FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Boris in reflective and apologetic mood . . .
Boris in reflective and apologetic mood . . .
Jump to: Newest in thread
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53525450 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again?" Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies. "What lies are these exactly? Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper. Nearly fell off my chair in shock. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Shame Andrew Neil wasn’t invited to ask the questions. Laura just too soft on Boris " Yeah it's weird how he just Grant's interviews to our Laura | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock."Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news? Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Shame Andrew Neil wasn’t invited to ask the questions. Laura just too soft on Boris Yeah it's weird how he just Grant's interviews to our Laura " Awwww your favourite BBC not cutting the mustard? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now. "He is getting sued Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar."Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies. "Nearly £184k 
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
Nearly £184k
"OMG! That will get the Judge a Pint in the Magpie and Stump !!! ' lmao | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
Feeling sad lol. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
"I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved. Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol."In 2 days. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days."£2.62 each. Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!"Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire. The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask. He really upset someone.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!
Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire.
The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask.
He really upset someone.."He can sell his house - it's worth just under a million and he should give the GoFundMe to charity.
Go Corby !!! Such a charitable sort. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!
Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire.
The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask.
He really upset someone..
He can sell his house - it's worth just under a million and he should give the GoFundMe to charity.
Go Corby !!! Such a charitable sort. "Just ignoring my point completely. Standard. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!
Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire.
The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask.
He really upset someone..
He can sell his house - it's worth just under a million and he should give the GoFundMe to charity.
Go Corby !!! Such a charitable sort.
Just ignoring my point completely.
Standard."And your point exactly is? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!
Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire.
The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask.
He really upset someone..
He can sell his house - it's worth just under a million and he should give the GoFundMe to charity.
Go Corby !!! Such a charitable sort.
Just ignoring my point completely.
Standard.
And your point exactly is?"I just told you. He has clearly upset someone. As a political force he is irrelevant now yet the mail,the telegraph ,the Express and the rag seem to have a particular bee in their bonnet about him. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!
Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire.
The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask.
He really upset someone..
He can sell his house - it's worth just under a million and he should give the GoFundMe to charity.
Go Corby !!! Such a charitable sort.
Just ignoring my point completely.
Standard.
And your point exactly is?
I just told you.
He has clearly upset someone.
As a political force he is irrelevant now yet the mail,the telegraph ,the Express and the rag seem to have a particular bee in their bonnet about him."He's upset the Panorama crew because the Labour Party said that they lied in their programme - turns out our Lionel, that they hadn't, personally I was shocked to the core - Anyways the head BBC journo for the programme has taken umbridge and thought enough is flippen enough - I'm suing yer arse !!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!
Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire.
The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask.
He really upset someone..
He can sell his house - it's worth just under a million and he should give the GoFundMe to charity.
Go Corby !!! Such a charitable sort.
Just ignoring my point completely.
Standard.
And your point exactly is?
I just told you.
He has clearly upset someone.
As a political force he is irrelevant now yet the mail,the telegraph ,the Express and the rag seem to have a particular bee in their bonnet about him.
He's upset the Panorama crew because the Labour Party said that they lied in their programme - turns out our Lionel, that they hadn't, personally I was shocked to the core - Anyways the head BBC journo for the programme has taken umbridge and thought enough is flippen enough - I'm suing yer arse !!!!
"Once again completely ignoring my point. I'm sure the whistleblowers have a string case. I'm fairly sure that report which found established evidence of labour members actively working against jc,which was published under starmer will prove to be a load of nonsense. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!
Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire.
The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask.
He really upset someone..
He can sell his house - it's worth just under a million and he should give the GoFundMe to charity.
Go Corby !!! Such a charitable sort.
Just ignoring my point completely.
Standard.
And your point exactly is?
I just told you.
He has clearly upset someone.
As a political force he is irrelevant now yet the mail,the telegraph ,the Express and the rag seem to have a particular bee in their bonnet about him.
He's upset the Panorama crew because the Labour Party said that they lied in their programme - turns out our Lionel, that they hadn't, personally I was shocked to the core - Anyways the head BBC journo for the programme has taken umbridge and thought enough is flippen enough - I'm suing yer arse !!!!
Once again completely ignoring my point.
I'm sure the whistleblowers have a string case.
I'm fairly sure that report which found established evidence of labour members actively working against jc,which was published under starmer will prove to be a load of nonsense."Only time will tell our lionel. But who will tell it on the moutain afterwards? I suspect it won't be you  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar."Corbyn ,lost and he is a lier FACT. Not the inuendo you come out with about Boris. I hope in court he loses his house,it is what he deserves | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Only time will tell our lionel. But who will tell it on the moutain afterwards? I suspect it won't be you "****************************************   | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?"Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day. Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.Corbyn ,lost and he is a lier FACT.
Not the inuendo you come out with about Boris.
I hope in court he loses his house,it is what he deserves"Corbyn lost what exactly? And provide proof of his lies please,. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict? "Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member? When you say speculate does that mean discuss? Is there a new decree that this is not allowed? Your lost paragraph is non sensical. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
""Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence." Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved." You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point. My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Shame Andrew Neil wasn’t invited to ask the questions. Laura just too soft on Boris " ,,,,,, Johnson too scared to face Andrew Neill on BBC but will appear if it's Laura ,,, Johnson too scared to face Piers Morgan on ITV but will be interrigared by Holly & Phillip | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
"Thank you for googling speculate for me. Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!
Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire.
The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask.
He really upset someone..
He can sell his house - it's worth just under a million and he should give the GoFundMe to charity.
Go Corby !!! Such a charitable sort.
Just ignoring my point completely.
Standard.
And your point exactly is?
I just told you.
He has clearly upset someone.
As a political force he is irrelevant now yet the mail,the telegraph ,the Express and the rag seem to have a particular bee in their bonnet about him."Nothing wrong with that people still harp on about thatcher, it,s standard for the job. How much have you sent him ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!
Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire.
The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask.
He really upset someone..
He can sell his house - it's worth just under a million and he should give the GoFundMe to charity.
Go Corby !!! Such a charitable sort.
Just ignoring my point completely.
Standard.
And your point exactly is?
I just told you.
He has clearly upset someone.
As a political force he is irrelevant now yet the mail,the telegraph ,the Express and the rag seem to have a particular bee in their bonnet about him.Nothing wrong with that people still harp on about thatcher, it,s standard for the job. How much have you sent him ?"Thatcher had 3 terms in office,was in power for 12 years and left a legacy that is still felt today. Corbn was a labour leader for a couple of years and lost 2 elections. Slight difference. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!
Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire.
The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask.
He really upset someone..
He can sell his house - it's worth just under a million and he should give the GoFundMe to charity.
Go Corby !!! Such a charitable sort.
Just ignoring my point completely.
Standard.
And your point exactly is?
I just told you.
He has clearly upset someone.
As a political force he is irrelevant now yet the mail,the telegraph ,the Express and the rag seem to have a particular bee in their bonnet about him.Nothing wrong with that people still harp on about thatcher, it,s standard for the job. How much have you sent him ?
Thatcher had 3 terms in office,was in power for 12 years and left a legacy that is still felt today.
Corbn was a labour leader for a couple of years and lost 2 elections.
Slight difference."There is, it just shows how useless he was so deserves the criticism. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!
Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire.
The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask.
He really upset someone..
He can sell his house - it's worth just under a million and he should give the GoFundMe to charity.
Go Corby !!! Such a charitable sort.
Just ignoring my point completely.
Standard.
And your point exactly is?
I just told you.
He has clearly upset someone.
As a political force he is irrelevant now yet the mail,the telegraph ,the Express and the rag seem to have a particular bee in their bonnet about him.Nothing wrong with that people still harp on about thatcher, it,s standard for the job. How much have you sent him ?
Thatcher had 3 terms in office,was in power for 12 years and left a legacy that is still felt today.
Corbn was a labour leader for a couple of years and lost 2 elections.
Slight difference.There is, it just shows how useless he was so deserves the criticism."Sort of proving my point. And she was such a vindictive evil cunt she is still talked about 30 years later. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"485,000 Labour members and only 185K?
Feeling sad lol.
In 2 days.
£2.62 each.
Go Labour Supporters. Feel the love!!!
Its mad how an ex labour leader who lost an election so badly should provoke such ire.
The rag is ripping into today because of how he wears his mask.
He really upset someone..
He can sell his house - it's worth just under a million and he should give the GoFundMe to charity.
Go Corby !!! Such a charitable sort.
Just ignoring my point completely.
Standard.
And your point exactly is?
I just told you.
He has clearly upset someone.
As a political force he is irrelevant now yet the mail,the telegraph ,the Express and the rag seem to have a particular bee in their bonnet about him.Nothing wrong with that people still harp on about thatcher, it,s standard for the job. How much have you sent him ?
Thatcher had 3 terms in office,was in power for 12 years and left a legacy that is still felt today.
Corbn was a labour leader for a couple of years and lost 2 elections.
Slight difference.There is, it just shows how useless he was so deserves the criticism."Well, the current incumbent has a history of being utterly fucking useless. Unfortunately, he is running the show. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid "No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases? What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out? A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt... Convenient that..  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that.. "I mean, you can carry on going on about a bloke who isn't or ever will be in power. Or you can look at the current bloke who's cabinet has members in in have taken money from Russian oligarchs... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that.. "The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism. And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that. If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up. When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground. You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs. In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied. Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train. Fairly sure you can do better than that | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
I mean, you can carry on going on about a bloke who isn't or ever will be in power. Or you can look at the current bloke who's cabinet has members in in have taken money from Russian oligarchs..."I've asked several times why they have got their knickers in such a twist about an ex labour leader. Still waiting for an answer | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
I mean, you can carry on going on about a bloke who isn't or ever will be in power. Or you can look at the current bloke who's cabinet has members in in have taken money from Russian oligarchs...
I've asked several times why they have got their knickers in such a twist about an ex labour leader.
Still waiting for an answer "What you have to think is, if you had voted for the utter bellend that is in government now, you would literally talking about anything other that what an utter fucking balls up he is making of it all. He is probably gonna break up the union, his government has multiple links to Russian money and terrible death rate from Covid. Deflect deflect deflect.....that's all there is to it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
I mean, you can carry on going on about a bloke who isn't or ever will be in power. Or you can look at the current bloke who's cabinet has members in in have taken money from Russian oligarchs..."Another one of the corby club telling us what we can and cant "discuss". The thread is about corbyns lies, is current news and has seen thatcher being brought into it (who hasnt has had power for 30 years and has been dead for 7). It's almost as though you are trying to avoid the subject which is ironic as thats what you accuse everyone else of doing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
I mean, you can carry on going on about a bloke who isn't or ever will be in power. Or you can look at the current bloke who's cabinet has members in in have taken money from Russian oligarchs...
Another one of the corby club telling us what we can and cant "discuss".
The thread is about corbyns lies, is current news and has seen thatcher being brought into it (who hasnt has had power for 30 years and has been dead for 7). It's almost as though you are trying to avoid the subject which is ironic as thats what you accuse everyone else of doing.
"Another master of whatabouterry. You realise I didn't bring Thatcher into this? I'm not avoiding anything. If you want to catalogue Corbyns litany of lies. Be my guest. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
I mean, you can carry on going on about a bloke who isn't or ever will be in power. Or you can look at the current bloke who's cabinet has members in in have taken money from Russian oligarchs...
I've asked several times why they have got their knickers in such a twist about an ex labour leader.
Still waiting for an answer
What you have to think is, if you had voted for the utter bellend that is in government now, you would literally talking about anything other that what an utter fucking balls up he is making of it all. He is probably gonna break up the union, his government has multiple links to Russian money and terrible death rate from Covid.
Deflect deflect deflect.....that's all there is to it."Its deeper than that. He isnt even the leader anymore and they are still fixated on him. Probably nothing to do with the fact that he has been the only politician to point out the right wing journalistitic hegemony in this country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I thought it a Tory supporter who brought Thatcher into this "It was. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I thought it a Tory supporter who brought Thatcher into this
It was."Sorted | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that "The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris". Its laughable. It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hows that investigation into Islamophobia going that boris promised while running for the leadership?" What about(ery) it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread. "Superb. So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that. I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed. Do you actually read what you type? If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest. For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading. The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party. Not jeremy Corbyn. So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture. The train thing Is actually comical. Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hows that investigation into Islamophobia going that boris promised while running for the leadership? What about(ery) it? "Pot and kettle comes to mind.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence. "Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy. Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme. You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy. Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hows that investigation into Islamophobia going that boris promised while running for the leadership? What about(ery) it?
Pot and kettle comes to mind.."If i was on a thread about Tories islamophobia you might have a case however this thread is about corbyn and i am discussing him and the bullshit used to defend him. You arent... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180. "Another master of twisting words. I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it. See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader? You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter. Please show me where I have done a 180. I'm all ears | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hows that investigation into Islamophobia going that boris promised while running for the leadership? What about(ery) it?
Pot and kettle comes to mind..
If i was on a thread about Tories islamophobia you might have a case however this thread is about corbyn and i am discussing him and the bullshit used to defend him. You arent..."This thread began about Johnson and compared him bizarrely with JC. Do keep up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hows that investigation into Islamophobia going that boris promised while running for the leadership? What about(ery) it?
Pot and kettle comes to mind..
If i was on a thread about Tories islamophobia you might have a case however this thread is about corbyn and i am discussing him and the bullshit used to defend him. You arent...
This thread began about Johnson and compared him bizarrely with JC.
Do keep up." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So basically we are all re-enforcing our belief that politicians in this country are all lying bastards and will say what ever they like to gain advantage. We the tax paying idiots put up with this shower year after year. Maybe vote in a new rule?? If an MP is found to be lying we shoot him. Only downside is we will run out of MP’s pretty quickly!! Never mind eh!! Oh and may I suggest we blow up the House of Lords to be replaced by non politically partied, experienced people. Rewarded for effort in the community not for financing parties or by being a cabinet minister. We need a second house to check legislation. Why do they have to be Labour , Tory or liberals ? We should insist independent. End the gravy train. " The system is inherently flawed and is biased towards the self serving shower of shite it contains. I would prefer a system that incorperates the principles that jury service contains where the public are directly involved and represented and the career politicians are reigned in. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
"You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous. As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it. It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power."When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight. You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it. Consistency my dear boy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hows that investigation into Islamophobia going that boris promised while running for the leadership? What about(ery) it?
Pot and kettle comes to mind..
If i was on a thread about Tories islamophobia you might have a case however this thread is about corbyn and i am discussing him and the bullshit used to defend him. You arent...
This thread began about Johnson and compared him bizarrely with JC.
Do keep up."Its a thread about the double standards between how boris is treated differently to corbyn by certain people. Those certain people then turned up, proved the point and proceded to dish out the usual hectoring, deflection and whataboutery. Not one of you addressed the link and proceded to make it about corbyn, therefore the thread is about corbyn.. stop trying to back up and about turn. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy."Show me where i said you brought up thatcher. Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that. Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - " See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hows that investigation into Islamophobia going that boris promised while running for the leadership? What about(ery) it?
Pot and kettle comes to mind..
If i was on a thread about Tories islamophobia you might have a case however this thread is about corbyn and i am discussing him and the bullshit used to defend him. You arent...
This thread began about Johnson and compared him bizarrely with JC.
Do keep up.
Its a thread about the double standards between how boris is treated differently to corbyn by certain people. Those certain people then turned up, proved the point and proceded to dish out the usual hectoring, deflection and whataboutery.
Not one of you addressed the link and proceded to make it about corbyn, therefore the thread is about corbyn.. stop trying to back up and about turn.
"Your exact words.. this thread is about Corbyn It's like arguing with 2 different people. It's quite simple. The thread began about boris but on The 1st line jc was inexplicabley dragged into it. The thread has descended into the usual JC v boris debate | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?""This is getting tedious know.. your exact words..thatcher has been brought into it...its almost as if you are trying to avoid the subject..etc | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?""It was investigating the labour party when Corbyn was in power.It was an investigation into a Institutional as.A little heads up..the clue is in the title.Institution not individual Yet all the digs on here have been about Corbyn being a liar. The only deflection I can see ironically is where Thatcher was brought up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
This is getting tedious know.. your exact words..thatcher has been brought into it...its almost as if you are trying to avoid the subject..etc"Thatcher was brought into it. Did i say you did it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
This is getting tedious know.. your exact words..thatcher has been brought into it...its almost as if you are trying to avoid the subject..etc
Thatcher was brought into it. Did i say you did it? "I cant be arsed arguing anymore. If anyone hasn't lost the will to live they can make their own minds up I think I'm losing the will to live myself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hows that investigation into Islamophobia going that boris promised while running for the leadership? What about(ery) it?
Pot and kettle comes to mind..
If i was on a thread about Tories islamophobia you might have a case however this thread is about corbyn and i am discussing him and the bullshit used to defend him. You arent...
This thread began about Johnson and compared him bizarrely with JC.
Do keep up.
Its a thread about the double standards between how boris is treated differently to corbyn by certain people. Those certain people then turned up, proved the point and proceded to dish out the usual hectoring, deflection and whataboutery.
Not one of you addressed the link and proceded to make it about corbyn, therefore the thread is about corbyn.. stop trying to back up and about turn.
Your exact words.. this thread is about Corbyn
It's like arguing with 2 different people.
It's quite simple.
The thread began about boris but on The 1st line jc was inexplicabley dragged into it.
