to blame for labours disasterous showing last december.

McCluskey claimes starmer was wholly responsible( from the 2018 labour conference in liverpool) , for delivering the policy for a second referndum on brexit , then without corbyns support or approval , putting remain on the ballot causing much internal friction.

Mccluskey says the blame for labours implosion in the north of england heartlands was all starmers fault because of this.

[Thomas]

Good luck with your man Stammer who presided over the colossal Rotherham feck up

Can you please explain that with evidence. (I do mean evidence.)

The CPS  , under starmer charged anti austerity protestors in 2012 for a sit in at fortnum and mason , something else the left have never forgiven him for.