Bloody 'ell, Andrew Neil utterly eviscerated Corbyn last night

[WES]

even by AN standards that was ruthless. :hehe:

And if I didn't despise Corbyn with every fibre of my being I might have felt ever so slightly sorry for horrible c*nt.

:-)

[Monty92]

even by AN standards that was ruthless. :hehe:

And if I didn't despise Corbyn with every fibre of my being I might have felt ever so slightly sorry for horrible c*nt.

:-)

Eviscerated? Only a fleeting mention of Corbyn's personal endorsements of antisemites (the most damning of all charges against him)?

He did great on the economic and security stuff, but the window is wide open to skewer Corbyn on the antisemitism stuff and he totally blew it.

[IUFG]

even by AN standards that was ruthless. :hehe:

And if I didn't despise Corbyn with every fibre of my being I might have felt ever so slightly sorry for horrible c*nt.

:-)

AN will score even higher when he takes on the bumbling baffoon that is Boris.

I'm sure politicians weren't as shít as this lot when I was younger.

[WES]

Eviscerated? Only a fleeting mention of Corbyn's personal endorsements of antisemites (the most damning of all charges against him)?

He did great on the economic and security stuff, but the window is wide open to skewer Corbyn on the antisemitism stuff and he totally blew it.

Eh? He absolutely murdered Corbyn on anti-semitism - the finale of Corbyn refusing to apologise 4 times when asked was utterly damning, I thought.

Corbyn barely answered a single question throughout the entire interview, if I was left with anything it was that.

[WES]

AN will score even higher when he takes on the bumbling baffoon that is Boris.

I'm sure politicians weren't as shít as this lot when I was younger.

I doubt that - he doesn't have the material with Boris that he does with Corbyn.

[Luis Anaconda]

I doubt that - he doesn't have the material with Boris that he does with Corbyn.

:hehe: :hehe: :hehe: :hehe: Did you really just write that?

[Pokster]

Eh? He absolutely murdered Corbyn on anti-semitism - the finale of Corbyn refusing to apologise 4 times when asked was utterly damning, I thought.

Corbyn barely answered a single question throughout the entire interview, if I was left with anything it was that.

Politician in not answering questions shocker!

the Antisemites was dumbed down on the BBC News with the Islamaphobia accusation against the Tory party sharing the billing

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

Eh? He absolutely murdered Corbyn on anti-semitism - the finale of Corbyn refusing to apologise 4 times when asked was utterly damning, I thought.

Corbyn barely answered a single question throughout the entire interview, if I was left with anything it was that.

wig. The man is a grotesque ogre and the only reason you like him is because you are one too :-D

Do you were an appalling wig WES?

[Pokster]

I doubt that - he doesn't have the material with Boris that he does with Corbyn.

No, because Boris has been as clean as a whistle in his whole career, no threatening to get people beaten up, no dodgy jobs beacuse he is shagging someone and they get contracts on the back of it. No siree, Boris will have nothing to fear :rolleyes:

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

I doubt that - he doesn't have the material with Boris that he does with Corbyn.

Jesus wept! Have you had some kind of stroke or something?

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

No, because Boris has been as clean as a whistle in his whole career, no threatening to get people beaten up, no dodgy jobs beacuse he is shagging someone and they get contracts on the back of it. No siree, Boris will have nothing to fear :rolleyes:

And don't forget, Jennifer is saving her next installment to maximize effect.

[Monty92]

Eh? He absolutely murdered Corbyn on anti-semitism - the finale of Corbyn refusing to apologise 4 times when asked was utterly damning, I thought.

Corbyn barely answered a single question throughout the entire interview, if I was left with anything it was that.

Whenever he's questioned on the anti-semitism stuff, 99.9% of the focus is on the fact that anti-semitism is a problem within the party itself, rather than a problem for him personally. This gives him wriggle room that he should not be afforded.

How about putting something like this to him:

"Mr Corbyn, we understand that you've always looked to engage with people with whom you do not always agree on everything, and this has unfortunately often led to you spending time with individuals who hold the most appalling anti-Semitic views. The problem is, Mr Corbyn, that when you share platforms with the likes of xxxxxx, defend an explicitly anti-Semitic piece of art, lay a wreath at the grave of terrorists, suggest that Jews don't understand irony, call terrorist groups "friends", invite terrorists for cups of tea, defend the right of virulent anti-semites to enter the country, protest against the jailing of convicted terrorists, take money to appear on Iranian Press TV.....it begins to look like you may have more in common with these people than you may like to admit.

"Let me put it this way, Mr Corbyn, if someone regularly accused of fascist leanings such as Donald Trump had spent this amount of time defending, supporting and endorsing white nationalists, what would your response be? And so we must ask you, why should people see you any differently?"

[Burney]

Eviscerated? Only a fleeting mention of Corbyn's personal endorsements of antisemites (the most damning of all charges against him)?

He did great on the economic and security stuff, but the window is wide open to skewer Corbyn on the antisemitism stuff and he totally blew it.

Reverse jinxing, m. Good work. Shrood. ;-)

[Pokster]

Whenever he's questioned on the anti-semitism stuff, 99.9% of the focus is on the fact that anti-semitism is a problem within the party itself, rather than a problem for him personally. This gives him wriggle room that he should not be afforded.