The thread has descended into the usual JC v boris debate"Corbyn is mentioned in the first post (and almost all thereafter). Therfore it is about Corbyn. Its not dificult to understand and your jibe about "its like arguing with two different people" is just bullshit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
This is getting tedious know.. your exact words..thatcher has been brought into it...its almost as if you are trying to avoid the subject..etc
Thatcher was brought into it. Did i say you did it?
I cant be arsed arguing anymore.
If anyone hasn't lost the will to live they can make their own minds up
I think I'm losing the will to live myself. "Now who is avoiding simple questions? Running off because you are wrong and wont admit it. You cant prove i said you brought thatcher into it because i didn't. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hows that investigation into Islamophobia going that boris promised while running for the leadership? What about(ery) it?
Pot and kettle comes to mind..
If i was on a thread about Tories islamophobia you might have a case however this thread is about corbyn and i am discussing him and the bullshit used to defend him. You arent...
This thread began about Johnson and compared him bizarrely with JC.
Do keep up.
Its a thread about the double standards between how boris is treated differently to corbyn by certain people. Those certain people then turned up, proved the point and proceded to dish out the usual hectoring, deflection and whataboutery.
Not one of you addressed the link and proceded to make it about corbyn, therefore the thread is about corbyn.. stop trying to back up and about turn.
Your exact words.. this thread is about Corbyn
It's like arguing with 2 different people.
It's quite simple.
The thread began about boris but on The 1st line jc was inexplicabley dragged into it.
The thread has descended into the usual JC v boris debate
Corbyn is mentioned in the first post (and almost all thereafter). Therfore it is about Corbyn.
Its not dificult to understand and your jibe about "its like arguing with two different people" is just bullshit. "I stand corrected..its like arguing with a crackpot bird..well you said that eyc Please try to stay on topic. You asked me a question. I answered it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
This is getting tedious know.. your exact words..thatcher has been brought into it...its almost as if you are trying to avoid the subject..etc
Thatcher was brought into it. Did i say you did it?
I cant be arsed arguing anymore.
If anyone hasn't lost the will to live they can make their own minds up
I think I'm losing the will to live myself.
Now who is avoiding simple questions? Running off because you are wrong and wont admit it. You cant prove i said you brought thatcher into it because i didn't. "I'm not running off, I'm on the verge of falling into a coma. If you want to discuss something relevant be my guest. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
It was investigating the labour party when Corbyn was in power.It was an investigation into a
Institutional as.A little heads up..the clue is in the title.Institution not individual
Yet all the digs on here have been about Corbyn being a liar.
The only deflection I can see ironically is where Thatcher was brought up."Corbyn is a liar. He lied about the whistleblowers and the facts in the programme and whilst the programme might not have been totally about him some of the content was and so is the resulting law suit. Trying to weasel out of it by saying "but it was about the party " is nothing more than you closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
It was investigating the labour party when Corbyn was in power.It was an investigation into a
Institutional as.A little heads up..the clue is in the title.Institution not individual
Yet all the digs on here have been about Corbyn being a liar.
The only deflection I can see ironically is where Thatcher was brought up.
Corbyn is a liar. He lied about the whistleblowers and the facts in the programme and whilst the programme might not have been totally about him some of the content was and so is the resulting law suit.
Trying to weasel out of it by saying "but it was about the party " is nothing more than you closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears."Jeez, this fella really has a hard on for Jezza | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hows that investigation into Islamophobia going that boris promised while running for the leadership? What about(ery) it?
Pot and kettle comes to mind..
If i was on a thread about Tories islamophobia you might have a case however this thread is about corbyn and i am discussing him and the bullshit used to defend him. You arent...
This thread began about Johnson and compared him bizarrely with JC.
Do keep up.
Its a thread about the double standards between how boris is treated differently to corbyn by certain people. Those certain people then turned up, proved the point and proceded to dish out the usual hectoring, deflection and whataboutery.
Not one of you addressed the link and proceded to make it about corbyn, therefore the thread is about corbyn.. stop trying to back up and about turn.
Your exact words.. this thread is about Corbyn
It's like arguing with 2 different people.
It's quite simple.
The thread began about boris but on The 1st line jc was inexplicabley dragged into it.
The thread has descended into the usual JC v boris debate
Corbyn is mentioned in the first post (and almost all thereafter). Therfore it is about Corbyn.
Its not dificult to understand and your jibe about "its like arguing with two different people" is just bullshit.
I stand corrected..its like arguing with a crackpot bird..well you said that eyc
Please try to stay on topic.
You asked me a question.
I answered it "You didnt answer it though, you tried to sidestep it and furthermore, i am on topic. Unlike your insults. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
It was investigating the labour party when Corbyn was in power.It was an investigation into a
Institutional as.A little heads up..the clue is in the title.Institution not individual
Yet all the digs on here have been about Corbyn being a liar.
The only deflection I can see ironically is where Thatcher was brought up.
Corbyn is a liar. He lied about the whistleblowers and the facts in the programme and whilst the programme might not have been totally about him some of the content was and so is the resulting law suit.
Trying to weasel out of it by saying "but it was about the party " is nothing more than you closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears.
Jeez, this fella really has a hard on for Jezza "Not jezza.. hypocrites. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
It was investigating the labour party when Corbyn was in power.It was an investigation into a
Institutional as.A little heads up..the clue is in the title.Institution not individual
Yet all the digs on here have been about Corbyn being a liar.
The only deflection I can see ironically is where Thatcher was brought up.
Corbyn is a liar. He lied about the whistleblowers and the facts in the programme and whilst the programme might not have been totally about him some of the content was and so is the resulting law suit.
Trying to weasel out of it by saying "but it was about the party " is nothing more than you closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears.
Jeez, this fella really has a hard on for Jezza
Not jezza.. hypocrites."Mate, he isn't even in power. He is old news, redundant, powerless. I'd be far more worried about the current shower of utter cunts running this country! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
This is getting tedious know.. your exact words..thatcher has been brought into it...its almost as if you are trying to avoid the subject..etc
Thatcher was brought into it. Did i say you did it?
I cant be arsed arguing anymore.
If anyone hasn't lost the will to live they can make their own minds up
I think I'm losing the will to live myself.
Now who is avoiding simple questions? Running off because you are wrong and wont admit it. You cant prove i said you brought thatcher into it because i didn't.
I'm not running off, I'm on the verge of falling into a coma.
If you want to discuss something relevant be my guest."Saying "i cant be arsed arguing anymore" whilst leaving your accusations unproven IS running off. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
It was investigating the labour party when Corbyn was in power.It was an investigation into a
Institutional as.A little heads up..the clue is in the title.Institution not individual
Yet all the digs on here have been about Corbyn being a liar.
The only deflection I can see ironically is where Thatcher was brought up.
Corbyn is a liar. He lied about the whistleblowers and the facts in the programme and whilst the programme might not have been totally about him some of the content was and so is the resulting law suit.
Trying to weasel out of it by saying "but it was about the party " is nothing more than you closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears.
Jeez, this fella really has a hard on for Jezza
Not jezza.. hypocrites.
Mate, he isn't even in power. He is old news, redundant, powerless. I'd be far more worried about the current shower of utter cunts running this country!"His behaviour is affecting the labour party today and moving forward so no, its not old news. Also ignoring the wrongdoings is A - perpetuating and enabling the bullshit, lies and deceit which is endemic within politics. B - destroying the credibility of the labour party and its supporters making any prospect of them being a viable opposition even more unlikely. C - deluding yourself that things would have been better with corbyn at the helm. This tribal nonsense is at the heart of what is wrong with politics and this country. Common sense has been replace by blind loyalty | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
It was investigating the labour party when Corbyn was in power.It was an investigation into a
Institutional as.A little heads up..the clue is in the title.Institution not individual
Yet all the digs on here have been about Corbyn being a liar.
The only deflection I can see ironically is where Thatcher was brought up.
Corbyn is a liar. He lied about the whistleblowers and the facts in the programme and whilst the programme might not have been totally about him some of the content was and so is the resulting law suit.
Trying to weasel out of it by saying "but it was about the party " is nothing more than you closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears."Finally. I'm a bit hamstrung as I didn't watch panorama so im going with what I've read over the last couple of days. A couple of whistleblowers accused the labour party of institutional as.1 of the claims surrounded the length of time it took to investigate someone. Labour denied it and it was due to be heard in court. Ks intervened and offered a pay out and apology. JC said this was a political decision which technically it is..as a judge hasn't made a decision The whistleblower and director wasnt happy and a libel case is forthcoming. What wasnt mentioned was that one of the whistleblowers was actually chair of an investigation into an individual which actually took longer than what he was accusing the labour party of. There has also been an 860 page report which found out no evidence these claims took any longer than necessary. Whilst umderstandly ks wants an end to this.. if he thinks this is the end,he isnt as clever as he thinks. After the pay out one of the whistleblowers stated 'this was only the beginning a rather strange this to say. Imho the case should have been heard in court. I'm guessing the extensive investigation into insititioknal as in the labour party will shed some light on it. Maybe JC should have kept his mouth shut but if you are accused of something and you genuinely believe you are innocent do you fight it or do you accept it or keep the peace. People can throw whatever Corbyn lies shouts out as they wish..bit again imo nothing has been conclusively proven. It's a very messy situation as the party is stricken in 2 and the right side of the party seemed determined to get rid of corbyn despite being democratically elected.. 2 failed coups etc. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
It was investigating the labour party when Corbyn was in power.It was an investigation into a
Institutional as.A little heads up..the clue is in the title.Institution not individual
Yet all the digs on here have been about Corbyn being a liar.
The only deflection I can see ironically is where Thatcher was brought up.
Corbyn is a liar. He lied about the whistleblowers and the facts in the programme and whilst the programme might not have been totally about him some of the content was and so is the resulting law suit.
Trying to weasel out of it by saying "but it was about the party " is nothing more than you closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears.
Jeez, this fella really has a hard on for Jezza "He isnt the only one tbf | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm a bit hamstrung as I didn't watch panorama so im going with what I've read over the last couple of days. A couple of whistleblowers accused the labour party of institutional as.1 of the claims surrounded the length of time it took to investigate someone. Labour denied it and it was due to be heard in court. Ks intervened and offered a pay out and apology. JC said this was a political decision which technically it is..as a judge hasn't made a decision The whistleblower and director wasnt happy and a libel case is forthcoming. What wasnt mentioned was that one of the whistleblowers was actually chair of an investigation into an individual which actually took longer than what he was accusing the labour party of. There has also been an 860 page report which found out no evidence these claims took any longer than necessary. Whilst umderstandly ks wants an end to this.. if he thinks this is the end,he isnt as clever as he thinks. After the pay out one of the whistleblowers stated 'this was only the beginning a rather strange this to say. Imho the case should have been heard in court. I'm guessing the extensive investigation into insititioknal as in the labour party will shed some light on it. Maybe JC should have kept his mouth shut but if you are accused of something and you genuinely believe you are innocent do you fight it or do you accept it or keep the peace. People can throw whatever Corbyn lies shouts out as they wish..bit again imo nothing has been conclusively proven. It's a very messy situation as the party is stricken in 2 and the right side of the party seemed determined to get rid of corbyn despite being democratically elected.. 2 failed coups etc." The labour party have UNRESERVEDLY withdrawn all the allegations of "bad faith, malice and lying" that they made against the whistleblowers , paid damages and avoided a courtcase. In my eyes this is an admission and proof of corbyns cover up, mishandling and lies. "In a statement read out in the High Court, Labour said it unreservedly apologised and was determined to root out anti-Semitism in the party and the wider Labour movement. "Before the broadcast of the programme, the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about these whistleblowers," the party said. "We acknowledge the many years of dedicated and committed service that the whistleblowers have given to the Labour Party as members and as staff. We appreciate their valuable contribution at all levels of the party. "We unreservedly withdraw all allegations of bad faith, malice and lying. We would like to apologise unreservedly for the distress, embarrassment and hurt caused by their publication. We have agreed to pay them damages."" The programme condemned corbyn as well as the party and i think this summary best describes the content - "Gideon Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said the show was “heartbreaking”. He said: “Former Labour officials have been compelled by their conscience to speak out, revealing the scale of the duplicity behind Labour’s failure to address the party’s anti-Semitism crisis,. “Whilst claiming to act against Jew hatred, Jeremy Corbyn’s agents and allies have carefully protected anti-Semites. “It was heartbreaking to watch the testimony of honourable lifelong Labour officials contemplating suicide and suffering breakdowns because of the actions of Mr Corbyn and his team,” Mr Falter said. “The charade of Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-racist activist has been blown apart. Mr Corbyn’s support for anti-Semites and his team’s protection of anti-Semites demonstrate that Mr Corbyn himself is an anti-Semite who is unfit to hold any public office.”" Pretty damning conclusion and the facts that lead to it are accepted by labours latest statement. As kier starmer was once director of public prosecutions i see his settlement out of court as a good indicator of how unlikely they were to win the court case despite corbyns and mcluskeys claim to the contrary. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
It was investigating the labour party when Corbyn was in power.It was an investigation into a
Institutional as.A little heads up..the clue is in the title.Institution not individual
Yet all the digs on here have been about Corbyn being a liar.
The only deflection I can see ironically is where Thatcher was brought up.
Corbyn is a liar. He lied about the whistleblowers and the facts in the programme and whilst the programme might not have been totally about him some of the content was and so is the resulting law suit.
Trying to weasel out of it by saying "but it was about the party " is nothing more than you closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears.
Jeez, this fella really has a hard on for Jezza
Not jezza.. hypocrites.
Mate, he isn't even in power. He is old news, redundant, powerless. I'd be far more worried about the current shower of utter cunts running this country!
His behaviour is affecting the labour party today and moving forward so no, its not old news.
Also ignoring the wrongdoings is
A - perpetuating and enabling the bullshit, lies and deceit which is endemic within politics.
B - destroying the credibility of the labour party and its supporters making any prospect of them being a viable opposition even more unlikely.
C - deluding yourself that things would have been better with corbyn at the helm.
This tribal nonsense is at the heart of what is wrong with politics and this country. Common sense has been replace by blind loyalty "You realise it wasnt just Corbyn who was unhappy with the decision?(hence the go fund me page) You seem quite happy to put all of this on 1 person. I asked on another thread to provide me a direct quote from jc where he had said or done something anti semitic. I'm still waiting. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm a bit hamstrung as I didn't watch panorama so im going with what I've read over the last couple of days. A couple of whistleblowers accused the labour party of institutional as.1 of the claims surrounded the length of time it took to investigate someone. Labour denied it and it was due to be heard in court. Ks intervened and offered a pay out and apology. JC said this was a political decision which technically it is..as a judge hasn't made a decision The whistleblower and director wasnt happy and a libel case is forthcoming. What wasnt mentioned was that one of the whistleblowers was actually chair of an investigation into an individual which actually took longer than what he was accusing the labour party of. There has also been an 860 page report which found out no evidence these claims took any longer than necessary. Whilst umderstandly ks wants an end to this.. if he thinks this is the end,he isnt as clever as he thinks. After the pay out one of the whistleblowers stated 'this was only the beginning a rather strange this to say. Imho the case should have been heard in court. I'm guessing the extensive investigation into insititioknal as in the labour party will shed some light on it. Maybe JC should have kept his mouth shut but if you are accused of something and you genuinely believe you are innocent do you fight it or do you accept it or keep the peace. People can throw whatever Corbyn lies shouts out as they wish..bit again imo nothing has been conclusively proven. It's a very messy situation as the party is stricken in 2 and the right side of the party seemed determined to get rid of corbyn despite being democratically elected.. 2 failed coups etc. The labour party have UNRESERVEDLY withdrawn all the allegations of "bad faith, malice and lying" that they made against the whistleblowers , paid damages and avoided a courtcase. In my eyes this is an admission and proof of corbyns cover up, mishandling and lies. "In a statement read out in the High Court, Labour said it unreservedly apologised and was determined to root out anti-Semitism in the party and the wider Labour movement. "Before the broadcast of the programme, the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about these whistleblowers," the party said. "We acknowledge the many years of dedicated and committed service that the whistleblowers have given to the Labour Party as members and as staff. We appreciate their valuable contribution at all levels of the party. "We unreservedly withdraw all allegations of bad faith, malice and lying. We would like to apologise unreservedly for the distress, embarrassment and hurt caused by their publication. We have agreed to pay them damages."" The programme condemned corbyn as well as the party and i think this summary best describes the content - "Gideon Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said the show was “heartbreaking”. He said: “Former Labour officials have been compelled by their conscience to speak out, revealing the scale of the duplicity behind Labour’s failure to address the party’s anti-Semitism crisis,. “Whilst claiming to act against Jew hatred, Jeremy Corbyn’s agents and allies have carefully protected anti-Semites. “It was heartbreaking to watch the testimony of honourable lifelong Labour officials contemplating suicide and suffering breakdowns because of the actions of Mr Corbyn and his team,” Mr Falter said. “The charade of Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-racist activist has been blown apart. Mr Corbyn’s support for anti-Semites and his team’s protection of anti-Semites demonstrate that Mr Corbyn himself is an anti-Semite who is unfit to hold any public office.”" Pretty damning conclusion and the facts that lead to it are accepted by labours latest statement. As kier starmer was once director of public prosecutions i see his settlement out of court as a good indicator of how unlikely they were to win the court case despite corbyns and mcluskeys claim to the contrary. " Some quite interesting stuff about gideon fawlter and his organisation online. The originator of the case was critical of the labour party. What a surprise. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Has he been on the sauce again? Poor Comrade Corby - Having GoFundMe to pay for his lies.
