Keir Starmer at it again..

[Templeton Peck]

You surely understand that the stuff in quotes is directly lifted from the report, it describes what happened. It's not opinion?

I wouldn't bank on it.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Actually no, there are very specific definitions of anti-semitism that are adopted by governments and political institutions.

I felt that Driscoll's treatment has been heavy handed, he simply shared a platform with Loach.

Are you saying that means i'm antisemitic?

 

[prawnking]

That's his signature move.

Got an answer yet?

 

[prawnking]

simply shared a platform with Loach.

Always downplaying

 

[prawnking]

You surely understand that the stuff in quotes within the quotes is directly lifted from the report, it describes what happened. It's not opinion?

Whereas you directly quoted the opinion of the author and said it was from the report - it wasn't.

That's where all this facts and opinion stuff has come from, I'm not sure if you're on a wind up at this point, as I know you are more intelligent than this.

Anyone actually reading the biased articles (all from the same newspaper) you quoted extensively from will realise that your definition of facts can't be taken seriously (the Ryan Coogan article is particularly laughable).

You really think that a journalist selectively quoting a section of the report to back up their political bias and take on events is fact, but a summary by the Labour Party themselves is opinion?

The one genuine quote you printed unabridged from the report (which, as I mentioned, was alreading in the single newspaper article I linked to) actually backs up my conclusion rather than yours!

Bizarre behaviour

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Always downplaying

I'm quoting a newspaper article here, so maybe it's not correct, but what I said is literally what the issue is, isn't it?

He has been prevented by Labour HQ from standing as candidate for the newly created role of leader of the North East Mayoral Combined Authority after appearing on stage with Mr Loach

Jamie Driscoll: Labour mayor blocked from standing after Ken Loach appearance says process 'anti-democratic'

Mr Driscoll has refused to apologise for appearing at an event with filmmaker Ken Loach and did not apologise when questioned over some of Mr Loach's comments on Jews, the Holocaust and Israel.

news.sky.com

 

[prawnking]

I'm quoting a newspaper article here, so maybe it's not correct, but what I said is literally what the issue is, isn't it?

Jamie Driscoll: Labour mayor blocked from standing after Ken Loach appearance says process 'anti-democratic'

Mr Driscoll has refused to apologise for appearing at an event with filmmaker Ken Loach and did not apologise when questioned over some of Mr Loach's comments on Jews, the Holocaust and Israel.

news.sky.com

Do you think the pub couple who displayed the golliwogs were treated in a heavy handed manner? After all, they were simply displaying toys

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

If we rewind a few days, when Ken Loach was being defended:

Mr Loach's comments.

They include saying that Israel's actions made a rise in antisemitism understandable; and replying that "all history" was up for discussion when asked if the Holocaust was unacceptable or if Israel's founding was based on ethnic cleansing.

Why would you actively choose not to disavow any of that?

 

[prawnking]

I'm quoting a newspaper article here, so maybe it's not correct, but what I said is literally what the issue is, isn't it?

Jamie Driscoll: Labour mayor blocked from standing after Ken Loach appearance says process 'anti-democratic'

Mr Driscoll has refused to apologise for appearing at an event with filmmaker Ken Loach and did not apologise when questioned over some of Mr Loach's comments on Jews, the Holocaust and Israel.

news.sky.com

Have you actually read this article FFS?

Have you seen the damning comments on Driscoll by not one, but two Jewish spokesmen from different organisations?

Do you believe in a zero tolerance approach to anti-semitism? Because the Labour Party does

 

[Johnny75]

Got an answer yet?

I wouldn't be holding your breath.

The longer he takes to answer the more Ken Livingstone he looks.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Anyone actually reading the biased articles (all from the same newspaper) you quoted extensively from will realise that your definition of facts can't be taken seriously (the Ryan Coogan article is particularly laughable).

For clarity, this is the report I was directly lifting the quotes FROM THE FORDE REPORT from

Anti-Corbyn Labour officials covertly diverted election cash to allies, inquiry finds

Long-awaited Forde inquiry finds evidence of ‘straightforward attempts’ to hinder Labour leadership

www.independent.co.uk

It's not bloody opinion, those particular posts that were directly from the Forde report and put into my post is what I'm talking about here, and you know it. This is ridiculous now.

You really think that a journalist selectively quoting a section of the report to back up their political bias and take on events is fact, but a summary by the Labour Party themselves is opinion?

The one genuine quote you printed unabridged from the report (which, as I mentioned, was alreading in the single newspaper article I linked to) actually backs up my conclusion rather than yours!

That particular quote was about both sides wanting to win, again if you can't read between the lines of what that actually means I really do pity you. To spell it out those that were working against JC would see a Labour defeat as a win in this instance especially as they'd been actively working against him.

Also, the Forde report was independent, so posting the Labour Party's spin on it isn't the gotcha you think it is.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Do you think the pub couple who displayed the golliwogs were treated in a heavy handed manner? After all, they were simply displaying toys

So you're answering a question with a question about something else?

 

[prawnking]

So you're answering a question with a question about something else?

Well, I never get any answers from you evasive buggers so I have to keep asking more questions, don't I?

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Have you actually read this article FFS?

Have you seen the damning comments on Driscoll by not one, but two Jewish spokesmen from different organisations?

Do you believe in a zero tolerance approach to anti-semitism? Because the Labour Party does

I'm trying to determine EXACTLY why Driscoll has been prevented from standing, and all I can find is that Labour have said its because he shared a platform with Loach?



You can digress and ask questions about Golliwogs all you like.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Well, I never get any answers from you evasive buggers so I have to keep asking more questions, don't I?

Another answer to question with a question.
 


I've answered post after post, you're even talking about golliwogs now.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Maybe he's an absolute bollock of a man, like Sam Tarry was?

He certainly hasn't done what he claims.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Maybe he's an absolute bollock of a man, like Sam Tarry was?

He certainly hasn't done what he claims.

He may well be, I hadn't heard of him a week ago, I have no idea.

What is troubling though is how someone can be de selected simply because of who they interviewed? And that is why, no other offical reason as far as what I can see?

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

I mean you could just not do that?

If I met Dean Saunders and said "actually he's quite a good bloke and I'm kind of on board with his side of things now he's explained his time at Wolves" I'm not sure you'd take my football views very seriously going forward.

 

[Johnny75]

He may well be, I hadn't heard of him a week ago, I have no idea.

What is troubling though is how someone can be de selected simply because of who they interviewed? And that is why, no other offical reason as far as what I can see?

Goes back to the point of Ken Loach being a complete cunt.

Why would you share a platform with somebody like that knowing you want to run for an election?

 

[prawnking]

I'm trying to determine EXACTLY why Driscoll has been prevented from standing, and all I can find is that Labour have said its because he shared a platform with Loach?

Driscoll then downplayed it, and refused to apologise or acknowledge that he should have brought up Loach's comments.

If you say that Corbyn couldn't favour a second referendum due to fear of political suicide, and understand that, why can't you understand that much of Starmer's reputation rests on following through on his comment to a zero tolerance approach to antisemitism?