How about putting something like this to him:

"Mr Corbyn, we understand that you've always looked to engage with people with whom you do not always agree on everything, and this has unfortunately often led to you spending time with individuals who hold the most appalling anti-Semitic views. The problem is, Mr Corbyn, that when you share platforms with the likes of xxxxxx, defend an explicitly anti-Semitic piece of art, lay a wreath at the grave of terrorists, suggest that Jews don't understand irony, call terrorist groups "friends", invite terrorists for cups of tea, defend the right of virulent anti-semites to enter the country, protest against the jailing of convicted terrorists, take money to appear on Iranian Press TV.....it begins to look like you may have more in common with these people than you may like to admit.

"Let me put it this way, Mr Corbyn, if someone regularly accused of fascist leanings such as Donald Trump had spent this amount of time defending, supporting and endorsing white nationalists, what would your response be? And so we must ask you, why should people see you any differently?"

I think he would have fallen asleep before the end of the question, and then he wouldn't answer it..... the same as every politician refuses to give a straight answer to any question no matter what it is.

Dangerous mentioning trump as whatever people think about hiis views, he is hugely popular for some reason...bit like Boris

[Burney]

Whenever he's questioned on the anti-semitism stuff, 99.9% of the focus is on the fact that anti-semitism is a problem within the party itself, rather than a problem for him personally. This gives him wriggle room that he should not be afforded.

How about putting something like this to him:

"Mr Corbyn, we understand that you've always looked to engage with people with whom you do not always agree on everything, and this has unfortunately often led to you spending time with individuals who hold the most appalling anti-Semitic views. The problem is, Mr Corbyn, that when you share platforms with the likes of xxxxxx, defend an explicitly anti-Semitic piece of art, lay a wreath at the grave of terrorists, suggest that Jews don't understand irony, call terrorist groups "friends", invite terrorists for cups of tea, defend the right of virulent anti-semites to enter the country, protest against the jailing of convicted terrorists, take money to appear on Iranian Press TV.....it begins to look like you may have more in common with these people than you may like to admit.

"Let me put it this way, Mr Corbyn, if someone regularly accused of fascist leanings such as Donald Trump had spent this amount of time defending, supporting and endorsing white nationalists, what would your response be? And so we must ask you, why should people see you any differently?"

a: it's more of a diatribe than a question
b: By way of an answer, you'd just get: 'Lifetime of anti-racist campaigning/muh Jewish friends/Tory racism/blah blah fúcking blah

[Monty92]

Reverse jinxing, m. Good work. Shrood. ;-)

It's gone, mate. The election's gone.

Everything is pointing to a hung parliament at this point - or worse. Tories have no more squeeze left and Labour still do. Add to that the number of new voter registrations and it's hard to be anything other than utterly despondent.

:-(

[WES]

a: it's more of a diatribe than a question
b: By way of an answer, you'd just get: 'Lifetime of anti-racist campaigning/muh Jewish friends/Tory racism/blah blah fúcking blah

Yes, Neil pushed it as far as he could and Corbyn repeatedly falling back to b in your reply was obvious to anyone that watched. Any further questioning on that line wasn't really going to prove anything else.

I thought the apology question was a very good finish. Lord knows why he didn't just do it. I mean, I know he's thick and anti-semitic but surely he could see how damaging it would be to not apologise and how easy it would be to do it.

[WES]

:hehe: :hehe: :hehe: :hehe: Did you really just write that?

Yes, and with good reason. Note that I didn't say he doesn't have anything on Johnson, I said he doesn't have as much.

I don't think anything will stick on Johnson the way that antisemitism and a suicidal economic strategy stuck on Corbyn.

[Monty92]

Yes, and with good reason. Note that I didn't say he doesn't have anything on Johnson, I said he doesn't have as much.

I don't think anything will stick on Johnson the way that antisemitism and a suicidal economic strategy stuck on Corbyn.

On suicidal economic strategies, the reality is that Corbyn is the 'change' candidate. We saw with the original Brexit vote that people are happy to shake things up regardless of the risks. This is no different. Boris represents a decade of Tory austerity, stagnant wage growth, NHS staff shortages, etc..

Whether or not his economic policies add up, Corbyn is offering a meaningful alternative and Boris is not. That will win a lot of votes.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

Yes, and with good reason. Note that I didn't say he doesn't have anything on Johnson, I said he doesn't have as much.

I don't think anything will stick on Johnson the way that antisemitism and a suicidal economic strategy stuck on Corbyn.

I think the antisemitism charges matter as much as the islamaphobia charges against the Tories. People don't really much care and, fact is, there is and always has been, an undercurrent of antisemitism in British culture and there is most definitely a strong current of islamaphobia

Add to that the fact that the Rabbi muppet is clearly a fat money lending Tory and it don't add up to a handful of beans.

[Pokster]

On suicidal economic strategies, the reality is that Corbyn is the 'change' candidate. We saw with the original Brexit vote that people are happy to shake things up regardless of the risks. This is no different. Boris represents a decade of Tory austerity, stagnant wage growth, NHS staff shortages, etc..

Whether or not his economic policies add up, Corbyn is offering a meaningful alternative and Boris is not. That will win a lot of votes.