What lies are these exactly?
Imceidentally if you Google jeremy Corbyn the top 3 stories are ,unsurprisingly,detrimental ones from your fave paper.
Nearly fell off my chair in shock.
Oh what that Jezza is being sued by the people he lied about !! You haven't heard the news?
Which paper would you like it to be from? It's reported in most
Keep up now.
He is getting sued
Probs best wait until The outcome of the case though before calling him a liar.
Those people couldn't sue him 'unless' they called him a liar.
I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved.
Presumably if thec whistleblower doesn't win you will retract everything you have said?
Lionel, you and the rest of the corby club speculate about the tories, non labour voters and brexit supporters every single day.
Why the sudden importance of waiting for the official verdict?
Once again who are the corby club and how do you become a member?
When you say speculate does that mean discuss?
Is there a new decree that this is not allowed?
Your lost paragraph is non sensical.
"Speculate - form a theory or conjecture about a subject without firm evidence."
Your words - "I really don't see the point of speculating on it until its resolved."
You are free to "discuss" your speculations any time, and you do so every day however you are now telling others there is no point.
My last sentance was pointing out the hypocrisy within your statement and is completely sensical.
Thank you for googling speculate for me.
Corby has bee called a liar on this thread without a shred of evidence.Plus the case was about the labour party in general and not Corbyn as an individual. I fail to see the hypocrisy in pointkng that out I'm afraid
No evidence? You mean apart from the panorama programme, the whistleblowers, payouts, apologies and the court cases?
What about the infamous sitting on the train floor stunt where he was proven to be lying and continued to do so after being caught out?
A simple search of "Jeremy Corbyn lies" brings up as many as you would get for Boris. Of course the results for corbyn are all a smear campaign but the ones about boris are true beyond doubt...
Convenient that..
The 1st 4 are all 1 issue which was due to be settled in court but hasn't been.Perhaps we will find out in the upcoming investigation into anti semitism.
And I'll repeat again for the hard of reading.It was an investigation into the labour party.Not corbyn
No mention of the smear campaign found by a report under stamer...convenient that.
If I googled jeremy corbyn lies I think I could take a wild stab in the dark at the news sources which would conjure up.
When you rely on the mail,the Express and the rag for your 'evidence'you are on shaky ground.
You realise Johnson has been sacked twice for telling fibs.
In the recent report on russian influence it was stated he lied.
Still lying about a foreign power influence is small beer when compared to lying about a seat on a train.
Fairly sure you can do better than that
The panorama programme was about corbyns labour party's increase in antisemitism under his control, and also his handling of it. Corbyn is being taken to task directly over his lies in the ware /panorama case and also another defamation case that has just been signed off by a high court judge. Despite this, and your admision that he lied about the train seat you try to dismiss it as being media bias and on top of that you accuse me of whataboutery whist whist harking "but,but.. WHAT ABOUT boris".
Its laughable.
It also doesnt matter who brought up thatcher, you chose to discuss it but then try to stop corbyn being discussed despite it being the subject of the thread.
Superb.
So it's my fault because I reply to a post.Shouldnt you make a beeping noise when you back up like that.
I asked you to list Corbyns lies and you accuse me of not wanting him to be discussed.
Do you actually read what you type?
If you wanna accuse Corbyn of being a liar before the impending anti semitism/libel case once again be my guest.
For about the millionth time,and I'm going to give up after this as you seem to be incapable of reading.
The panaroma case was against institution anti semitism in the labour party.
Not jeremy Corbyn.
So one is a party and one is an individual. Can you see the difference or shall I do you a picture.
The train thing Is actually comical.
Oh and sorry to burst another of your bubbles but bj was actually mentioned by the OP in the 1st sentence.
Do you read what you type? You are the one that said people shouldn't be discussing corby and no one has said you cant discuss boris, only pointed out your hypocrisy.
Trying to claim the panorama program as nothing to do with corbyn is ridiculous. The programme, adresses labours handling of antisemitism under corbyns control as well as the increase in antisemitism attributed to his leadership. It is also him directly being sued as a result of his lies relating to that programme.
You choosing to engage in a tangential discussion is entirely your fault. Even more so when you focus your argument on it. Again, not stopping you, just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Show me where i have 'backed up' and i wil show where you have backed up and done a complete 180.
Another master of twisting words.
I said the programme was investigating as in the labour party as a whole.I never once said jc had nothing to do with it.
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?
You brought up Thatcher and when it was pointed out to that I didn't bring it up,you claimed it didn't matter.
Please show me where I have done a 180.
I'm all ears
You were trying to make a distinction between the party and corbyn to imply that corbyn has done nothing wrong. Corbyn was both responsible for the party and implicated in the programme so trying to distance him from it is somewhat disingenuous.
As for the 180, you stated that people shouldn't speculate about him and shouldn't talk about him because he is not the leader and then go on to make out that you dont have an issue with it.
It doesnt matter who brought up thatcher. You made the decision to run with it at the same time as saying corbyn is irreleveant as he is not in power.
When you answer someone a simple question they cannot answer it's time to say goodnight.
You tried to imply I brought Thatcher into the equation to deflect from Corbyn
When you were proved wrong all of a sudden "it doesn't matter'who brought Thatcher into it.
Consistency my dear boy.
Show me where i said you brought up thatcher.
Your (and others) entire contribution has been attempting to deflect from corbyn and your posts about thatcher were an extension of that.
Also, show me the simple question i haven't answered as i have addressed this completely and repeatedly - "
See if you can answer a simple question.Was panorama investigating as by Corbyn or was it investigating as in the labour party whilst Corbyn was leader?"
It was investigating the labour party when Corbyn was in power.It was an investigation into a
Institutional as.A little heads up..the clue is in the title.Institution not individual
Yet all the digs on here have been about Corbyn being a liar.
The only deflection I can see ironically is where Thatcher was brought up.
Corbyn is a liar. He lied about the whistleblowers and the facts in the programme and whilst the programme might not have been totally about him some of the content was and so is the resulting law suit.
Trying to weasel out of it by saying "but it was about the party " is nothing more than you closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears.
Jeez, this fella really has a hard on for Jezza
Not jezza.. hypocrites.
Mate, he isn't even in power. He is old news, redundant, powerless. I'd be far more worried about the current shower of utter cunts running this country!
His behaviour is affecting the labour party today and moving forward so no, its not old news.
Also ignoring the wrongdoings is
A - perpetuating and enabling the bullshit, lies and deceit which is endemic within politics.
B - destroying the credibility of the labour party and its supporters making any prospect of them being a viable opposition even more unlikely.
C - deluding yourself that things would have been better with corbyn at the helm.
This tribal nonsense is at the heart of what is wrong with politics and this country. Common sense has been replace by blind loyalty
You realise it wasnt just Corbyn who was unhappy with the decision?(hence the go fund me page)
You seem quite happy to put all of this on 1 person.
I asked on another thread to provide me a direct quote from jc where he had said or done something anti semitic.
I'm still waiting.
"Tommy Robinson gets go fund me support and many followers, hardly a good indicator or credibility now is it? I havent put it all on Corbyn, simply pointing out his involvement. You however are trying to put it all on the party. One example of corbyns antisemitism is writing the foreword and a glowing reccomendation for a deeply antisemitic republication of an outdated book. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-antisemitism-book-ja-hobson-imperalism-jewish-labour-a8894086.html Then there is his membership of a secret facebook group called Palestine live which contained antisemitic posts, jewish conspirasy theories, nazi caricatures and holocaust deniers. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/08/labour-suspends-party-members-in-antisemitic-facebook-group The same article details him commenting against a person offended by an antisemetic mural in london. He was also a member of an anti isreal group ran by a holocaust sceptic. He was given the title antisemitic well before his leadership making claims of a smear campaign dubious at best. Sure, he denies being antisemitic and dismisses the accusations as misunderstandings but the labour parties latest statement throws that into serious doubt if it wasn't already. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm a bit hamstrung as I didn't watch panorama so im going with what I've read over the last couple of days. A couple of whistleblowers accused the labour party of institutional as.1 of the claims surrounded the length of time it took to investigate someone. Labour denied it and it was due to be heard in court. Ks intervened and offered a pay out and apology. JC said this was a political decision which technically it is..as a judge hasn't made a decision The whistleblower and director wasnt happy and a libel case is forthcoming. What wasnt mentioned was that one of the whistleblowers was actually chair of an investigation into an individual which actually took longer than what he was accusing the labour party of. There has also been an 860 page report which found out no evidence these claims took any longer than necessary. Whilst umderstandly ks wants an end to this.. if he thinks this is the end,he isnt as clever as he thinks. After the pay out one of the whistleblowers stated 'this was only the beginning a rather strange this to say. Imho the case should have been heard in court. I'm guessing the extensive investigation into insititioknal as in the labour party will shed some light on it. Maybe JC should have kept his mouth shut but if you are accused of something and you genuinely believe you are innocent do you fight it or do you accept it or keep the peace. People can throw whatever Corbyn lies shouts out as they wish..bit again imo nothing has been conclusively proven. It's a very messy situation as the party is stricken in 2 and the right side of the party seemed determined to get rid of corbyn despite being democratically elected.. 2 failed coups etc. The labour party have UNRESERVEDLY withdrawn all the allegations of "bad faith, malice and lying" that they made against the whistleblowers , paid damages and avoided a courtcase. In my eyes this is an admission and proof of corbyns cover up, mishandling and lies. "In a statement read out in the High Court, Labour said it unreservedly apologised and was determined to root out anti-Semitism in the party and the wider Labour movement. "Before the broadcast of the programme, the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about these whistleblowers," the party said. "We acknowledge the many years of dedicated and committed service that the whistleblowers have given to the Labour Party as members and as staff. We appreciate their valuable contribution at all levels of the party. "We unreservedly withdraw all allegations of bad faith, malice and lying. We would like to apologise unreservedly for the distress, embarrassment and hurt caused by their publication. We have agreed to pay them damages."" The programme condemned corbyn as well as the party and i think this summary best describes the content - "Gideon Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said the show was “heartbreaking”. He said: “Former Labour officials have been compelled by their conscience to speak out, revealing the scale of the duplicity behind Labour’s failure to address the party’s anti-Semitism crisis,. “Whilst claiming to act against Jew hatred, Jeremy Corbyn’s agents and allies have carefully protected anti-Semites. “It was heartbreaking to watch the testimony of honourable lifelong Labour officials contemplating suicide and suffering breakdowns because of the actions of Mr Corbyn and his team,” Mr Falter said. “The charade of Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-racist activist has been blown apart. Mr Corbyn’s support for anti-Semites and his team’s protection of anti-Semites demonstrate that Mr Corbyn himself is an anti-Semite who is unfit to hold any public office.”" Pretty damning conclusion and the facts that lead to it are accepted by labours latest statement. As kier starmer was once director of public prosecutions i see his settlement out of court as a good indicator of how unlikely they were to win the court case despite corbyns and mcluskeys claim to the contrary. Some quite interesting stuff about gideon fawlter and his organisation online. The originator of the case was critical of the labour party. What a surprise. " What interesting stuff? Or are you just going to follow in corbyns footsteps of throwing unsubstantiated muck and inferences at others rather than give any proof of innocence? Why would it be surprising that someone making a case against labour has an issue with them? Its a prerequisite of making the case. If there was nothing wrong there wouldnt be anything to complain about. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm a bit hamstrung as I didn't watch panorama so im going with what I've read over the last couple of days. A couple of whistleblowers accused the labour party of institutional as.1 of the claims surrounded the length of time it took to investigate someone. Labour denied it and it was due to be heard in court. Ks intervened and offered a pay out and apology. JC said this was a political decision which technically it is..as a judge hasn't made a decision The whistleblower and director wasnt happy and a libel case is forthcoming. What wasnt mentioned was that one of the whistleblowers was actually chair of an investigation into an individual which actually took longer than what he was accusing the labour party of. There has also been an 860 page report which found out no evidence these claims took any longer than necessary. Whilst umderstandly ks wants an end to this.. if he thinks this is the end,he isnt as clever as he thinks. After the pay out one of the whistleblowers stated 'this was only the beginning a rather strange this to say. Imho the case should have been heard in court. I'm guessing the extensive investigation into insititioknal as in the labour party will shed some light on it. Maybe JC should have kept his mouth shut but if you are accused of something and you genuinely believe you are innocent do you fight it or do you accept it or keep the peace. People can throw whatever Corbyn lies shouts out as they wish..bit again imo nothing has been conclusively proven. It's a very messy situation as the party is stricken in 2 and the right side of the party seemed determined to get rid of corbyn despite being democratically elected.. 2 failed coups etc. The labour party have UNRESERVEDLY withdrawn all the allegations of "bad faith, malice and lying" that they made against the whistleblowers , paid damages and avoided a courtcase. In my eyes this is an admission and proof of corbyns cover up, mishandling and lies. "In a statement read out in the High Court, Labour said it unreservedly apologised and was determined to root out anti-Semitism in the party and the wider Labour movement. "Before the broadcast of the programme, the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about these whistleblowers," the party said. "We acknowledge the many years of dedicated and committed service that the whistleblowers have given to the Labour Party as members and as staff. We appreciate their valuable contribution at all levels of the party. "We unreservedly withdraw all allegations of bad faith, malice and lying. We would like to apologise unreservedly for the distress, embarrassment and hurt caused by their publication. We have agreed to pay them damages."" The programme condemned corbyn as well as the party and i think this summary best describes the content - "Gideon Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said the show was “heartbreaking”. He said: “Former Labour officials have been compelled by their conscience to speak out, revealing the scale of the duplicity behind Labour’s failure to address the party’s anti-Semitism crisis,. “Whilst claiming to act against Jew hatred, Jeremy Corbyn’s agents and allies have carefully protected anti-Semites. “It was heartbreaking to watch the testimony of honourable lifelong Labour officials contemplating suicide and suffering breakdowns because of the actions of Mr Corbyn and his team,” Mr Falter said. “The charade of Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-racist activist has been blown apart. Mr Corbyn’s support for anti-Semites and his team’s protection of anti-Semites demonstrate that Mr Corbyn himself is an anti-Semite who is unfit to hold any public office.”" Pretty damning conclusion and the facts that lead to it are accepted by labours latest statement. As kier starmer was once director of public prosecutions i see his settlement out of court as a good indicator of how unlikely they were to win the court case despite corbyns and mcluskeys claim to the contrary. Some quite interesting stuff about gideon fawlter and his organisation online. The originator of the case was critical of the labour party. What a surprise. What interesting stuff? Or are you just going to follow in corbyns footsteps of throwing unsubstantiated muck and inferences at others rather than give any proof of innocence? Why would it be surprising that someone making a case against labour has an issue with them? Its a prerequisite of making the case. If there was nothing wrong there wouldnt be anything to complain about." Not at all.Just did some background reading.They sound like a great bunch of Lads | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite?" It depends 'how' you criticise Israel and 'who' in the TwitterSphere decides to take umbridge at any given moment of the day really. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm a bit hamstrung as I didn't watch panorama so im going with what I've read over the last couple of days. A couple of whistleblowers accused the labour party of institutional as.1 of the claims surrounded the length of time it took to investigate someone. Labour denied it and it was due to be heard in court. Ks intervened and offered a pay out and apology. JC said this was a political decision which technically it is..as a judge hasn't made a decision The whistleblower and director wasnt happy and a libel case is forthcoming. What wasnt mentioned was that one of the whistleblowers was actually chair of an investigation into an individual which actually took longer than what he was accusing the labour party of. There has also been an 860 page report which found out no evidence these claims took any longer than necessary. Whilst umderstandly ks wants an end to this.. if he thinks this is the end,he isnt as clever as he thinks. After the pay out one of the whistleblowers stated 'this was only the beginning a rather strange this to say. Imho the case should have been heard in court. I'm guessing the extensive investigation into insititioknal as in the labour party will shed some light on it. Maybe JC should have kept his mouth shut but if you are accused of something and you genuinely believe you are innocent do you fight it or do you accept it or keep the peace. People can throw whatever Corbyn lies shouts out as they wish..bit again imo nothing has been conclusively proven. It's a very messy situation as the party is stricken in 2 and the right side of the party seemed determined to get rid of corbyn despite being democratically elected.. 2 failed coups etc. The labour party have UNRESERVEDLY withdrawn all the allegations of "bad faith, malice and lying" that they made against the whistleblowers , paid damages and avoided a courtcase. In my eyes this is an admission and proof of corbyns cover up, mishandling and lies. "In a statement read out in the High Court, Labour said it unreservedly apologised and was determined to root out anti-Semitism in the party and the wider Labour movement. "Before the broadcast of the programme, the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about these whistleblowers," the party said. "We acknowledge the many years of dedicated and committed service that the whistleblowers have given to the Labour Party as members and as staff. We appreciate their valuable contribution at all levels of the party. "We unreservedly withdraw all allegations of bad faith, malice and lying. We would like to apologise unreservedly for the distress, embarrassment and hurt caused by their publication. We have agreed to pay them damages."" The programme condemned corbyn as well as the party and i think this summary best describes the content - "Gideon Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said the show was “heartbreaking”. He said: “Former Labour officials have been compelled by their conscience to speak out, revealing the scale of the duplicity behind Labour’s failure to address the party’s anti-Semitism crisis,. “Whilst claiming to act against Jew hatred, Jeremy Corbyn’s agents and allies have carefully protected anti-Semites. “It was heartbreaking to watch the testimony of honourable lifelong Labour officials contemplating suicide and suffering breakdowns because of the actions of Mr Corbyn and his team,” Mr Falter said. “The charade of Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-racist activist has been blown apart. Mr Corbyn’s support for anti-Semites and his team’s protection of anti-Semites demonstrate that Mr Corbyn himself is an anti-Semite who is unfit to hold any public office.”" Pretty damning conclusion and the facts that lead to it are accepted by labours latest statement. As kier starmer was once director of public prosecutions i see his settlement out of court as a good indicator of how unlikely they were to win the court case despite corbyns and mcluskeys claim to the contrary. Some quite interesting stuff about gideon fawlter and his organisation online. The originator of the case was critical of the labour party. What a surprise. What interesting stuff? Or are you just going to follow in corbyns footsteps of throwing unsubstantiated muck and inferences at others rather than give any proof of innocence? Why would it be surprising that someone making a case against labour has an issue with them? Its a prerequisite of making the case. If there was nothing wrong there wouldnt be anything to complain about. Not at all.Just did some background reading.They sound like a great bunch of Lads" So just casting the seed of doubt with no evidence for us then? You have been taking tips from JC havent you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite?" Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm a bit hamstrung as I didn't watch panorama so im going with what I've read over the last couple of days. A couple of whistleblowers accused the labour party of institutional as.1 of the claims surrounded the length of time it took to investigate someone. Labour denied it and it was due to be heard in court. Ks intervened and offered a pay out and apology. JC said this was a political decision which technically it is..as a judge hasn't made a decision The whistleblower and director wasnt happy and a libel case is forthcoming. What wasnt mentioned was that one of the whistleblowers was actually chair of an investigation into an individual which actually took longer than what he was accusing the labour party of. There has also been an 860 page report which found out no evidence these claims took any longer than necessary. Whilst umderstandly ks wants an end to this.. if he thinks this is the end,he isnt as clever as he thinks. After the pay out one of the whistleblowers stated 'this was only the beginning a rather strange this to say. Imho the case should have been heard in court. I'm guessing the extensive investigation into insititioknal as in the labour party will shed some light on it. Maybe JC should have kept his mouth shut but if you are accused of something and you genuinely believe you are innocent do you fight it or do you accept it or keep the peace. People can throw whatever Corbyn lies shouts out as they wish..bit again imo nothing has been conclusively proven. It's a very messy situation as the party is stricken in 2 and the right side of the party seemed determined to get rid of corbyn despite being democratically elected.. 2 failed coups etc. The labour party have UNRESERVEDLY withdrawn all the allegations of "bad faith, malice and lying" that they made against the whistleblowers , paid damages and avoided a courtcase. In my eyes this is an admission and proof of corbyns cover up, mishandling and lies. "In a statement read out in the High Court, Labour said it unreservedly apologised and was determined to root out anti-Semitism in the party and the wider Labour movement. "Before the broadcast of the programme, the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about these whistleblowers," the party said. "We acknowledge the many years of dedicated and committed service that the whistleblowers have given to the Labour Party as members and as staff. We appreciate their valuable contribution at all levels of the party. "We unreservedly withdraw all allegations of bad faith, malice and lying. We would like to apologise unreservedly for the distress, embarrassment and hurt caused by their publication. We have agreed to pay them damages."" The programme condemned corbyn as well as the party and i think this summary best describes the content - "Gideon Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said the show was “heartbreaking”. He said: “Former Labour officials have been compelled by their conscience to speak out, revealing the scale of the duplicity behind Labour’s failure to address the party’s anti-Semitism crisis,. “Whilst claiming to act against Jew hatred, Jeremy Corbyn’s agents and allies have carefully protected anti-Semites. “It was heartbreaking to watch the testimony of honourable lifelong Labour officials contemplating suicide and suffering breakdowns because of the actions of Mr Corbyn and his team,” Mr Falter said. “The charade of Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-racist activist has been blown apart. Mr Corbyn’s support for anti-Semites and his team’s protection of anti-Semites demonstrate that Mr Corbyn himself is an anti-Semite who is unfit to hold any public office.”" Pretty damning conclusion and the facts that lead to it are accepted by labours latest statement. As kier starmer was once director of public prosecutions i see his settlement out of court as a good indicator of how unlikely they were to win the court case despite corbyns and mcluskeys claim to the contrary. Some quite interesting stuff about gideon fawlter and his organisation online. The originator of the case was critical of the labour party. What a surprise. What interesting stuff? Or are you just going to follow in corbyns footsteps of throwing unsubstantiated muck and inferences at others rather than give any proof of innocence? Why would it be surprising that someone making a case against labour has an issue with them? Its a prerequisite of making the case. If there was nothing wrong there wouldnt be anything to complain about. Not at all.Just did some background reading.They sound like a great bunch of Lads So just casting the seed of doubt with no evidence for us then? You have been taking tips from JC havent you? "Ok well for a start they are funded by a group called the jewish national fund..I suggest you Google that click on the news tab. In addition in their archive tab where they claim to promote harmony there are 2 articles about far right groups in Britain..the English defence league..and the national defence league. There are 77 articles about Corbyn. In other words a lifelong pacifist is over 30 times more racist than the most far right groups in this country. Riiiiight. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain " Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm a bit hamstrung as I didn't watch panorama so im going with what I've read over the last couple of days. A couple of whistleblowers accused the labour party of institutional as.1 of the claims surrounded the length of time it took to investigate someone. Labour denied it and it was due to be heard in court. Ks intervened and offered a pay out and apology. JC said this was a political decision which technically it is..as a judge hasn't made a decision The whistleblower and director wasnt happy and a libel case is forthcoming. What wasnt mentioned was that one of the whistleblowers was actually chair of an investigation into an individual which actually took longer than what he was accusing the labour party of. There has also been an 860 page report which found out no evidence these claims took any longer than necessary. Whilst umderstandly ks wants an end to this.. if he thinks this is the end,he isnt as clever as he thinks. After the pay out one of the whistleblowers stated 'this was only the beginning a rather strange this to say. Imho the case should have been heard in court. I'm guessing the extensive investigation into insititioknal as in the labour party will shed some light on it. Maybe JC should have kept his mouth shut but if you are accused of something and you genuinely believe you are innocent do you fight it or do you accept it or keep the peace. People can throw whatever Corbyn lies shouts out as they wish..bit again imo nothing has been conclusively proven. It's a very messy situation as the party is stricken in 2 and the right side of the party seemed determined to get rid of corbyn despite being democratically elected.. 2 failed coups etc. The labour party have UNRESERVEDLY withdrawn all the allegations of "bad faith, malice and lying" that they made against the whistleblowers , paid damages and avoided a courtcase. In my eyes this is an admission and proof of corbyns cover up, mishandling and lies. "In a statement read out in the High Court, Labour said it unreservedly apologised and was determined to root out anti-Semitism in the party and the wider Labour movement. "Before the broadcast of the programme, the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about these whistleblowers," the party said. "We acknowledge the many years of dedicated and committed service that the whistleblowers have given to the Labour Party as members and as staff. We appreciate their valuable contribution at all levels of the party. "We unreservedly withdraw all allegations of bad faith, malice and lying. We would like to apologise unreservedly for the distress, embarrassment and hurt caused by their publication. We have agreed to pay them damages."" The programme condemned corbyn as well as the party and i think this summary best describes the content - "Gideon Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said the show was “heartbreaking”. He said: “Former Labour officials have been compelled by their conscience to speak out, revealing the scale of the duplicity behind Labour’s failure to address the party’s anti-Semitism crisis,. “Whilst claiming to act against Jew hatred, Jeremy Corbyn’s agents and allies have carefully protected anti-Semites. “It was heartbreaking to watch the testimony of honourable lifelong Labour officials contemplating suicide and suffering breakdowns because of the actions of Mr Corbyn and his team,” Mr Falter said. “The charade of Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-racist activist has been blown apart. Mr Corbyn’s support for anti-Semites and his team’s protection of anti-Semites demonstrate that Mr Corbyn himself is an anti-Semite who is unfit to hold any public office.”" Pretty damning conclusion and the facts that lead to it are accepted by labours latest statement. As kier starmer was once director of public prosecutions i see his settlement out of court as a good indicator of how unlikely they were to win the court case despite corbyns and mcluskeys claim to the contrary. Some quite interesting stuff about gideon fawlter and his organisation online. The originator of the case was critical of the labour party. What a surprise. What interesting stuff? Or are you just going to follow in corbyns footsteps of throwing unsubstantiated muck and inferences at others rather than give any proof of innocence? Why would it be surprising that someone making a case against labour has an issue with them? Its a prerequisite of making the case. If there was nothing wrong there wouldnt be anything to complain about. Not at all.Just did some background reading.They sound like a great bunch of Lads So just casting the seed of doubt with no evidence for us then? You have been taking tips from JC havent you?
Ok well for a start they are funded by a group called the jewish national fund..I suggest you Google that click on the news tab.
In addition in their archive tab where they claim to promote harmony there are 2 articles about far right groups in Britain..the English defence league..and the national defence league.
There are 77 articles about Corbyn.
In other words a lifelong pacifist is over 30 times more racist than the most far right groups in this country.
Riiiiight."So still not providing any evidence then? Put your money where your mouth is lionel, you always want proof, evidence and credible links yet you are stalling providing them yourself | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable?" Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. " Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm a bit hamstrung as I didn't watch panorama so im going with what I've read over the last couple of days. A couple of whistleblowers accused the labour party of institutional as.1 of the claims surrounded the length of time it took to investigate someone. Labour denied it and it was due to be heard in court. Ks intervened and offered a pay out and apology. JC said this was a political decision which technically it is..as a judge hasn't made a decision The whistleblower and director wasnt happy and a libel case is forthcoming. What wasnt mentioned was that one of the whistleblowers was actually chair of an investigation into an individual which actually took longer than what he was accusing the labour party of. There has also been an 860 page report which found out no evidence these claims took any longer than necessary. Whilst umderstandly ks wants an end to this.. if he thinks this is the end,he isnt as clever as he thinks. After the pay out one of the whistleblowers stated 'this was only the beginning a rather strange this to say. Imho the case should have been heard in court. I'm guessing the extensive investigation into insititioknal as in the labour party will shed some light on it. Maybe JC should have kept his mouth shut but if you are accused of something and you genuinely believe you are innocent do you fight it or do you accept it or keep the peace. People can throw whatever Corbyn lies shouts out as they wish..bit again imo nothing has been conclusively proven. It's a very messy situation as the party is stricken in 2 and the right side of the party seemed determined to get rid of corbyn despite being democratically elected.. 2 failed coups etc. The labour party have UNRESERVEDLY withdrawn all the allegations of "bad faith, malice and lying" that they made against the whistleblowers , paid damages and avoided a courtcase. In my eyes this is an admission and proof of corbyns cover up, mishandling and lies. "In a statement read out in the High Court, Labour said it unreservedly apologised and was determined to root out anti-Semitism in the party and the wider Labour movement. "Before the broadcast of the programme, the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about these whistleblowers," the party said. "We acknowledge the many years of dedicated and committed service that the whistleblowers have given to the Labour Party as members and as staff. We appreciate their valuable contribution at all levels of the party. "We unreservedly withdraw all allegations of bad faith, malice and lying. We would like to apologise unreservedly for the distress, embarrassment and hurt caused by their publication. We have agreed to pay them damages."" The programme condemned corbyn as well as the party and i think this summary best describes the content - "Gideon Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said the show was “heartbreaking”. He said: “Former Labour officials have been compelled by their conscience to speak out, revealing the scale of the duplicity behind Labour’s failure to address the party’s anti-Semitism crisis,. “Whilst claiming to act against Jew hatred, Jeremy Corbyn’s agents and allies have carefully protected anti-Semites. “It was heartbreaking to watch the testimony of honourable lifelong Labour officials contemplating suicide and suffering breakdowns because of the actions of Mr Corbyn and his team,” Mr Falter said. “The charade of Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-racist activist has been blown apart. Mr Corbyn’s support for anti-Semites and his team’s protection of anti-Semites demonstrate that Mr Corbyn himself is an anti-Semite who is unfit to hold any public office.”" Pretty damning conclusion and the facts that lead to it are accepted by labours latest statement. As kier starmer was once director of public prosecutions i see his settlement out of court as a good indicator of how unlikely they were to win the court case despite corbyns and mcluskeys claim to the contrary. Some quite interesting stuff about gideon fawlter and his organisation online. The originator of the case was critical of the labour party. What a surprise. What interesting stuff? Or are you just going to follow in corbyns footsteps of throwing unsubstantiated muck and inferences at others rather than give any proof of innocence? Why would it be surprising that someone making a case against labour has an issue with them? Its a prerequisite of making the case. If there was nothing wrong there wouldnt be anything to complain about. Not at all.Just did some background reading.They sound like a great bunch of Lads So just casting the seed of doubt with no evidence for us then? You have been taking tips from JC havent you?
Ok well for a start they are funded by a group called the jewish national fund..I suggest you Google that click on the news tab.
In addition in their archive tab where they claim to promote harmony there are 2 articles about far right groups in Britain..the English defence league..and the national defence league.
There are 77 articles about Corbyn.
In other words a lifelong pacifist is over 30 times more racist than the most far right groups in this country.
Riiiiight.
So still not providing any evidence then? Put your money where your mouth is lionel, you always want proof, evidence and credible links yet you are stalling providing them yourself"That was published by Tony Bernstein in a piece called the electronic intifada.. its available online. I've told you the name of who they are funded by.Type in the name on Google and see what comes out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. " Are you actually capable of answering a simple question? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret." How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm a bit hamstrung as I didn't watch panorama so im going with what I've read over the last couple of days. A couple of whistleblowers accused the labour party of institutional as.1 of the claims surrounded the length of time it took to investigate someone. Labour denied it and it was due to be heard in court. Ks intervened and offered a pay out and apology. JC said this was a political decision which technically it is..as a judge hasn't made a decision The whistleblower and director wasnt happy and a libel case is forthcoming. What wasnt mentioned was that one of the whistleblowers was actually chair of an investigation into an individual which actually took longer than what he was accusing the labour party of. There has also been an 860 page report which found out no evidence these claims took any longer than necessary. Whilst umderstandly ks wants an end to this.. if he thinks this is the end,he isnt as clever as he thinks. After the pay out one of the whistleblowers stated 'this was only the beginning a rather strange this to say. Imho the case should have been heard in court. I'm guessing the extensive investigation into insititioknal as in the labour party will shed some light on it. Maybe JC should have kept his mouth shut but if you are accused of something and you genuinely believe you are innocent do you fight it or do you accept it or keep the peace. People can throw whatever Corbyn lies shouts out as they wish..bit again imo nothing has been conclusively proven. It's a very messy situation as the party is stricken in 2 and the right side of the party seemed determined to get rid of corbyn despite being democratically elected.. 2 failed coups etc. The labour party have UNRESERVEDLY withdrawn all the allegations of "bad faith, malice and lying" that they made against the whistleblowers , paid damages and avoided a courtcase. In my eyes this is an admission and proof of corbyns cover up, mishandling and lies. "In a statement read out in the High Court, Labour said it unreservedly apologised and was determined to root out anti-Semitism in the party and the wider Labour movement. "Before the broadcast of the programme, the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about these whistleblowers," the party said. "We acknowledge the many years of dedicated and committed service that the whistleblowers have given to the Labour Party as members and as staff. We appreciate their valuable contribution at all levels of the party. "We unreservedly withdraw all allegations of bad faith, malice and lying. We would like to apologise unreservedly for the distress, embarrassment and hurt caused by their publication. We have agreed to pay them damages."" The programme condemned corbyn as well as the party and i think this summary best describes the content - "Gideon Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said the show was “heartbreaking”. He said: “Former Labour officials have been compelled by their conscience to speak out, revealing the scale of the duplicity behind Labour’s failure to address the party’s anti-Semitism crisis,. “Whilst claiming to act against Jew hatred, Jeremy Corbyn’s agents and allies have carefully protected anti-Semites. “It was heartbreaking to watch the testimony of honourable lifelong Labour officials contemplating suicide and suffering breakdowns because of the actions of Mr Corbyn and his team,” Mr Falter said. “The charade of Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-racist activist has been blown apart. Mr Corbyn’s support for anti-Semites and his team’s protection of anti-Semites demonstrate that Mr Corbyn himself is an anti-Semite who is unfit to hold any public office.”" Pretty damning conclusion and the facts that lead to it are accepted by labours latest statement. As kier starmer was once director of public prosecutions i see his settlement out of court as a good indicator of how unlikely they were to win the court case despite corbyns and mcluskeys claim to the contrary. Some quite interesting stuff about gideon fawlter and his organisation online. The originator of the case was critical of the labour party. What a surprise. What interesting stuff? Or are you just going to follow in corbyns footsteps of throwing unsubstantiated muck and inferences at others rather than give any proof of innocence? Why would it be surprising that someone making a case against labour has an issue with them? Its a prerequisite of making the case. If there was nothing wrong there wouldnt be anything to complain about. Not at all.Just did some background reading.They sound like a great bunch of Lads So just casting the seed of doubt with no evidence for us then? You have been taking tips from JC havent you?
Ok well for a start they are funded by a group called the jewish national fund..I suggest you Google that click on the news tab.
In addition in their archive tab where they claim to promote harmony there are 2 articles about far right groups in Britain..the English defence league..and the national defence league.
There are 77 articles about Corbyn.
In other words a lifelong pacifist is over 30 times more racist than the most far right groups in this country.
Riiiiight.
So still not providing any evidence then? Put your money where your mouth is lionel, you always want proof, evidence and credible links yet you are stalling providing them yourself
That was published by Tony Bernstein in a piece called the electronic intifada.. its available online.