And what is a in a manifesto doesn't mean it will actually happen... the Tory party have promised quite a few things that Labour have done but just in a smaller way.

Poll out at 10 tonight (yougov) is the important one, they are the only ones that forecast a hung parliament last time...at the moment it still points to a 50 seat majority but depends on tactical voting imo

[WES]

On suicidal economic strategies, the reality is that Corbyn is the 'change' candidate. We saw with the original Brexit vote that people are happy to shake things up regardless of the risks. This is no different. Boris represents a decade of Tory austerity, stagnant wage growth, NHS staff shortages, etc..

Whether or not his economic policies add up, Corbyn is offering a meaningful alternative and Boris is not. That will win a lot of votes.

His alternative needs to be meaningful and achievable to win him many votes. The polls suggest that the only people who think they are achievable are those that were going to vote for Labour anyway.

Boris has done a decent job in avoiding responsibility for austerity, particularly by using his time as the mayor of London as evidence. He represents a move away from austerity but with an achievable plan, that is an alternative.

[Monty92]

I think the antisemitism charges matter as much as the islamaphobia charges against the Tories. People don't really much care and, fact is, there is and always has been, an undercurrent of antisemitism in British culture and there is most definitely a strong current of islamaphobia

Add to that the fact that the Rabbi muppet is clearly a fat money lending Tory and it don't add up to a handful of beans.

Islamophobia is an aversion to a set of religious ideas. There is no parallel at all with anti-Semitism, which is racism.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

On suicidal economic strategies, the reality is that Corbyn is the 'change' candidate. We saw with the original Brexit vote that people are happy to shake things up regardless of the risks. This is no different. Boris represents a decade of Tory austerity, stagnant wage growth, NHS staff shortages, etc..

Whether or not his economic policies add up, Corbyn is offering a meaningful alternative and Boris is not. That will win a lot of votes.

Have you been listening to much radio lately? Thousands of working class northerners are desperate for Brexit and switching to Boris. I think at least a 40 seat majority, possibly 80.

I'll leave it to Berni to explain the myth of the youth-quake, but basically, the extra million snowflakes who've registered to vote won't remember to because they'll be too busy taking selfies.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

And what is a in a manifesto doesn't mean it will actually happen... the Tory party have promised quite a few things that Labour have done but just in a smaller way.

Poll out at 10 tonight (yougov) is the important one, they are the only ones that forecast a hung parliament last time...at the moment it still points to a 50 seat majority but depends on tactical voting imo

Just because yougov got it right last time doesn't mean too much. They may well have got lucky. Most polling outfits have seriously embarrassed themselves at some time.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

particularly by using his time as the mayor of London as evidence

Errant bollux - you're just repeating what a couple of media pundits have recently opined. His time as mayor of London does not register one iota outside of London.

[Pokster]

Islamophobia is an aversion to a set of religious ideas. There is no parallel at all with anti-Semitism, which is racism.

But post of the population are neither Jewish or Muslims, so they don't see the difference ... and most don't actually care

[Pokster]

Errant bollux - you're just repeating what a couple of media pundits have recently opined. His time as mayor of London does not register one iota outside of London.

Except he was up to dodgy tactics when he was mayor, so he can't hide behind that

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

Islamophobia is an aversion to a set of religious ideas. There is no parallel at all with anti-Semitism, which is racism.

Dictionary definitions dear boy. Islamaphobia in the UK is actually a deep dislike and distrust of asians, particularly muslim asians and , more specifically, pakistanis.

There is quite a compelling counter narrative developing to the Chief Rabbi's disgraceful interventions where Jewish thinkers and writers of the left are pointing out what a disgraceful specimen he[the Chief Rabbi] is.

Your thoughts on the man Monty?

[Pokster]

Just because yougov got it right last time doesn't mean too much. They may well have got lucky. Most polling outfits have seriously embarrassed themselves at some time.

Well it does mean a lot, as so many people are focussing on it. Each polling company has changed the way the compute the results since 2016, and since Youguv accurately got it right in 2017 whatever it says tonight will be major news tomorrow.

[Monty92]

Dictionary definitions dear boy. Islamaphobia in the UK is actually a deep dislike and distrust of asians, particularly muslim asians and , more specifically, pakistanis.

There is quite a compelling counter narrative developing to the Chief Rabbi's disgraceful interventions where Jewish thinkers and writers of the left are pointing out what a disgraceful specimen he[the Chief Rabbi] is.

Your thoughts on the man Monty?

Hang on, Islamophobia can be a hatred of people who aren't even Muslim, but are brown-skinned? Blimey, and there was me thinking they'd already stretched the definition beyond credibility!

I think the threats faced by Jews in Europe are unique in that they come from the far left, the far right, and the continent's fast-growing Muslim populations (and statistics bear all of this out). So I'm pretty relaxed about any Jew doing everything they can to prevent a far left extremist racist party with Islamist sympathies like the Labour party getting into power.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

Hang on, Islamophobia can be a hatred of people who aren't even Muslim

You have never actually spent any discernible amount of time with working class people have you? Apart from at the football I guess.

Many of them don't even know the difference between an Indian and a Pakistani - they are all just "fackin pakis". Sikhs have been subjected to so called islamaphobic insults based on the fact they were wearing a turban fer fuxake.

Do you really feel threatened? Or are you just lining yourself up for some compensation for the stress you are being made to endure? Which you will doubtless use to establish some kind of payday loan company.

[Monty92]

You have never actually spent any discernible amount of time with working class people have you? Apart from at the football I guess.

Many of them don't even know the difference between an Indian and a Pakistani - they are all just "fackin pakis". Sikhs have been subjected to so called islamaphobic insults based on the fact they were wearing a turban fer fuxake.

Do you really feel threatened? Or are you just lining yourself up for some compensation for the stress you are being made to endure? Which you will doubtless use to establish some kind of payday loan company.

But still, it feels a bit whiffy if they are including hate crimes against non-Muslims as part of statistics designed to record hate crimes against Muslims :hehe:

Do I feel threatened? Yes, I do. Whenever I spend time in Central London I think about the fact that dozens of people have been killed by Jew-hating Muslims in the city in recent years. If I'd left home 7 minutes earlier on 7/7 I'd have been on a train that was bombed by a Jew-hating Muslim.

This is an entirely rational response, I would have thought :shrug:

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

AN will score even higher when he takes on the bumbling baffoon that is Boris.

I'm sure politicians weren't as shít as this lot when I was younger.

They weren't.

Before the City big bang, and when the top rate of tax was extortionate, chaps and chappesses with Oxbridge first would go into politics.

Now they all go into the City.

Thatcher turned the Tory party into a bunch of shyster estate agents with the only people with any real beliefs being the europhobe nutter wing. The rest now just want to make money for their tribe and entrench inequality, hidden behind a focus grouped, PR veneer.

Gordon Brown spent a decade ruining the career of everyone who could have made a better replacement. Ed M beating his brother and then the Corbyn/Momentum take over has meant that where we used to have Jenkins, Healey et al, we now have 23 yr old woke types choosing who ever the loudest social media loudmouth in the locality is as candidate.

Yes, it's a shower of shît compared to any period 1945-1987.

In fact, the early C20th lot were better, too. And the C19th and C28th.

Cünts, the lot of them.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Well it does mean a lot, as so many people are focussing on it. Each polling company has changed the way the compute the results since 2016, and since Youguv accurately got it right in 2017 whatever it says tonight will be major news tomorrow.

The big yougov poll was MRP so by using census data they break it down to a constituency bu constituency basis.

That's why it got the last won pretty much spot on.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

They weren't.

Before the City big bang, and when the top rate of tax was extortionate, chaps and chappesses with Oxbridge first would go into politics.

Now they all go into the City.

Thatcher turned the Tory party into a bunch of shyster estate agents with the only people with any real beliefs being the europhobe nutter wing. The rest now just want to make money for their tribe and entrench inequality, hidden behind a focus grouped, PR veneer.

Gordon Brown spent a decade ruining the career of everyone who could have made a better replacement. Ed M beating his brother and then the Corbyn/Momentum take over has meant that where we used to have Jenkins, Healey et al, we now have 23 yr old woke types choosing who ever the loudest social media loudmouth in the locality is as candidate.

Yes, it's a shower of shît compared to any period 1945-1987.

In fact, the early C20th lot were better, too. And the C19th and C28th.

Cünts, the lot of them.

Good Lord Ganps. This is exactly, slightly different wording, the way my wife feels about the whole shebang.

Estate agents really are the slimiest of the creatures. Affordable or social housing is the last thing they want to see. I rather enjoy looking in estate agent's windows and observing the miserable wretches inside who haven't had a whiff of a bonus for two years and continue to assure everyone that "prippertay" prices will be accelerating onwards and upwards again any day now.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

But still, it feels a bit whiffy if they are including hate crimes against non-Muslims as part of statistics designed to record hate crimes against Muslims :hehe:

Do I feel threatened? Yes, I do. Whenever I spend time in Central London I think about the fact that dozens of people have been killed by Jew-hating Muslims in the city in recent years. If I'd left home 7 minutes earlier on 7/7 I'd have been on a train that was bombed by a Jew-hating Muslim.

This is an entirely rational response, I would have thought :shrug:

They're not targetting jews though are they. How many jews were in the Manchester Arena thingy? You are no more at risk that me so it is actually entirely irrational.

I can't remember UK muslims ever attacking a synagogue. Any such incidents have usually been the work of the far right ( brainless skinheads to be precise).

[Pokster]

But still, it feels a bit whiffy if they are including hate crimes against non-Muslims as part of statistics designed to record hate crimes against Muslims :hehe:

Do I feel threatened? Yes, I do. Whenever I spend time in Central London I think about the fact that dozens of people have been killed by Jew-hating Muslims in the city in recent years. If I'd left home 7 minutes earlier on 7/7 I'd have been on a train that was bombed by a Jew-hating Muslim.

This is an entirely rational response, I would have thought :shrug:

so you feel threatened because you are near Muslims, not because you are Jewish

[Burney]

You have never actually spent any discernible amount of time with working class people have you? Apart from at the football I guess.

Many of them don't even know the difference between an Indian and a Pakistani - they are all just "fackin pakis". Sikhs have been subjected to so called islamaphobic insults based on the fact they were wearing a turban fer fuxake.