I've told you the name of who they are funded by.Type in the name on Google and see what comes out."Still no link, proof or evidence and referencing a pro palestine group. I expected better from someone that spends their days rebuking biased sources... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly?" Once is enough.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Are you actually capable of answering a simple question?" You literally quoted me answering your question. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly? Once is enough.." 'Repeatedly having to apologise for making the mistake again and again' 1 book. Are you counting individual copies of the book? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Are you actually capable of answering a simple question? You literally quoted me answering your question. "Sigh I'll try once more. Are you anti semitic if you criticise Israel? Please note.. this is a general question.Seriously you don't need to answer every single question with the words jeremy corbyn in the answer. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly? Once is enough.. 'Repeatedly having to apologise for making the mistake again and again' 1 book. Are you counting individual copies of the book?" The same mistake is being associated himself with antisemitic incedents. Antisemetic book, mural, associates, facebook group, rallies etc. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm a bit hamstrung as I didn't watch panorama so im going with what I've read over the last couple of days. A couple of whistleblowers accused the labour party of institutional as.1 of the claims surrounded the length of time it took to investigate someone. Labour denied it and it was due to be heard in court. Ks intervened and offered a pay out and apology. JC said this was a political decision which technically it is..as a judge hasn't made a decision The whistleblower and director wasnt happy and a libel case is forthcoming. What wasnt mentioned was that one of the whistleblowers was actually chair of an investigation into an individual which actually took longer than what he was accusing the labour party of. There has also been an 860 page report which found out no evidence these claims took any longer than necessary. Whilst umderstandly ks wants an end to this.. if he thinks this is the end,he isnt as clever as he thinks. After the pay out one of the whistleblowers stated 'this was only the beginning a rather strange this to say. Imho the case should have been heard in court. I'm guessing the extensive investigation into insititioknal as in the labour party will shed some light on it. Maybe JC should have kept his mouth shut but if you are accused of something and you genuinely believe you are innocent do you fight it or do you accept it or keep the peace. People can throw whatever Corbyn lies shouts out as they wish..bit again imo nothing has been conclusively proven. It's a very messy situation as the party is stricken in 2 and the right side of the party seemed determined to get rid of corbyn despite being democratically elected.. 2 failed coups etc. The labour party have UNRESERVEDLY withdrawn all the allegations of "bad faith, malice and lying" that they made against the whistleblowers , paid damages and avoided a courtcase. In my eyes this is an admission and proof of corbyns cover up, mishandling and lies. "In a statement read out in the High Court, Labour said it unreservedly apologised and was determined to root out anti-Semitism in the party and the wider Labour movement. "Before the broadcast of the programme, the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about these whistleblowers," the party said. "We acknowledge the many years of dedicated and committed service that the whistleblowers have given to the Labour Party as members and as staff. We appreciate their valuable contribution at all levels of the party. "We unreservedly withdraw all allegations of bad faith, malice and lying. We would like to apologise unreservedly for the distress, embarrassment and hurt caused by their publication. We have agreed to pay them damages."" The programme condemned corbyn as well as the party and i think this summary best describes the content - "Gideon Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said the show was “heartbreaking”. He said: “Former Labour officials have been compelled by their conscience to speak out, revealing the scale of the duplicity behind Labour’s failure to address the party’s anti-Semitism crisis,. “Whilst claiming to act against Jew hatred, Jeremy Corbyn’s agents and allies have carefully protected anti-Semites. “It was heartbreaking to watch the testimony of honourable lifelong Labour officials contemplating suicide and suffering breakdowns because of the actions of Mr Corbyn and his team,” Mr Falter said. “The charade of Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-racist activist has been blown apart. Mr Corbyn’s support for anti-Semites and his team’s protection of anti-Semites demonstrate that Mr Corbyn himself is an anti-Semite who is unfit to hold any public office.”" Pretty damning conclusion and the facts that lead to it are accepted by labours latest statement. As kier starmer was once director of public prosecutions i see his settlement out of court as a good indicator of how unlikely they were to win the court case despite corbyns and mcluskeys claim to the contrary. Some quite interesting stuff about gideon fawlter and his organisation online. The originator of the case was critical of the labour party. What a surprise. What interesting stuff? Or are you just going to follow in corbyns footsteps of throwing unsubstantiated muck and inferences at others rather than give any proof of innocence? Why would it be surprising that someone making a case against labour has an issue with them? Its a prerequisite of making the case. If there was nothing wrong there wouldnt be anything to complain about. Not at all.Just did some background reading.They sound like a great bunch of Lads So just casting the seed of doubt with no evidence for us then? You have been taking tips from JC havent you?
Ok well for a start they are funded by a group called the jewish national fund..I suggest you Google that click on the news tab.
In addition in their archive tab where they claim to promote harmony there are 2 articles about far right groups in Britain..the English defence league..and the national defence league.
There are 77 articles about Corbyn.
In other words a lifelong pacifist is over 30 times more racist than the most far right groups in this country.
Riiiiight.
So still not providing any evidence then? Put your money where your mouth is lionel, you always want proof, evidence and credible links yet you are stalling providing them yourself
That was published by Tony Bernstein in a piece called the electronic intifada.. its available online.
I've told you the name of who they are funded by.Type in the name on Google and see what comes out.
Still no link, proof or evidence and referencing a pro palestine group. I expected better from someone that spends their days rebuking biased sources..."Just the name of the author. The name of the publication he writes for. And the name of the organisation who funds them. Do you know how Google works? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Are you actually capable of answering a simple question? You literally quoted me answering your question.
Sigh
I'll try once more.
Are you anti semitic if you criticise Israel?
Please note.. this is a general question.Seriously you don't need to answer every single question with the words jeremy corbyn in the answer. "You literally quoted me making a reply without the words Jeremy Corbyn in it...
No, you are not antisemitic for criticising Israel and if thats all he had done there wouldn't be a panorama program, courtcase and unreserved apology about him. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly? Once is enough.. 'Repeatedly having to apologise for making the mistake again and again' 1 book. Are you counting individual copies of the book? The same mistake is being associated himself with antisemitic incedents. Antisemetic book, mural, associates, facebook group, rallies etc. " What anti semitic incidents exactly? What anti Jewish rallies had be attended? What assosistes? The holocaust survivors who wrote to the times supporting him perhaps? Or are you referring to hejo meyer? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm a bit hamstrung as I didn't watch panorama so im going with what I've read over the last couple of days. A couple of whistleblowers accused the labour party of institutional as.1 of the claims surrounded the length of time it took to investigate someone. Labour denied it and it was due to be heard in court. Ks intervened and offered a pay out and apology. JC said this was a political decision which technically it is..as a judge hasn't made a decision The whistleblower and director wasnt happy and a libel case is forthcoming. What wasnt mentioned was that one of the whistleblowers was actually chair of an investigation into an individual which actually took longer than what he was accusing the labour party of. There has also been an 860 page report which found out no evidence these claims took any longer than necessary. Whilst umderstandly ks wants an end to this.. if he thinks this is the end,he isnt as clever as he thinks. After the pay out one of the whistleblowers stated 'this was only the beginning a rather strange this to say. Imho the case should have been heard in court. I'm guessing the extensive investigation into insititioknal as in the labour party will shed some light on it. Maybe JC should have kept his mouth shut but if you are accused of something and you genuinely believe you are innocent do you fight it or do you accept it or keep the peace. People can throw whatever Corbyn lies shouts out as they wish..bit again imo nothing has been conclusively proven. It's a very messy situation as the party is stricken in 2 and the right side of the party seemed determined to get rid of corbyn despite being democratically elected.. 2 failed coups etc. The labour party have UNRESERVEDLY withdrawn all the allegations of "bad faith, malice and lying" that they made against the whistleblowers , paid damages and avoided a courtcase. In my eyes this is an admission and proof of corbyns cover up, mishandling and lies. "In a statement read out in the High Court, Labour said it unreservedly apologised and was determined to root out anti-Semitism in the party and the wider Labour movement. "Before the broadcast of the programme, the Labour Party issued a press release that contained defamatory and false allegations about these whistleblowers," the party said. "We acknowledge the many years of dedicated and committed service that the whistleblowers have given to the Labour Party as members and as staff. We appreciate their valuable contribution at all levels of the party. "We unreservedly withdraw all allegations of bad faith, malice and lying. We would like to apologise unreservedly for the distress, embarrassment and hurt caused by their publication. We have agreed to pay them damages."" The programme condemned corbyn as well as the party and i think this summary best describes the content - "Gideon Falter, chief executive of Campaign Against Antisemitism, said the show was “heartbreaking”. He said: “Former Labour officials have been compelled by their conscience to speak out, revealing the scale of the duplicity behind Labour’s failure to address the party’s anti-Semitism crisis,. “Whilst claiming to act against Jew hatred, Jeremy Corbyn’s agents and allies have carefully protected anti-Semites. “It was heartbreaking to watch the testimony of honourable lifelong Labour officials contemplating suicide and suffering breakdowns because of the actions of Mr Corbyn and his team,” Mr Falter said. “The charade of Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-racist activist has been blown apart. Mr Corbyn’s support for anti-Semites and his team’s protection of anti-Semites demonstrate that Mr Corbyn himself is an anti-Semite who is unfit to hold any public office.”" Pretty damning conclusion and the facts that lead to it are accepted by labours latest statement. As kier starmer was once director of public prosecutions i see his settlement out of court as a good indicator of how unlikely they were to win the court case despite corbyns and mcluskeys claim to the contrary. Some quite interesting stuff about gideon fawlter and his organisation online. The originator of the case was critical of the labour party. What a surprise. What interesting stuff? Or are you just going to follow in corbyns footsteps of throwing unsubstantiated muck and inferences at others rather than give any proof of innocence? Why would it be surprising that someone making a case against labour has an issue with them? Its a prerequisite of making the case. If there was nothing wrong there wouldnt be anything to complain about. Not at all.Just did some background reading.They sound like a great bunch of Lads So just casting the seed of doubt with no evidence for us then? You have been taking tips from JC havent you?
Ok well for a start they are funded by a group called the jewish national fund..I suggest you Google that click on the news tab.
In addition in their archive tab where they claim to promote harmony there are 2 articles about far right groups in Britain..the English defence league..and the national defence league.
There are 77 articles about Corbyn.
In other words a lifelong pacifist is over 30 times more racist than the most far right groups in this country.
Riiiiight.
So still not providing any evidence then? Put your money where your mouth is lionel, you always want proof, evidence and credible links yet you are stalling providing them yourself
That was published by Tony Bernstein in a piece called the electronic intifada.. its available online.
I've told you the name of who they are funded by.Type in the name on Google and see what comes out.
Still no link, proof or evidence and referencing a pro palestine group. I expected better from someone that spends their days rebuking biased sources...
Just the name of the author.
The name of the publication he writes for.
And the name of the organisation who funds them.
Do you know how Google works?"Thats not how it goes. You make the claim, you provide the proof and so far the only thing remotely near proof is your refernce to a pro palestine source. Plus ultimately all you are doing is trying to run your own smear campaign and avoid adressing the facts. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly? Once is enough.. 'Repeatedly having to apologise for making the mistake again and again' 1 book. Are you counting individual copies of the book? The same mistake is being associated himself with antisemitic incedents. Antisemetic book, mural, associates, facebook group, rallies etc. What anti semitic incidents exactly? What anti Jewish rallies had be attended? What assosistes? The holocaust survivors who wrote to the times supporting him perhaps? Or are you referring to hejo meyer? " I've already specified some examples, with links. You ignored them... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Are you actually capable of answering a simple question? You literally quoted me answering your question.
Sigh
I'll try once more.
Are you anti semitic if you criticise Israel?
Please note.. this is a general question.Seriously you don't need to answer every single question with the words jeremy corbyn in the answer.
You literally quoted me making a reply without the words Jeremy Corbyn in it...
No, you are not antisemitic for criticising Israel and if thats all he had done there wouldn't be a panorama program, courtcase and unreserved apology about him."Right Ok answer me this. When the labour party adopted the Irha defeniton of anti semitism the party wanted to put in a clause which allowed for criticism of the Israeli state. When they did this there was a huge backlash?why? If you want my honest opinion.. herein lies the problems.The left are very critical of Israel.The fact they carry out human rights abuses and are never pulled up is obviously a bone of contention. I'm not saying anti semitic remarks haven't been made,but we are in a situation now where practically any criticism of Israel are met by shouts of anti semite.We saw that the other week with rlb. That is the core of the issue. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly? Once is enough.. 'Repeatedly having to apologise for making the mistake again and again' 1 book. Are you counting individual copies of the book? The same mistake is being associated himself with antisemitic incedents. Antisemetic book, mural, associates, facebook group, rallies etc. What anti semitic incidents exactly? What anti Jewish rallies had be attended? What assosistes? The holocaust survivors who wrote to the times supporting him perhaps? Or are you referring to hejo meyer? I've already specified some examples, with links. You ignored them..." No you stated..associates.. incidents..Facebook groups..rallies. I saw no links whatsoever. Perhaps you could quote the one where because Corbyn misprouncouned a name,,he was branded a racist. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly? Once is enough.. 'Repeatedly having to apologise for making the mistake again and again' 1 book. Are you counting individual copies of the book? The same mistake is being associated himself with antisemitic incedents. Antisemetic book, mural, associates, facebook group, rallies etc. What anti semitic incidents exactly? What anti Jewish rallies had be attended? What assosistes? The holocaust survivors who wrote to the times supporting him perhaps? Or are you referring to hejo meyer? I've already specified some examples, with links. You ignored them... No you stated..associates.. incidents..Facebook groups..rallies. I saw no links whatsoever. Perhaps you could quote the one where because Corbyn misprouncouned a name,,he was branded a racist. " Right after you asked for proof and claimed nobody had ever given you any, i made a post giving specific examples and links. They are there to see along with your avoidance of them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly? Once is enough.. 'Repeatedly having to apologise for making the mistake again and again' 1 book. Are you counting individual copies of the book? The same mistake is being associated himself with antisemitic incedents. Antisemetic book, mural, associates, facebook group, rallies etc. What anti semitic incidents exactly? What anti Jewish rallies had be attended? What assosistes? The holocaust survivors who wrote to the times supporting him perhaps? Or are you referring to hejo meyer? I've already specified some examples, with links. You ignored them... No you stated..associates.. incidents..Facebook groups..rallies. I saw no links whatsoever. Perhaps you could quote the one where because Corbyn misprouncouned a name,,he was branded a racist. Right after you asked for proof and claimed nobody had ever given you any, i made a post giving specific examples and links. They are there to see along with your avoidance of them. " Again There were no links in your post. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I asked on another thread to provide me a direct quote from jc where he had said or done something anti semitic. I'm still waiting. Tommy Robinson gets go fund me support and many followers, hardly a good indicator or credibility now is it? I havent put it all on Corbyn, simply pointing out his involvement. You however are trying to put it all on the party. One example of corbyns antisemitism is writing the foreword and a glowing reccomendation for a deeply antisemitic republication of an outdated book. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-antisemitism-book-ja-hobson-imperalism-jewish-labour-a8894086.html Then there is his membership of a secret facebook group called Palestine live which contained antisemitic posts, jewish conspirasy theories, nazi caricatures and holocaust deniers. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/08/labour-suspends-party-members-in-antisemitic-facebook-group The same article details him commenting against a person offended by an antisemetic mural in london. He was also a member of an anti isreal group ran by a holocaust sceptic. He was given the title antisemitic well before his leadership making claims of a smear campaign dubious at best. Sure, he denies being antisemitic and dismisses the accusations as misunderstandings but the labour parties latest statement throws that into serious doubt if it wasn't already. " Yes there are links.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://electronicintifada.net/content/campaign-against-antisemitism-campaign-against-palestinians/19916" No proof in there of the caa funding the case... there is however a lot of hate from a man sacked from the labour party for antisemitism and recently called sajid david "the worst uncle Tom" and a "coconut". Sounds like a lovely chap himself... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly? Once is enough.. 'Repeatedly having to apologise for making the mistake again and again' 1 book. Are you counting individual copies of the book? The same mistake is being associated himself with antisemitic incedents. Antisemetic book, mural, associates, facebook group, rallies etc. " Please show me where the links are | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All of that tirade of links are proven left wing biased, some with dubious integrity. None address any of the instances of antisemitism i provided when you asked for them. Lets note that you lied about whether i provided links and even after i reposted them you havent responded, but you have found time to dump a load of bullshit links, i assume in the hope of obfuscating things and sidetracking the discussion. Cut the crap and take off the blinkers. Corbyn has been involved in too many antisemitic scandals for it to be coincidence or misunderstanding. Posting your repositry of pro Corbyn links doesnt detract from this. " Anything you disagree with is proven left wing bias but whatever you post is gospel.Despite it coming from a group who committ atrotocies on a daily basis I have quoted your post again for about the 6th ime now where you talk about anti semitiic incidents etc yet baffling you insist you have provided links where none exist. You have called me a liar and accused me of a deflection on several occasions.You consistently whinged that I didn't provide links and when I did you accused me of sidetaracking the debate. You repeatedly try to mire the debate down in tedious 'you said this,'semsbtics'rather than sticking to the actual point. Buzararly when asked a simple question like is criticm of Israel make you an as?your answer was jeremy Corbyn. I have suggested that the root cause of the issue is what's happening in the west bank,but hou just completely ignored me and reverted back to your little crusade about jc. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All of that tirade of links are proven left wing biased, some with dubious integrity. None address any of the instances of antisemitism i provided when you asked for them. Lets note that you lied about whether i provided links and even after i reposted them you havent responded, but you have found time to dump a load of bullshit links, i assume in the hope of obfuscating things and sidetracking the discussion. Cut the crap and take off the blinkers. Corbyn has been involved in too many antisemitic scandals for it to be coincidence or misunderstanding. Posting your repositry of pro Corbyn links doesnt detract from this. " Little queshom Those holocaust survivors who wrote an open letter to that well known socialist rag..the Times..are they of Dubious integrity too? They will be pleased to know their opinions are "bullshit' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I asked on another thread to provide me a direct quote from jc where he had said or done something anti semitic. I'm still waiting. Tommy Robinson gets go fund me support and many followers, hardly a good indicator or credibility now is it? I havent put it all on Corbyn, simply pointing out his involvement. You however are trying to put it all on the party. One example of corbyns antisemitism is writing the foreword and a glowing reccomendation for a deeply antisemitic republication of an outdated book. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-antisemitism-book-ja-hobson-imperalism-jewish-labour-a8894086.html Then there is his membership of a secret facebook group called Palestine live which contained antisemitic posts, jewish conspirasy theories, nazi caricatures and holocaust deniers. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/08/labour-suspends-party-members-in-antisemitic-facebook-group The same article details him commenting against a person offended by an antisemetic mural in london. He was also a member of an anti isreal group ran by a holocaust sceptic. He was given the title antisemitic well before his leadership making claims of a smear campaign dubious at best. Sure, he denies being antisemitic and dismisses the accusations as misunderstandings but the labour parties latest statement throws that into serious doubt if it wasn't already. Yes there are links...." I will quote this, yet again. It is the post I made directly after you asked for evidence of corbyns antisemetic behaviour. There are two links in it which support and refer to the things I put in the post. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All of that tirade of links are proven left wing biased, some with dubious integrity. None address any of the instances of antisemitism i provided when you asked for them. Lets note that you lied about whether i provided links and even after i reposted them you havent responded, but you have found time to dump a load of bullshit links, i assume in the hope of obfuscating things and sidetracking the discussion. Cut the crap and take off the blinkers. Corbyn has been involved in too many antisemitic scandals for it to be coincidence or misunderstanding. Posting your repositry of pro Corbyn links doesnt detract from this. Anything you disagree with is proven left wing bias but whatever you post is gospel.Despite it coming from a group who committ atrotocies on a daily basis I have quoted your post again for about the 6th ime now where you talk about anti semitiic incidents etc yet baffling you insist you have provided links where none exist. You have called me a liar and accused me of a deflection on several occasions.You consistently whinged that I didn't provide links and when I did you accused me of sidetaracking the debate. You repeatedly try to mire the debate down in tedious 'you said this,'semsbtics'rather than sticking to the actual point. Buzararly when asked a simple question like is criticm of Israel make you an as?your answer was jeremy Corbyn. I have suggested that the root cause of the issue is what's happening in the west bank,but hou just completely ignored me and reverted back to your little crusade about jc. " All of the links you posted are proven left bias by the people that exist to judge such things. I,e, mediabiasfactcheck. The exception being the lse however this article condemns them for their left wing bias https://thebackbencher.co.uk/shocking-left-wing-bias-at-the-lse/ Ironically I'm sure you are muttering under your breath right now something about the backbencher being right bias
However the lse was founded by the fabian society, the very epitome of "left wing"
It is very interesting that you counter my dismissal of your left wing links by dismissing my links as "coming from a group that commit atrocities on a daily basis"
I didn`t know the independent commited any atrocities?!