Do you really feel threatened? Or are you just lining yourself up for some compensation for the stress you are being made to endure? Which you will doubtless use to establish some kind of payday loan company.


Anti-semitism and Islamophobia are distinct in that an Islamophobe is not necessarily a racist, whereas an anti-semite by definition is.

And I'm deeply suspicious of any argument that uses the spectre of thick, racist proles who can't be trusted to think to justify why one ought not to be allowed to say or do certain things. It's not only horribly reductive, snobbish and dehumanising, it's ultimately authoritarian.

By the way, I do wish you'd learn to spell 'Islamophobia', you thick, racist prole.

[Burney]

so you feel threatened because you are near Muslims, not because you are Jewish

No, he's threatened because he's near muslims and he's Jewish. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Muslim immigration to Europe has seen rates of anti-semitism soar because the muslim world is vastly more anti-semitic than the post-1945 west. This is because of structural factors within Islam itself; Israel and ultimately because the muslim world doesn't have the sense of guilt and horror about the Holocaust the we in the West do to help restrain its anti-semitism.

[Monty92]

They're not targetting jews though are they. How many jews were in the Manchester Arena thingy? You are no more at risk that me so it is actually entirely irrational.

I can't remember UK muslims ever attacking a synagogue. Any such incidents have usually been the work of the far right ( brainless skinheads to be precise).

"Any such incidents have usually been the work of the far right"

And that speaks to my original point which is that the threat to Jews is, uniquely, three pronged.

I don't personally feel threatened because of my Jewish-ness, but I'm not necessarily easily identifiable as a Jew (shut it!). I don't conspicuously walk to synagogue on Saturday mornings and I don't hang around outside Carmellis in Golders Green with my Jew mates as cars full of immigrants drive past shouting abuse (as happens on a regular basis).

We know that by far and away the biggest victims of "hate crimes" (as much as I dislike the phrase) across Europe are Jews.

So no, I don't personally feel threatened, but many do. And it would seem rational if the prospect of an institutionally anti-Semitic party being in power would add to their sense of unease.

[Pokster]

"Any such incidents have usually been the work of the far right"

And that speaks to my original point which is that the threat to Jews is, uniquely, three pronged.

I don't personally feel threatened because of my Jewish-ness, but I'm not necessarily easily identifiable as a Jew (shut it!). I don't conspicuously walk to synagogue on Saturday mornings and I don't hang around outside Carmellis in Golders Green with my Jew mates as cars full of immigrants drive past shouting abuse (as happens on a regular basis).

We know that by far and away the biggest victims of "hate crimes" (as much as I dislike the phrase) across Europe are Jews.

So no, I don't personally feel threatened, but many do. And it would seem rational if the prospect of an institutionally anti-Semitic party being in power would add to their sense of unease.

How do you know they are immigrants? Or are you just casually tossing the term out there for any Muslim?

[Burney]

They're not targetting jews though are they. How many jews were in the Manchester Arena thingy? You are no more at risk that me so it is actually entirely irrational.

I can't remember UK muslims ever attacking a synagogue. Any such incidents have usually been the work of the far right ( brainless skinheads to be precise).

If you honestly think skinheads are behind the fact that anti-semitic attacks have doubled in frequency over the last year (and the year before that), you're out of your mind.

In fact, the reason for it is the massive increase in the muslim population since 1997. Muslims are twice as likely to espouse anti-semitic sentiments than native Britons.

https://www.jta.org/2017/09/12/global/british-muslims-twice-likelier-than-others-to-espouse-anti-semitic-views-survey-suggests

Now are you honestly going to tell me you believe there is no relationship between a high level of expressed anti-semitism amongst a particular group that has grown significantly as a percentage of the population over a short period and a significant spike in anti-semitic attacks?

Pull the other one.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

By the way, I do wish you'd learn to spell 'Islamophobia', you thick, racist prole.

I'll be interested to see if your suspicion of the argument remains if they, the racist proles, fail to deliver Brexit for you. "Horribly reductive and dehumanising" :hehe: get to fúck you old Tory w@nker.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

the threat to Jews is, uniquely, three pronged.

The threat to you is actually four pronged m because you look like a muslim. Possibly even five pronged because you could be attacked by far right jewish vigilantes. I get up in that attic sharpish mate.

[Burney]

I'll be interested to see if your suspicion of the argument remains if they, the racist proles, fail to deliver Brexit for you. "Horribly reductive and dehumanising" :hehe: get to fúck you old Tory w@nker.

Joking aside, it has been the most repulsive and depressing aspect of the last three years seeing the visceral, hate-filled snobbery of the Remain-voting middle classes come out into the open. Seeing people who'd vote Labour, talk about 'our NHS' and bleat about 'social justice' in the same breath being happy to characterise anyone below them on the social scale as basically sub-human scum who ought to disenfranchised altogether started off being funny, but now just sickens me.

It's bigotry, plain and simple. In fact, I've seen it in my own family and haven't spoken to my sister for over a year because of it. So yes, I do mean it and no, my mind isn't getting changed on the matter.

[Ash]

Do you really feel threatened? Or are you just lining yourself up for some compensation for the stress you are being made to endure? Which you will doubtless use to establish some kind of payday loan company.

:yikes:

Are you suggesting that Monty is, by his nature, a lender of coin?

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

Israel and ultimately because the muslim world doesn't have the sense of guilt and horror about the Holocaust the we in the West do to help restrain its anti-semitism.

So employing your own barrack room lawyer style of discourse b, do you mean to tell me if it wasn't for your sense of guilt about atrocities perpetrated against jewish folk by the Nazis you'd be out there daubing swastikas on synagogues? Shame on you.

[Ash]

Joking aside, it has been the most repulsive and depressing aspect of the last three years seeing the visceral, hate-filled snobbery of the Remain-voting middle classes come out into the open. Seeing people who'd vote Labour, talk about 'our NHS' and bleat about 'social justice' in the same breath being happy to characterise anyone below them on the social scale as basically sub-human scum who ought to disenfranchised altogether started off being funny, but now just sickens me.

It's bigotry, plain and simple.

Whilst agree with this, it may be that your distaste for such class-based bigotry does not have the deepest of roots. I do seem to recall you hating the lower order citizens as much as the fake-left hard-core Remainers do.

[Burney]

Whilst agree with this, it may be that your distaste for such class-based bigotry does not have the deepest of roots. I do seem to recall you hating the lower order citizens as much as the fake-left hard-core Remainers do.

You do realise that not everything said on here is serious, yes? That people sometimes adopt comic or provocative poses for amusement or effect?

[Monty92]

You do realise that not everything said on here is serious, yes? That people sometimes adopt comic or provocative poses for amusement or effect?

Also, it's entirely possible to detest the cultural predilections (TV habits, dress sense, diet, etc) of the working class without considering them inherently thick.

I generally prefer spending time with middle class people than working class people for this reason, but would I trust the former to have more sophisticated opinions than the latter on whether or not we should remain in the EU? My experience tells me absolutely not.

[Ash]

You do realise that not everything said on here is serious, yes? That people sometimes adopt comic or provocative poses for amusement or effect?

Ah, ok. I see.

You never meant dem fings.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

:yikes:

Are you suggesting that Monty is, by his nature, a lender of coin?

I imagine he lends money with some kind of new hyper interest that makes coping with compound interest a cakewalk by comparison. Interest on the interest of the interest

[WES]

From Michael Deacon in the Tele today:

Andrew Neil’s interview of Jeremy Corbyn was so brutal, the BBC should have shown it after the watershed. How Labour must wish they had. Ideally, long after everyone of voting age was asleep.

The first 10 minutes – a whole third of the interview – were dedicated to anti-Semitism. Under the burning searchlight of Mr Neil’s interrogation, Mr Corbyn floundered. He sounded by turns waffly, defensive, confused, crabby, and clueless.

Mr Neil asked him three times whether it was anti-Semitic to say “Rothschild’s Zionists run Israel and world governments”. Eventually, after 45 seconds of pointless prevarication, Mr Corbyn conceded that it was. Upon which Mr Neil informed him that they were the words of a Labour member and former council candidate – and that, despite being investigated for a whole year, the man hadn’t been suspended from the party for it. Which was odd, because Mr Corbyn had previously said that anyone who’d been antisemitic had been suspended or expelled from the party.

Next Mr Neil reminded him of a Labour member who’d posted a video denying the Holocaust. Her punishment? A written warning. And another odd thing: earlier today, Mr Corbyn had spoken at a Labour event on “race and faith”, where he’d said anti-Semitism was vile and unacceptable. And yet two of the prospective Labour candidates sitting alongside him at that event had themselves been accused of anti-Semitism.

Mr Neil asked Mr Corbyn whether he wished to apologise to the Jewish community for what had happened. In reply, Mr Corbyn neither apologised, nor even mentioned the Jewish community. Instead, he launched into a statement of such vague and evasive banality (“What I’ll say is this. I am determined that our society will be safer for people of all faiths. I…”) that Mr Neil decided he was wasting his time, and abandoned the subject altogether. On to Brexit. Funnily enough, that topic didn’t seem to suit Mr Corbyn terribly well either.

What made this interview so awful for Labour, though, wasn’t just Mr Corbyn’s inability – or refusal – to give adequate answers. It was his manner. So tetchy, so sullen, so huffy. So sniffily passive-aggressive.

“Can I finish?” he would snap, mid-waffle, every time Mr Neil attempted to remind him what the actual question had been. “Can I? Can I please finish? Please? Andrew? Can I finish?”

Again, and again, and again. Can I finish? Can I? Can I finish? He genuinely seemed to have no idea how it made him sound: pitiful, and self-pitying. And the longer the interview went on, the sulkier he grew. He was behaving like the world’s oldest teenager: the smouldering victimhood, the muttering martyrdom. At any moment, I half-expected him to flounce out of his chair, stalk out of the studio, and stomp upstairs to his bedroom.

It really was awful. Arguably the great triumph of Labour’s 2017 campaign was that Mr Corbyn managed to reign in his temper, and present himself to the public as calm, thoughtful, kindly, gentle. Sadly for Labour, it seems that Mr Zen is no longer at home.

This morning, when the airwaves were dominated by that extraordinary intervention by the Chief Rabbi, I thought Mr Corbyn’s day couldn’t get any worse. Somehow, though, he proved me wrong.