Furthermore, you daily dismiss links as being right wing bias, you have even done so in the beginning of this thread. Why are your biased links any more reliable? Oh yeah, because it backs up your agenda....
As for calling you a liar, you are.
The links you keep saying aren't there, are. I even quoted them for you as well as telling you exactly where in the thread you could find them however you continue to imply I am making unsubstantiated claims. I would go as far as to say that your claim of `people never giving any evidence of corbyns anti Semitism` is utter bollocks as it appears that when they do you avoid it like the plague.
You have deflected all the way through the thread. One prime example is me giving you specific incidents (with links ) and then you going off on a tangent asking "does it make you antisemetic to criticise Israel?" Then you make a big deal out of me not answering the bullshit question, then say I haven't given links, then say I don't answer questions, then say I cant answer a question without the word corbyn and keep going round in circles with the same thing all the while avoiding the points I made. And then you accuse ME of miring the debate!!!
As for your last point, it is another example of you avoiding the points I made, miring the debate and going off topic. Your summary of the root cause is also bullshit. The root cause is that people think they can dish out xenophobia with the justification being "uh, but, Palestine". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All of that tirade of links are proven left wing biased, some with dubious integrity. None address any of the instances of antisemitism i provided when you asked for them. Lets note that you lied about whether i provided links and even after i reposted them you havent responded, but you have found time to dump a load of bullshit links, i assume in the hope of obfuscating things and sidetracking the discussion. Cut the crap and take off the blinkers. Corbyn has been involved in too many antisemitic scandals for it to be coincidence or misunderstanding. Posting your repositry of pro Corbyn links doesnt detract from this. Little queshom Those holocaust survivors who wrote an open letter to that well known socialist rag..the Times..are they of Dubious integrity too? They will be pleased to know their opinions are "bullshit'" Do those holocaust survivors know Corbyn personally? Are they privy to the inner workings of the party? Why are they to be believed more than the people that do know Corbyn, were part of the inner circle and have this week been awarded damages and unreserved apologies for exposing the very things these holocaust survivors are denying? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All of that tirade of links are proven left wing biased, some with dubious integrity. None address any of the instances of antisemitism i provided when you asked for them. Lets note that you lied about whether i provided links and even after i reposted them you havent responded, but you have found time to dump a load of bullshit links, i assume in the hope of obfuscating things and sidetracking the discussion. Cut the crap and take off the blinkers. Corbyn has been involved in too many antisemitic scandals for it to be coincidence or misunderstanding. Posting your repositry of pro Corbyn links doesnt detract from this. Anything you disagree with is proven left wing bias but whatever you post is gospel.Despite it coming from a group who committ atrotocies on a daily basis I have quoted your post again for about the 6th ime now where you talk about anti semitiic incidents etc yet baffling you insist you have provided links where none exist. You have called me a liar and accused me of a deflection on several occasions.You consistently whinged that I didn't provide links and when I did you accused me of sidetaracking the debate. You repeatedly try to mire the debate down in tedious 'you said this,'semsbtics'rather than sticking to the actual point. Buzararly when asked a simple question like is criticm of Israel make you an as?your answer was jeremy Corbyn. I have suggested that the root cause of the issue is what's happening in the west bank,but hou just completely ignored me and reverted back to your little crusade about jc. All of the links you posted are proven left bias by the people that exist to judge such things. I,e, mediabiasfactcheck. The exception being the lse however this article condemns them for their left wing bias https://thebackbencher.co.uk/shocking-left-wing-bias-at-the-lse/ Ironically I'm sure you are muttering under your breath right now something about the backbencher being right bias
However the lse was founded by the fabian society, the very epitome of "left wing"
It is very interesting that you counter my dismissal of your left wing links by dismissing my links as "coming from a group that commit atrocities on a daily basis"
I didn`t know the independent commited any atrocities?!
Furthermore, you daily dismiss links as being right wing bias, you have even done so in the beginning of this thread. Why are your biased links any more reliable? Oh yeah, because it backs up your agenda....
As for calling you a liar, you are.
The links you keep saying aren't there, are. I even quoted them for you as well as telling you exactly where in the thread you could find them however you continue to imply I am making unsubstantiated claims. I would go as far as to say that your claim of `people never giving any evidence of corbyns anti Semitism` is utter bollocks as it appears that when they do you avoid it like the plague.
You have deflected all the way through the thread. One prime example is me giving you specific incidents (with links ) and then you going off on a tangent asking "does it make you antisemetic to criticise Israel?" Then you make a big deal out of me not answering the bullshit question, then say I haven't given links, then say I don't answer questions, then say I cant answer a question without the word corbyn and keep going round in circles with the same thing all the while avoiding the points I made. And then you accuse ME of miring the debate!!!
As for your last point, it is another example of you avoiding the points I made, miring the debate and going off topic. Your summary of the root cause is also bullshit. The root cause is that people think they can dish out xenophobia with the justification being "uh, but, Palestine". "Do you often find people lose the will to live when debate with you? Every single post I have made has been about jc and as yet I am deflecting? Utter bullshit again. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All of that tirade of links are proven left wing biased, some with dubious integrity. None address any of the instances of antisemitism i provided when you asked for them. Lets note that you lied about whether i provided links and even after i reposted them you havent responded, but you have found time to dump a load of bullshit links, i assume in the hope of obfuscating things and sidetracking the discussion. Cut the crap and take off the blinkers. Corbyn has been involved in too many antisemitic scandals for it to be coincidence or misunderstanding. Posting your repositry of pro Corbyn links doesnt detract from this. Anything you disagree with is proven left wing bias but whatever you post is gospel.Despite it coming from a group who committ atrotocies on a daily basis I have quoted your post again for about the 6th ime now where you talk about anti semitiic incidents etc yet baffling you insist you have provided links where none exist. You have called me a liar and accused me of a deflection on several occasions.You consistently whinged that I didn't provide links and when I did you accused me of sidetaracking the debate. You repeatedly try to mire the debate down in tedious 'you said this,'semsbtics'rather than sticking to the actual point. Buzararly when asked a simple question like is criticm of Israel make you an as?your answer was jeremy Corbyn. I have suggested that the root cause of the issue is what's happening in the west bank,but hou just completely ignored me and reverted back to your little crusade about jc. All of the links you posted are proven left bias by the people that exist to judge such things. I,e, mediabiasfactcheck. The exception being the lse however this article condemns them for their left wing bias https://thebackbencher.co.uk/shocking-left-wing-bias-at-the-lse/ Ironically I'm sure you are muttering under your breath right now something about the backbencher being right bias
However the lse was founded by the fabian society, the very epitome of "left wing"
It is very interesting that you counter my dismissal of your left wing links by dismissing my links as "coming from a group that commit atrocities on a daily basis"
I didn`t know the independent commited any atrocities?!
Furthermore, you daily dismiss links as being right wing bias, you have even done so in the beginning of this thread. Why are your biased links any more reliable? Oh yeah, because it backs up your agenda....
As for calling you a liar, you are.
The links you keep saying aren't there, are. I even quoted them for you as well as telling you exactly where in the thread you could find them however you continue to imply I am making unsubstantiated claims. I would go as far as to say that your claim of `people never giving any evidence of corbyns anti Semitism` is utter bollocks as it appears that when they do you avoid it like the plague.
You have deflected all the way through the thread. One prime example is me giving you specific incidents (with links ) and then you going off on a tangent asking "does it make you antisemetic to criticise Israel?" Then you make a big deal out of me not answering the bullshit question, then say I haven't given links, then say I don't answer questions, then say I cant answer a question without the word corbyn and keep going round in circles with the same thing all the while avoiding the points I made. And then you accuse ME of miring the debate!!!
As for your last point, it is another example of you avoiding the points I made, miring the debate and going off topic. Your summary of the root cause is also bullshit. The root cause is that people think they can dish out xenophobia with the justification being "uh, but, Palestine". "So to sum up if you are left of centre you are liar and your opinions are invalid. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All of that tirade of links are proven left wing biased, some with dubious integrity. None address any of the instances of antisemitism i provided when you asked for them. Lets note that you lied about whether i provided links and even after i reposted them you havent responded, but you have found time to dump a load of bullshit links, i assume in the hope of obfuscating things and sidetracking the discussion. Cut the crap and take off the blinkers. Corbyn has been involved in too many antisemitic scandals for it to be coincidence or misunderstanding. Posting your repositry of pro Corbyn links doesnt detract from this. Anything you disagree with is proven left wing bias but whatever you post is gospel.Despite it coming from a group who committ atrotocies on a daily basis I have quoted your post again for about the 6th ime now where you talk about anti semitiic incidents etc yet baffling you insist you have provided links where none exist. You have called me a liar and accused me of a deflection on several occasions.You consistently whinged that I didn't provide links and when I did you accused me of sidetaracking the debate. You repeatedly try to mire the debate down in tedious 'you said this,'semsbtics'rather than sticking to the actual point. Buzararly when asked a simple question like is criticm of Israel make you an as?your answer was jeremy Corbyn. I have suggested that the root cause of the issue is what's happening in the west bank,but hou just completely ignored me and reverted back to your little crusade about jc. All of the links you posted are proven left bias by the people that exist to judge such things. I,e, mediabiasfactcheck. The exception being the lse however this article condemns them for their left wing bias https://thebackbencher.co.uk/shocking-left-wing-bias-at-the-lse/ Ironically I'm sure you are muttering under your breath right now something about the backbencher being right bias
However the lse was founded by the fabian society, the very epitome of "left wing"
It is very interesting that you counter my dismissal of your left wing links by dismissing my links as "coming from a group that commit atrocities on a daily basis"
I didn`t know the independent commited any atrocities?!
Furthermore, you daily dismiss links as being right wing bias, you have even done so in the beginning of this thread. Why are your biased links any more reliable? Oh yeah, because it backs up your agenda....
As for calling you a liar, you are.
The links you keep saying aren't there, are. I even quoted them for you as well as telling you exactly where in the thread you could find them however you continue to imply I am making unsubstantiated claims. I would go as far as to say that your claim of `people never giving any evidence of corbyns anti Semitism` is utter bollocks as it appears that when they do you avoid it like the plague.
You have deflected all the way through the thread. One prime example is me giving you specific incidents (with links ) and then you going off on a tangent asking "does it make you antisemetic to criticise Israel?" Then you make a big deal out of me not answering the bullshit question, then say I haven't given links, then say I don't answer questions, then say I cant answer a question without the word corbyn and keep going round in circles with the same thing all the while avoiding the points I made. And then you accuse ME of miring the debate!!!
As for your last point, it is another example of you avoiding the points I made, miring the debate and going off topic. Your summary of the root cause is also bullshit. The root cause is that people think they can dish out xenophobia with the justification being "uh, but, Palestine".
Do you often find people lose the will to live when debate with you?
Every single post I have made has been about jc and as yet I am deflecting?
Utter bullshit again.
"Of course you are deflecting, you still havent responded to the links i posted have you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All of that tirade of links are proven left wing biased, some with dubious integrity. None address any of the instances of antisemitism i provided when you asked for them. Lets note that you lied about whether i provided links and even after i reposted them you havent responded, but you have found time to dump a load of bullshit links, i assume in the hope of obfuscating things and sidetracking the discussion. Cut the crap and take off the blinkers. Corbyn has been involved in too many antisemitic scandals for it to be coincidence or misunderstanding. Posting your repositry of pro Corbyn links doesnt detract from this. Anything you disagree with is proven left wing bias but whatever you post is gospel.Despite it coming from a group who committ atrotocies on a daily basis I have quoted your post again for about the 6th ime now where you talk about anti semitiic incidents etc yet baffling you insist you have provided links where none exist. You have called me a liar and accused me of a deflection on several occasions.You consistently whinged that I didn't provide links and when I did you accused me of sidetaracking the debate. You repeatedly try to mire the debate down in tedious 'you said this,'semsbtics'rather than sticking to the actual point. Buzararly when asked a simple question like is criticm of Israel make you an as?your answer was jeremy Corbyn. I have suggested that the root cause of the issue is what's happening in the west bank,but hou just completely ignored me and reverted back to your little crusade about jc. All of the links you posted are proven left bias by the people that exist to judge such things. I,e, mediabiasfactcheck. The exception being the lse however this article condemns them for their left wing bias https://thebackbencher.co.uk/shocking-left-wing-bias-at-the-lse/ Ironically I'm sure you are muttering under your breath right now something about the backbencher being right bias
However the lse was founded by the fabian society, the very epitome of "left wing"
It is very interesting that you counter my dismissal of your left wing links by dismissing my links as "coming from a group that commit atrocities on a daily basis"
I didn`t know the independent commited any atrocities?!
Furthermore, you daily dismiss links as being right wing bias, you have even done so in the beginning of this thread. Why are your biased links any more reliable? Oh yeah, because it backs up your agenda....
As for calling you a liar, you are.
The links you keep saying aren't there, are. I even quoted them for you as well as telling you exactly where in the thread you could find them however you continue to imply I am making unsubstantiated claims. I would go as far as to say that your claim of `people never giving any evidence of corbyns anti Semitism` is utter bollocks as it appears that when they do you avoid it like the plague.
You have deflected all the way through the thread. One prime example is me giving you specific incidents (with links ) and then you going off on a tangent asking "does it make you antisemetic to criticise Israel?" Then you make a big deal out of me not answering the bullshit question, then say I haven't given links, then say I don't answer questions, then say I cant answer a question without the word corbyn and keep going round in circles with the same thing all the while avoiding the points I made. And then you accuse ME of miring the debate!!!
As for your last point, it is another example of you avoiding the points I made, miring the debate and going off topic. Your summary of the root cause is also bullshit. The root cause is that people think they can dish out xenophobia with the justification being "uh, but, Palestine".
So to sum up if you are left of centre you are liar and your opinions are invalid. "Didn't you accuse me of twisting things?
And isnt it a little hypocritical when everyday you just dismiss anything you condsider right wing as bollcks?