[Pokster]

From Michael Deacon in the Tele today:

Andrew Neil’s interview of Jeremy Corbyn was so brutal, the BBC should have shown it after the watershed. How Labour must wish they had. Ideally, long after everyone of voting age was asleep.

The first 10 minutes – a whole third of the interview – were dedicated to anti-Semitism. Under the burning searchlight of Mr Neil’s interrogation, Mr Corbyn floundered. He sounded by turns waffly, defensive, confused, crabby, and clueless.

Mr Neil asked him three times whether it was anti-Semitic to say “Rothschild’s Zionists run Israel and world governments”. Eventually, after 45 seconds of pointless prevarication, Mr Corbyn conceded that it was. Upon which Mr Neil informed him that they were the words of a Labour member and former council candidate – and that, despite being investigated for a whole year, the man hadn’t been suspended from the party for it. Which was odd, because Mr Corbyn had previously said that anyone who’d been antisemitic had been suspended or expelled from the party.

Next Mr Neil reminded him of a Labour member who’d posted a video denying the Holocaust. Her punishment? A written warning. And another odd thing: earlier today, Mr Corbyn had spoken at a Labour event on “race and faith”, where he’d said anti-Semitism was vile and unacceptable. And yet two of the prospective Labour candidates sitting alongside him at that event had themselves been accused of anti-Semitism.

Mr Neil asked Mr Corbyn whether he wished to apologise to the Jewish community for what had happened. In reply, Mr Corbyn neither apologised, nor even mentioned the Jewish community. Instead, he launched into a statement of such vague and evasive banality (“What I’ll say is this. I am determined that our society will be safer for people of all faiths. I…”) that Mr Neil decided he was wasting his time, and abandoned the subject altogether. On to Brexit. Funnily enough, that topic didn’t seem to suit Mr Corbyn terribly well either.

What made this interview so awful for Labour, though, wasn’t just Mr Corbyn’s inability – or refusal – to give adequate answers. It was his manner. So tetchy, so sullen, so huffy. So sniffily passive-aggressive.

“Can I finish?” he would snap, mid-waffle, every time Mr Neil attempted to remind him what the actual question had been. “Can I? Can I please finish? Please? Andrew? Can I finish?”

Again, and again, and again. Can I finish? Can I? Can I finish? He genuinely seemed to have no idea how it made him sound: pitiful, and self-pitying. And the longer the interview went on, the sulkier he grew. He was behaving like the world’s oldest teenager: the smouldering victimhood, the muttering martyrdom. At any moment, I half-expected him to flounce out of his chair, stalk out of the studio, and stomp upstairs to his bedroom.

It really was awful. Arguably the great triumph of Labour’s 2017 campaign was that Mr Corbyn managed to reign in his temper, and present himself to the public as calm, thoughtful, kindly, gentle. Sadly for Labour, it seems that Mr Zen is no longer at home.

This morning, when the airwaves were dominated by that extraordinary intervention by the Chief Rabbi, I thought Mr Corbyn’s day couldn’t get any worse. Somehow, though, he proved me wrong.

"in the Telegraph"... was always going to be a well balanced feature then

[Monty92]

From Michael Deacon in the Tele today:

Andrew Neil’s interview of Jeremy Corbyn was so brutal, the BBC should have shown it after the watershed. How Labour must wish they had. Ideally, long after everyone of voting age was asleep.

The first 10 minutes – a whole third of the interview – were dedicated to anti-Semitism. Under the burning searchlight of Mr Neil’s interrogation, Mr Corbyn floundered. He sounded by turns waffly, defensive, confused, crabby, and clueless.

Mr Neil asked him three times whether it was anti-Semitic to say “Rothschild’s Zionists run Israel and world governments”. Eventually, after 45 seconds of pointless prevarication, Mr Corbyn conceded that it was. Upon which Mr Neil informed him that they were the words of a Labour member and former council candidate – and that, despite being investigated for a whole year, the man hadn’t been suspended from the party for it. Which was odd, because Mr Corbyn had previously said that anyone who’d been antisemitic had been suspended or expelled from the party.

Next Mr Neil reminded him of a Labour member who’d posted a video denying the Holocaust. Her punishment? A written warning. And another odd thing: earlier today, Mr Corbyn had spoken at a Labour event on “race and faith”, where he’d said anti-Semitism was vile and unacceptable. And yet two of the prospective Labour candidates sitting alongside him at that event had themselves been accused of anti-Semitism.

Mr Neil asked Mr Corbyn whether he wished to apologise to the Jewish community for what had happened. In reply, Mr Corbyn neither apologised, nor even mentioned the Jewish community. Instead, he launched into a statement of such vague and evasive banality (“What I’ll say is this. I am determined that our society will be safer for people of all faiths. I…”) that Mr Neil decided he was wasting his time, and abandoned the subject altogether. On to Brexit. Funnily enough, that topic didn’t seem to suit Mr Corbyn terribly well either.

What made this interview so awful for Labour, though, wasn’t just Mr Corbyn’s inability – or refusal – to give adequate answers. It was his manner. So tetchy, so sullen, so huffy. So sniffily passive-aggressive.

“Can I finish?” he would snap, mid-waffle, every time Mr Neil attempted to remind him what the actual question had been. “Can I? Can I please finish? Please? Andrew? Can I finish?”