And didnt you say i hadnt posted any links even after i prove demonstrably that i have? Therfore lie? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly? Once is enough.. 'Repeatedly having to apologise for making the mistake again and again' 1 book. Are you counting individual copies of the book? The same mistake is being associated himself with antisemitic incedents. Antisemetic book, mural, associates, facebook group, rallies etc. " Right after this I give up. Read the last paragraph Now provide me with your link showing the incidents,associates,Facebook group and rallies. And before you start we have discussed the book in length | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All of that tirade of links are proven left wing biased, some with dubious integrity. None address any of the instances of antisemitism i provided when you asked for them. Lets note that you lied about whether i provided links and even after i reposted them you havent responded, but you have found time to dump a load of bullshit links, i assume in the hope of obfuscating things and sidetracking the discussion. Cut the crap and take off the blinkers. Corbyn has been involved in too many antisemitic scandals for it to be coincidence or misunderstanding. Posting your repositry of pro Corbyn links doesnt detract from this. Anything you disagree with is proven left wing bias but whatever you post is gospel.Despite it coming from a group who committ atrotocies on a daily basis I have quoted your post again for about the 6th ime now where you talk about anti semitiic incidents etc yet baffling you insist you have provided links where none exist. You have called me a liar and accused me of a deflection on several occasions.You consistently whinged that I didn't provide links and when I did you accused me of sidetaracking the debate. You repeatedly try to mire the debate down in tedious 'you said this,'semsbtics'rather than sticking to the actual point. Buzararly when asked a simple question like is criticm of Israel make you an as?your answer was jeremy Corbyn. I have suggested that the root cause of the issue is what's happening in the west bank,but hou just completely ignored me and reverted back to your little crusade about jc. All of the links you posted are proven left bias by the people that exist to judge such things. I,e, mediabiasfactcheck. The exception being the lse however this article condemns them for their left wing bias https://thebackbencher.co.uk/shocking-left-wing-bias-at-the-lse/ Ironically I'm sure you are muttering under your breath right now something about the backbencher being right bias
However the lse was founded by the fabian society, the very epitome of "left wing"
It is very interesting that you counter my dismissal of your left wing links by dismissing my links as "coming from a group that commit atrocities on a daily basis"
I didn`t know the independent commited any atrocities?!
Furthermore, you daily dismiss links as being right wing bias, you have even done so in the beginning of this thread. Why are your biased links any more reliable? Oh yeah, because it backs up your agenda....
As for calling you a liar, you are.
The links you keep saying aren't there, are. I even quoted them for you as well as telling you exactly where in the thread you could find them however you continue to imply I am making unsubstantiated claims. I would go as far as to say that your claim of `people never giving any evidence of corbyns anti Semitism` is utter bollocks as it appears that when they do you avoid it like the plague.
You have deflected all the way through the thread. One prime example is me giving you specific incidents (with links ) and then you going off on a tangent asking "does it make you antisemetic to criticise Israel?" Then you make a big deal out of me not answering the bullshit question, then say I haven't given links, then say I don't answer questions, then say I cant answer a question without the word corbyn and keep going round in circles with the same thing all the while avoiding the points I made. And then you accuse ME of miring the debate!!!
As for your last point, it is another example of you avoiding the points I made, miring the debate and going off topic. Your summary of the root cause is also bullshit. The root cause is that people think they can dish out xenophobia with the justification being "uh, but, Palestine".
So to sum up if you are left of centre you are liar and your opinions are invalid.
Didn't you accuse me of twisting things?
And isnt it a little hypocritical when everyday you just dismiss anything you condsider right wing as bollcks?
And didnt you say i hadnt posted any links even after i prove demonstrably that i have? Therfore lie?"What like the mail and the rag? They generally are. I quoted a source from the times..I'm waiting for that to be dismissed as left wing propaganda. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly? Once is enough.. 'Repeatedly having to apologise for making the mistake again and again' 1 book. Are you counting individual copies of the book? The same mistake is being associated himself with antisemitic incedents. Antisemetic book, mural, associates, facebook group, rallies etc. Right after this I give up. Read the last paragraph Now provide me with your link showing the incidents,associates,Facebook group and rallies. And before you start we have discussed the book in length" The links i have repeatedly requoted address all of those points. If you had read them you would know. As for the book, we have hardly discussed it. ALL you have said about it is "how many books has he done the foreword for?". Which btw was you trying to win using semantics (like you wrongly accused me of..). I said "mistakes" and you was pointing out he only did the foreword for ONE antisemetic book.(as if just doing one is ok..) The mistakes i referred to were the book, facebook group, dubious associations etc. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you criticise Israel does that make you an anti semite? Writing the foreword and a glowing review of a antisemitic book does, as do the other examples i gave and you neglected to explain Avoiding my question again Is he still an anti semite if he later apologises and admits some of the language of the book..written in 1902..is "deplorable? Apologising is an acknowledgement of guilt, so yes. Furthermore, once could be forgiven but repetedly having to apologise for making the same mistake again and again is very telling and shows a lack of genuine remorse or regret. How many racist books did he do.forewards for exactly? Once is enough.. 'Repeatedly having to apologise for making the mistake again and again' 1 book. Are you counting individual copies of the book? The same mistake is being associated himself with antisemitic incedents. Antisemetic book, mural, associates, facebook group, rallies etc. Right after this I give up. Read the last paragraph Now provide me with your link showing the incidents,associates,Facebook group and rallies. And before you start we have discussed the book in length The links i have repeatedly requoted address all of those points. If you had read them you would know. As for the book, we have hardly discussed it. ALL you have said about it is "how many books has he done the foreword for?". Which btw was you trying to win using semantics (like you wrongly accused me of..). I said "mistakes" and you was pointing out he only did the foreword for ONE antisemetic book.(as if just doing one is ok..) The mistakes i referred to were the book, facebook group, dubious associations etc. " I give up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All of that tirade of links are proven left wing biased, some with dubious integrity. None address any of the instances of antisemitism i provided when you asked for them. Lets note that you lied about whether i provided links and even after i reposted them you havent responded, but you have found time to dump a load of bullshit links, i assume in the hope of obfuscating things and sidetracking the discussion. Cut the crap and take off the blinkers. Corbyn has been involved in too many antisemitic scandals for it to be coincidence or misunderstanding. Posting your repositry of pro Corbyn links doesnt detract from this. Anything you disagree with is proven left wing bias but whatever you post is gospel.Despite it coming from a group who committ atrotocies on a daily basis I have quoted your post again for about the 6th ime now where you talk about anti semitiic incidents etc yet baffling you insist you have provided links where none exist. You have called me a liar and accused me of a deflection on several occasions.You consistently whinged that I didn't provide links and when I did you accused me of sidetaracking the debate. You repeatedly try to mire the debate down in tedious 'you said this,'semsbtics'rather than sticking to the actual point. Buzararly when asked a simple question like is criticm of Israel make you an as?your answer was jeremy Corbyn. I have suggested that the root cause of the issue is what's happening in the west bank,but hou just completely ignored me and reverted back to your little crusade about jc. All of the links you posted are proven left bias by the people that exist to judge such things. I,e, mediabiasfactcheck. The exception being the lse however this article condemns them for their left wing bias https://thebackbencher.co.uk/shocking-left-wing-bias-at-the-lse/ Ironically I'm sure you are muttering under your breath right now something about the backbencher being right bias
However the lse was founded by the fabian society, the very epitome of "left wing"
It is very interesting that you counter my dismissal of your left wing links by dismissing my links as "coming from a group that commit atrocities on a daily basis"
I didn`t know the independent commited any atrocities?!
Furthermore, you daily dismiss links as being right wing bias, you have even done so in the beginning of this thread. Why are your biased links any more reliable? Oh yeah, because it backs up your agenda....
As for calling you a liar, you are.
The links you keep saying aren't there, are. I even quoted them for you as well as telling you exactly where in the thread you could find them however you continue to imply I am making unsubstantiated claims. I would go as far as to say that your claim of `people never giving any evidence of corbyns anti Semitism` is utter bollocks as it appears that when they do you avoid it like the plague.
You have deflected all the way through the thread. One prime example is me giving you specific incidents (with links ) and then you going off on a tangent asking "does it make you antisemetic to criticise Israel?" Then you make a big deal out of me not answering the bullshit question, then say I haven't given links, then say I don't answer questions, then say I cant answer a question without the word corbyn and keep going round in circles with the same thing all the while avoiding the points I made. And then you accuse ME of miring the debate!!!
As for your last point, it is another example of you avoiding the points I made, miring the debate and going off topic. Your summary of the root cause is also bullshit. The root cause is that people think they can dish out xenophobia with the justification being "uh, but, Palestine".
So to sum up if you are left of centre you are liar and your opinions are invalid.
Didn't you accuse me of twisting things?
And isnt it a little hypocritical when everyday you just dismiss anything you condsider right wing as bollcks?
And didnt you say i hadnt posted any links even after i prove demonstrably that i have? Therfore lie?
What like the mail and the rag?
They generally are.
I quoted a source from the times..I'm waiting for that to be dismissed as left wing propaganda."Thanks for proving my point and it is not just the mail or the sun. It is anything that doesnt suit your bias. The 'times' thing you mention i have already addressed and as usual you avoid the response so i will say again - Why should we believe a group of 12 peoples opinion that there is no antisemitism in the labour party when they are not any part of the internal workings or inner circle. Especially when 7 people who are privy to that knowledge have just been issued an UNRESERVED apology and damages for their exposing that there is. It doesnt add up lionel. There is lots of evidence against corbyn and labour and the only defence you and anyone can offer are irrelevent opinions. You dont even discuss any of the evidence, i presume because you know they are indefensible. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In Comrade Corby can apologise so can Bozza . . . But I bet you won't let him till he's hanging from the yard-arm ( I have no idea what that actually means BTY having not been a Pirate in this life or the last lol)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53525450 "Why the obsession with Corbyn? He isn’t the labour leader anymore? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In Comrade Corby can apologise so can Bozza . . . But I bet you won't let him till he's hanging from the yard-arm ( I have no idea what that actually means BTY having not been a Pirate in this life or the last lol)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53525450
Why the obsession with Corbyn? He isn’t the labour leader anymore? "I don't think I have seen anybody so obsessed. It's just odd! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All of that tirade of links are proven left wing biased, some with dubious integrity. None address any of the instances of antisemitism i provided when you asked for them. Lets note that you lied about whether i provided links and even after i reposted them you havent responded, but you have found time to dump a load of bullshit links, i assume in the hope of obfuscating things and sidetracking the discussion. Cut the crap and take off the blinkers. Corbyn has been involved in too many antisemitic scandals for it to be coincidence or misunderstanding. Posting your repositry of pro Corbyn links doesnt detract from this. Anything you disagree with is proven left wing bias but whatever you post is gospel.Despite it coming from a group who committ atrotocies on a daily basis I have quoted your post again for about the 6th ime now where you talk about anti semitiic incidents etc yet baffling you insist you have provided links where none exist. You have called me a liar and accused me of a deflection on several occasions.You consistently whinged that I didn't provide links and when I did you accused me of sidetaracking the debate. You repeatedly try to mire the debate down in tedious 'you said this,'semsbtics'rather than sticking to the actual point. Buzararly when asked a simple question like is criticm of Israel make you an as?your answer was jeremy Corbyn. I have suggested that the root cause of the issue is what's happening in the west bank,but hou just completely ignored me and reverted back to your little crusade about jc. All of the links you posted are proven left bias by the people that exist to judge such things. I,e, mediabiasfactcheck. The exception being the lse however this article condemns them for their left wing bias https://thebackbencher.co.uk/shocking-left-wing-bias-at-the-lse/ Ironically I'm sure you are muttering under your breath right now something about the backbencher being right bias
However the lse was founded by the fabian society, the very epitome of "left wing"
It is very interesting that you counter my dismissal of your left wing links by dismissing my links as "coming from a group that commit atrocities on a daily basis"
I didn`t know the independent commited any atrocities?!
Furthermore, you daily dismiss links as being right wing bias, you have even done so in the beginning of this thread. Why are your biased links any more reliable? Oh yeah, because it backs up your agenda....
As for calling you a liar, you are.
The links you keep saying aren't there, are. I even quoted them for you as well as telling you exactly where in the thread you could find them however you continue to imply I am making unsubstantiated claims. I would go as far as to say that your claim of `people never giving any evidence of corbyns anti Semitism` is utter bollocks as it appears that when they do you avoid it like the plague.
You have deflected all the way through the thread. One prime example is me giving you specific incidents (with links ) and then you going off on a tangent asking "does it make you antisemetic to criticise Israel?" Then you make a big deal out of me not answering the bullshit question, then say I haven't given links, then say I don't answer questions, then say I cant answer a question without the word corbyn and keep going round in circles with the same thing all the while avoiding the points I made. And then you accuse ME of miring the debate!!!
As for your last point, it is another example of you avoiding the points I made, miring the debate and going off topic. Your summary of the root cause is also bullshit. The root cause is that people think they can dish out xenophobia with the justification being "uh, but, Palestine".
So to sum up if you are left of centre you are liar and your opinions are invalid.
Didn't you accuse me of twisting things?
And isnt it a little hypocritical when everyday you just dismiss anything you condsider right wing as bollcks?
And didnt you say i hadnt posted any links even after i prove demonstrably that i have? Therfore lie?
What like the mail and the rag?
They generally are.
I quoted a source from the times..I'm waiting for that to be dismissed as left wing propaganda.
Thanks for proving my point and it is not just the mail or the sun. It is anything that doesnt suit your bias.
The 'times' thing you mention i have already addressed and as usual you avoid the response so i will say again -
Why should we believe a group of 12 peoples opinion that there is no antisemitism in the labour party when they are not any part of the internal workings or inner circle. Especially when 7 people who are privy to that knowledge have just been issued an UNRESERVED apology and damages for their exposing that there is.
It doesnt add up lionel. There is lots of evidence against corbyn and labour and the only defence you and anyone can offer are irrelevent opinions. You dont even discuss any of the evidence, i presume because you know they are indefensible. "Re the letter according to you he has a horrific racist yet 12 holocaust survivors took the time to write a letter to the times about him. Why? Presumably the people who knew him who went on panorama were completely unbiased. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/panoramas-hatchet-job-labour-antisemitism-bbc-has-become-pro-tory-media Coming from journalist who used to work for the observer" "Ofcom dismisses every complaint of bias against Jeremy Corbyn about UK broadcasters The regulator received a total of 139 complaints about broadcasters' coverage since the Labour leader took office in 2015" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/jeremy-corbyn-bias-ofcom-complaint-bbc-channel-4-sky-news-labour-party-a7368796.html Interesting that the quote is from a left leaning source, is reporting on fact rather than opinion and shows your claims to be nothing more than biased opinion.... We could play this game all day but ultimately Corbyn keeps getting caught in antisemetic situations. - Right wing newspapers didn't make him write the foreword, and a glowing recommendation for an antisemetic book. - It is fact that he did this, not some made up smear campaign. - This is the case for many (all?) of the things he is criticised for and reporting of it is not bias or unfair. Corbyn was know as a terrorist sympathiser and totally unsuitable for any role of leadership and his card was marked long before his leadership campaign. Those with common sense could see through this false prophet that the blind ideologists chose to promote in opposition to the expenses scandal because he took the train and wore an old suit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/panoramas-hatchet-job-labour-antisemitism-bbc-has-become-pro-tory-media Coming from journalist who used to work for the observer "Ofcom dismisses every complaint of bias against Jeremy Corbyn about UK broadcasters The regulator received a total of 139 complaints about broadcasters' coverage since the Labour leader took office in 2015" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/jeremy-corbyn-bias-ofcom-complaint-bbc-channel-4-sky-news-labour-party-a7368796.html Interesting that the quote is from a left leaning source, is reporting on fact rather than opinion and shows your claims to be nothing more than biased opinion.... We could play this game all day but ultimately Corbyn keeps getting caught in antisemetic situations. - Right wing newspapers didn't make him write the foreword, and a glowing recommendation for an antisemetic book. - It is fact that he did this, not some made up smear campaign. - This is the case for many (all?) of the things he is criticised for and reporting of it is not bias or unfair. Corbyn was know as a terrorist sympathiser and totally unsuitable for any role of leadership and his card was marked long before his leadership campaign. Those with common sense could see through this false prophet that the blind ideologists chose to promote in opposition to the expenses scandal because he took the train and wore an old suit. "Biased opinion? Apart from the study from an economics school you mean? Those holocaust survivors were biased but some one working for the Israeli gmnt wasnt? Interesting. Terrorist synthesizer too? He has really got under your skin hasn't he? So let's tally up..according you he is a lying racist anti semitic bullying unrepentant tertorist sympathiser (can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?) Any more? Nice to see you have an opinion of such impartiality. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/panoramas-hatchet-job-labour-antisemitism-bbc-has-become-pro-tory-media Coming from journalist who used to work for the observer "Ofcom dismisses every complaint of bias against Jeremy Corbyn about UK broadcasters The regulator received a total of 139 complaints about broadcasters' coverage since the Labour leader took office in 2015" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/jeremy-corbyn-bias-ofcom-complaint-bbc-channel-4-sky-news-labour-party-a7368796.html Interesting that the quote is from a left leaning source, is reporting on fact rather than opinion and shows your claims to be nothing more than biased opinion.... We could play this game all day but ultimately Corbyn keeps getting caught in antisemetic situations. - Right wing newspapers didn't make him write the foreword, and a glowing recommendation for an antisemetic book. - It is fact that he did this, not some made up smear campaign. - This is the case for many (all?) of the things he is criticised for and reporting of it is not bias or unfair. Corbyn was know as a terrorist sympathiser and totally unsuitable for any role of leadership and his card was marked long before his leadership campaign. Those with common sense could see through this false prophet that the blind ideologists chose to promote in opposition to the expenses scandal because he took the train and wore an old suit.
Biased opinion?
Apart from the study from an economics school you mean?
Those holocaust survivors were biased but some one working for the Israeli gmnt wasnt?
Interesting.
Terrorist synthesizer too?
He has really got under your skin hasn't he?
So let's tally up..according you he is a lying racist anti semitic bullying unrepentant tertorist sympathiser (can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?)
Any more?
Nice to see you have an opinion of such impartiality.""Can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?" No, and that is kinda my point. He claims to be a pacifist but supports violent methods to "bring peace". I would struggle to find a more hypocritical, non sensical and contradictory stance if I tried. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/jeremy-corbyn-should-not-be-allowed-to-rewrite-the-history-of-his-support-for-the-ira https://order-order.com/2017/05/31/top-irish-historian-corbyn-didnt-support-ira-ceasefire/ I didn`t say he was racist but you could add traitor to that list. I`m sure your rose tinted glasses wont allow you to see it but this misconception that he is an innocent victim is as much bullshit as the stunt he pulled on the train. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://antisemitism.uk/labour-withdraws-ofcom-complaint-about-panorama-expose-of-partys-antisemitism/" I`m not sure what you were trying to prove with this link lionel as all it does is prove my point that the panorama programme was justified and corbyns opposition to it wasn`t. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/panoramas-hatchet-job-labour-antisemitism-bbc-has-become-pro-tory-media Coming from journalist who used to work for the observer "Ofcom dismisses every complaint of bias against Jeremy Corbyn about UK broadcasters The regulator received a total of 139 complaints about broadcasters' coverage since the Labour leader took office in 2015" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/jeremy-corbyn-bias-ofcom-complaint-bbc-channel-4-sky-news-labour-party-a7368796.html Interesting that the quote is from a left leaning source, is reporting on fact rather than opinion and shows your claims to be nothing more than biased opinion.... We could play this game all day but ultimately Corbyn keeps getting caught in antisemetic situations. - Right wing newspapers didn't make him write the foreword, and a glowing recommendation for an antisemetic book. - It is fact that he did this, not some made up smear campaign. - This is the case for many (all?) of the things he is criticised for and reporting of it is not bias or unfair. Corbyn was know as a terrorist sympathiser and totally unsuitable for any role of leadership and his card was marked long before his leadership campaign. Those with common sense could see through this false prophet that the blind ideologists chose to promote in opposition to the expenses scandal because he took the train and wore an old suit.
Biased opinion?
Apart from the study from an economics school you mean?
Those holocaust survivors were biased but some one working for the Israeli gmnt wasnt?
Interesting.
Terrorist synthesizer too?
He has really got under your skin hasn't he?
So let's tally up..according you he is a lying racist anti semitic bullying unrepentant tertorist sympathiser (can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?)
Any more?
Nice to see you have an opinion of such impartiality.
"Can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?"
No, and that is kinda my point. He claims to be a pacifist but supports violent methods to "bring peace". I would struggle to find a more hypocritical, non sensical and contradictory stance if I tried.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/jeremy-corbyn-should-not-be-allowed-to-rewrite-the-history-of-his-support-for-the-ira
https://order-order.com/2017/05/31/top-irish-historian-corbyn-didnt-support-ira-ceasefire/
I didn`t say he was racist but you could add traitor to that list.
I`m sure your rose tinted glasses wont allow you to see it but this misconception that he is an innocent victim is as much bullshit as the stunt he pulled on the train."Ha ha ha..the spectator Oh yes totally unbiased Was bj the editor at the time? I stopped reading at the vit which said the IRa were defeated. I suggest you try the excellent bbc drama the troubles if you want something resembling the truth. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/panoramas-hatchet-job-labour-antisemitism-bbc-has-become-pro-tory-media Coming from journalist who used to work for the observer "Ofcom dismisses every complaint of bias against Jeremy Corbyn about UK broadcasters The regulator received a total of 139 complaints about broadcasters' coverage since the Labour leader took office in 2015" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/jeremy-corbyn-bias-ofcom-complaint-bbc-channel-4-sky-news-labour-party-a7368796.html Interesting that the quote is from a left leaning source, is reporting on fact rather than opinion and shows your claims to be nothing more than biased opinion.... We could play this game all day but ultimately Corbyn keeps getting caught in antisemetic situations. - Right wing newspapers didn't make him write the foreword, and a glowing recommendation for an antisemetic book. - It is fact that he did this, not some made up smear campaign. - This is the case for many (all?) of the things he is criticised for and reporting of it is not bias or unfair. Corbyn was know as a terrorist sympathiser and totally unsuitable for any role of leadership and his card was marked long before his leadership campaign. Those with common sense could see through this false prophet that the blind ideologists chose to promote in opposition to the expenses scandal because he took the train and wore an old suit.
Biased opinion?
Apart from the study from an economics school you mean?
Those holocaust survivors were biased but some one working for the Israeli gmnt wasnt?
Interesting.
Terrorist synthesizer too?
He has really got under your skin hasn't he?
So let's tally up..according you he is a lying racist anti semitic bullying unrepentant tertorist sympathiser (can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?)
Any more?
Nice to see you have an opinion of such impartiality.
"Can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?"
No, and that is kinda my point. He claims to be a pacifist but supports violent methods to "bring peace". I would struggle to find a more hypocritical, non sensical and contradictory stance if I tried.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/jeremy-corbyn-should-not-be-allowed-to-rewrite-the-history-of-his-support-for-the-ira
https://order-order.com/2017/05/31/top-irish-historian-corbyn-didnt-support-ira-ceasefire/
I didn`t say he was racist but you could add traitor to that list.
I`m sure your rose tinted glasses wont allow you to see it but this misconception that he is an innocent victim is as much bullshit as the stunt he pulled on the train."I'm sorry...who calls herself a top historian? Can I ask is the same rosa parks who works for the observer and practically every single column is supporting the tories or Donald Trump? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://antisemitism.uk/labour-withdraws-ofcom-complaint-about-panorama-expose-of-partys-antisemitism/ I`m not sure what you were trying to prove with this link lionel as all it does is prove my point that the panorama programme was justified and corbyns opposition to it wasn`t." You said Ofcom had rejected every objection. You missed the bit where you mentioned labour had withdrew their complaint. Completely unbiased as usual | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
Absolutely.
Fucking
Pricesless. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/panoramas-hatchet-job-labour-antisemitism-bbc-has-become-pro-tory-media Coming from journalist who used to work for the observer "Ofcom dismisses every complaint of bias against Jeremy Corbyn about UK broadcasters The regulator received a total of 139 complaints about broadcasters' coverage since the Labour leader took office in 2015" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/jeremy-corbyn-bias-ofcom-complaint-bbc-channel-4-sky-news-labour-party-a7368796.html Interesting that the quote is from a left leaning source, is reporting on fact rather than opinion and shows your claims to be nothing more than biased opinion.... We could play this game all day but ultimately Corbyn keeps getting caught in antisemetic situations. - Right wing newspapers didn't make him write the foreword, and a glowing recommendation for an antisemetic book. - It is fact that he did this, not some made up smear campaign. - This is the case for many (all?) of the things he is criticised for and reporting of it is not bias or unfair. Corbyn was know as a terrorist sympathiser and totally unsuitable for any role of leadership and his card was marked long before his leadership campaign. Those with common sense could see through this false prophet that the blind ideologists chose to promote in opposition to the expenses scandal because he took the train and wore an old suit.
Biased opinion?
Apart from the study from an economics school you mean?
Those holocaust survivors were biased but some one working for the Israeli gmnt wasnt?
Interesting.
Terrorist synthesizer too?
He has really got under your skin hasn't he?
So let's tally up..according you he is a lying racist anti semitic bullying unrepentant tertorist sympathiser (can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?)
Any more?
Nice to see you have an opinion of such impartiality.
"Can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?"
No, and that is kinda my point. He claims to be a pacifist but supports violent methods to "bring peace". I would struggle to find a more hypocritical, non sensical and contradictory stance if I tried.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/jeremy-corbyn-should-not-be-allowed-to-rewrite-the-history-of-his-support-for-the-ira
https://order-order.com/2017/05/31/top-irish-historian-corbyn-didnt-support-ira-ceasefire/
I didn`t say he was racist but you could add traitor to that list.
I`m sure your rose tinted glasses wont allow you to see it but this misconception that he is an innocent victim is as much bullshit as the stunt he pulled on the train.
I'm sorry...who calls herself a top historian?
Can I ask is the same rosa parks who works for the observer and practically every single column is supporting the tories or Donald Trump?"Its not surprising that you struggle with logical conclusions as you obviously have a problem with comprehension. Nobody called themselves a top historian and also, it definitely isn't `rosa parks` and rosa parks definitely doesn't work for the observer... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://antisemitism.uk/labour-withdraws-ofcom-complaint-about-panorama-expose-of-partys-antisemitism/ I`m not sure what you were trying to prove with this link lionel as all it does is prove my point that the panorama programme was justified and corbyns opposition to it wasn`t. You said Ofcom had rejected every objection. You missed the bit where you mentioned labour had withdrew their complaint. Completely unbiased as usual " This is a completely bullshit point and statement. I never reference the BBCs complaint, I posted how many complaints Ofcom had thrown out after you tried to blame media bias. As an aside, remember you said I argued about semantics...?
And BTW, withdrawing your complaint is worse than having it thrown out. They didn`t even need to wait to be told it was a load of old cobblers, they already knew! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/panoramas-hatchet-job-labour-antisemitism-bbc-has-become-pro-tory-media Coming from journalist who used to work for the observer "Ofcom dismisses every complaint of bias against Jeremy Corbyn about UK broadcasters The regulator received a total of 139 complaints about broadcasters' coverage since the Labour leader took office in 2015" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/jeremy-corbyn-bias-ofcom-complaint-bbc-channel-4-sky-news-labour-party-a7368796.html Interesting that the quote is from a left leaning source, is reporting on fact rather than opinion and shows your claims to be nothing more than biased opinion.... We could play this game all day but ultimately Corbyn keeps getting caught in antisemetic situations. - Right wing newspapers didn't make him write the foreword, and a glowing recommendation for an antisemetic book. - It is fact that he did this, not some made up smear campaign. - This is the case for many (all?) of the things he is criticised for and reporting of it is not bias or unfair. Corbyn was know as a terrorist sympathiser and totally unsuitable for any role of leadership and his card was marked long before his leadership campaign. Those with common sense could see through this false prophet that the blind ideologists chose to promote in opposition to the expenses scandal because he took the train and wore an old suit.
Biased opinion?
Apart from the study from an economics school you mean?
Those holocaust survivors were biased but some one working for the Israeli gmnt wasnt?
Interesting.
Terrorist synthesizer too?
He has really got under your skin hasn't he?
So let's tally up..according you he is a lying racist anti semitic bullying unrepentant tertorist sympathiser (can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?)
Any more?
Nice to see you have an opinion of such impartiality.
"Can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?"
No, and that is kinda my point. He claims to be a pacifist but supports violent methods to "bring peace". I would struggle to find a more hypocritical, non sensical and contradictory stance if I tried.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/jeremy-corbyn-should-not-be-allowed-to-rewrite-the-history-of-his-support-for-the-ira
https://order-order.com/2017/05/31/top-irish-historian-corbyn-didnt-support-ira-ceasefire/
I didn`t say he was racist but you could add traitor to that list.
I`m sure your rose tinted glasses wont allow you to see it but this misconception that he is an innocent victim is as much bullshit as the stunt he pulled on the train.
Ha ha ha..the spectator
Oh yes totally unbiased
Was bj the editor at the time?
I stopped reading at the vit which said the IRa were defeated.
I suggest you try the excellent bbc drama the troubles if you want something resembling the truth. "I`m hardly surprised that you stopped reading, we know you only read things that suit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/panoramas-hatchet-job-labour-antisemitism-bbc-has-become-pro-tory-media Coming from journalist who used to work for the observer "Ofcom dismisses every complaint of bias against Jeremy Corbyn about UK broadcasters The regulator received a total of 139 complaints about broadcasters' coverage since the Labour leader took office in 2015" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/jeremy-corbyn-bias-ofcom-complaint-bbc-channel-4-sky-news-labour-party-a7368796.html Interesting that the quote is from a left leaning source, is reporting on fact rather than opinion and shows your claims to be nothing more than biased opinion.... We could play this game all day but ultimately Corbyn keeps getting caught in antisemetic situations. - Right wing newspapers didn't make him write the foreword, and a glowing recommendation for an antisemetic book. - It is fact that he did this, not some made up smear campaign. - This is the case for many (all?) of the things he is criticised for and reporting of it is not bias or unfair. Corbyn was know as a terrorist sympathiser and totally unsuitable for any role of leadership and his card was marked long before his leadership campaign. Those with common sense could see through this false prophet that the blind ideologists chose to promote in opposition to the expenses scandal because he took the train and wore an old suit.
Biased opinion?
Apart from the study from an economics school you mean?
Those holocaust survivors were biased but some one working for the Israeli gmnt wasnt?
Interesting.
Terrorist synthesizer too?
He has really got under your skin hasn't he?
So let's tally up..according you he is a lying racist anti semitic bullying unrepentant tertorist sympathiser (can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?)
Any more?
Nice to see you have an opinion of such impartiality.
"Can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?"
No, and that is kinda my point. He claims to be a pacifist but supports violent methods to "bring peace". I would struggle to find a more hypocritical, non sensical and contradictory stance if I tried.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/jeremy-corbyn-should-not-be-allowed-to-rewrite-the-history-of-his-support-for-the-ira
https://order-order.com/2017/05/31/top-irish-historian-corbyn-didnt-support-ira-ceasefire/
I didn`t say he was racist but you could add traitor to that list.
I`m sure your rose tinted glasses wont allow you to see it but this misconception that he is an innocent victim is as much bullshit as the stunt he pulled on the train.
I'm sorry...who calls herself a top historian?
Can I ask is the same rosa parks who works for the observer and practically every single column is supporting the tories or Donald Trump?
Its not surprising that you struggle with logical conclusions as you obviously have a problem with comprehension.
Nobody called themselves a top historian and also, it definitely isn't `rosa parks` and rosa parks definitely doesn't work for the observer... "Rosa prince. Erm. The piece is headlined 'top Irish historian | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-corbyn-on-northern-ireland" Did I say he voted against the good Friday agreement? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hypocritical lying bullying anti semitic Marxist radical terrorist sympathiser traitor who hates his country.
Absolutely.
Fucking
Pricesless."Now you're getting the idea.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Boris and his leader Cummings are both cnuts and not the type I want to climb into. " I think we have found the corby clubs next member.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/panoramas-hatchet-job-labour-antisemitism-bbc-has-become-pro-tory-media Coming from journalist who used to work for the observer "Ofcom dismisses every complaint of bias against Jeremy Corbyn about UK broadcasters The regulator received a total of 139 complaints about broadcasters' coverage since the Labour leader took office in 2015" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/jeremy-corbyn-bias-ofcom-complaint-bbc-channel-4-sky-news-labour-party-a7368796.html Interesting that the quote is from a left leaning source, is reporting on fact rather than opinion and shows your claims to be nothing more than biased opinion.... We could play this game all day but ultimately Corbyn keeps getting caught in antisemetic situations. - Right wing newspapers didn't make him write the foreword, and a glowing recommendation for an antisemetic book. - It is fact that he did this, not some made up smear campaign. - This is the case for many (all?) of the things he is criticised for and reporting of it is not bias or unfair. Corbyn was know as a terrorist sympathiser and totally unsuitable for any role of leadership and his card was marked long before his leadership campaign. Those with common sense could see through this false prophet that the blind ideologists chose to promote in opposition to the expenses scandal because he took the train and wore an old suit.
Biased opinion?
Apart from the study from an economics school you mean?
Those holocaust survivors were biased but some one working for the Israeli gmnt wasnt?
Interesting.
Terrorist synthesizer too?
He has really got under your skin hasn't he?
So let's tally up..according you he is a lying racist anti semitic bullying unrepentant tertorist sympathiser (can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?)
Any more?
Nice to see you have an opinion of such impartiality.
"Can you be a pacifist and advocate atrocities?"
No, and that is kinda my point. He claims to be a pacifist but supports violent methods to "bring peace". I would struggle to find a more hypocritical, non sensical and contradictory stance if I tried.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/jeremy-corbyn-should-not-be-allowed-to-rewrite-the-history-of-his-support-for-the-ira
https://order-order.com/2017/05/31/top-irish-historian-corbyn-didnt-support-ira-ceasefire/
I didn`t say he was racist but you could add traitor to that list.
I`m sure your rose tinted glasses wont allow you to see it but this misconception that he is an innocent victim is as much bullshit as the stunt he pulled on the train.
Ha ha ha..the spectator
Oh yes totally unbiased
Was bj the editor at the time?
I stopped reading at the vit which said the IRa were defeated.
I suggest you try the excellent bbc drama the troubles if you want something resembling the truth.
I`m hardly surprised that you stopped reading, we know you only read things that suit."What's the point of reading something which is potentially nonsense?I may aswell read the beano The ira were not defeated Thatcher actually reached out to them in the early 70s.By the 90s both sides had just about had enough hence the good Friday agreement. Tbf I'd expect such nonsense that the professional liar in no 10 edited. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