Again, and again, and again. Can I finish? Can I? Can I finish? He genuinely seemed to have no idea how it made him sound: pitiful, and self-pitying. And the longer the interview went on, the sulkier he grew. He was behaving like the world’s oldest teenager: the smouldering victimhood, the muttering martyrdom. At any moment, I half-expected him to flounce out of his chair, stalk out of the studio, and stomp upstairs to his bedroom.

It really was awful. Arguably the great triumph of Labour’s 2017 campaign was that Mr Corbyn managed to reign in his temper, and present himself to the public as calm, thoughtful, kindly, gentle. Sadly for Labour, it seems that Mr Zen is no longer at home.

This morning, when the airwaves were dominated by that extraordinary intervention by the Chief Rabbi, I thought Mr Corbyn’s day couldn’t get any worse. Somehow, though, he proved me wrong.

:shrug:

This is a man who has spent 40 years in the company of virulent anti-Semites, many of whom he has actively defended and endorsed, and yet Neil did not deem this worthy of discussion. The reason? Because Neil knew the best way to make the interview front page news would be to press Corbyn on whether he'd apologise. In other words he favoured soundbite over substance.

That is a total abdication and proves that Andrew Neill is merely the best of a pitiful bunch.

[Burney]

"in the Telegraph"... was always going to be a well balanced feature then

These days, The Telegraph is little better than The Guardian. Full of lefty claptrap.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Good Lord Ganps. This is exactly, slightly different wording, the way my wife feels about the whole shebang.

Estate agents really are the slimiest of the creatures. Affordable or social housing is the last thing they want to see. I rather enjoy looking in estate agent's windows and observing the miserable wretches inside who haven't had a whiff of a bonus for two years and continue to assure everyone that "prippertay" prices will be accelerating onwards and upwards again any day now.

Should have known your glw would be educated, informed and insightful, H.

Hadn't realised estate agents hadn't been getting bonuses recently. My heart bleeds. Do they still have those minis spray painted in the office colours?

Since I moved to the estuary slums, I haven't seen anything like that. But do they still have them in civilisation?

[Monty92]

These days, The Telegraph is little better than The Guardian. Full of lefty claptrap.

Michael Deacon is an arch remainer as well as being deeply unfunny.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

"Any such incidents have usually been the work of the far right"

And that speaks to my original point which is that the threat to Jews is, uniquely, three pronged.

I don't personally feel threatened because of my Jewish-ness, but I'm not necessarily easily identifiable as a Jew (shut it!). I don't conspicuously walk to synagogue on Saturday mornings and I don't hang around outside Carmellis in Golders Green with my Jew mates as cars full of immigrants drive past shouting abuse (as happens on a regular basis).

We know that by far and away the biggest victims of "hate crimes" (as much as I dislike the phrase) across Europe are Jews.

So no, I don't personally feel threatened, but many do. And it would seem rational if the prospect of an institutionally anti-Semitic party being in power would add to their sense of unease.

Oh, the irony of you creating a victimhood hierarchy of race hate.

What was it the Stalinist said about Yids and irony? Maybe Jez is actually right about you lot and irony. Or maybe it's just you being a particularly thick dog whistle racist Tory and has nothing to do with your ethno-faith. I wonder which :that silly emoji he uses all the time:

[Burney]

:shrug:

This is a man who has spent 40 years in the company of virulent anti-Semites, many of whom he has actively defended and endorsed, and yet Neil did not deem this worthy of discussion. The reason? Because Neil knew the best way to make the interview front page news would be to press Corbyn on whether he'd apologise. In other words he favoured soundbite over substance.

That is a total abdication and proves that Andrew Neill is merely the best of a pitiful bunch.

He had half an hour to land a few telling blows. Corbyn's history doesn't land with the public at large as people see it as old news and - in the case of younger voters - irrelevant ancient history. In that context, the 'gotcha' of having him refuse four times to apologise is much more effective.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

These days, The Telegraph is little better than The Guardian. Full of lefty claptrap.

Deacon's ace. Only thing I read.

I particularly love all the comments below screaming at him for mocking all equally as opposed to spouting BJ Brexit propaganda.

Cheers me up temporarily having had the sainted Patrick Kidd in the Times replaced by the odious Letts.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

These days, The Telegraph is little better than The Guardian. Full of lefty claptrap.

section I magine that at least half of the fulminating swivel eyed loonies contributing are you and Sir C

[Sir C]

Oh, the irony of you creating a victimhood hierarchy of race hate.

What was it the Stalinist said about Yids and irony? Maybe Jez is actually right about you lot and irony. Or maybe it's just you being a particularly thick dog whistle racist Tory and has nothing to do with your ethno-faith. I wonder which :that silly emoji he uses all the time:

I appreciate that this isn't my argument, but I do feel inclined to suggest that abusing him with racist language in order to condemn him as, erm, racist is either an extreme attempt at self-deprecating irony or a rather badly judged use of language. And if it is extremely stretched irony, it's ironic that you racially insult him by suggesting 'his lot' don't understand irony, whilst singularly failing to understand irony.

Maybe I've got the whole thing árse about face, I don't know. But please don't call him a Yid. It's pretty offensive.

[Monty92]

Oh, the irony of you creating a victimhood hierarchy of race hate.

What was it the Stalinist said about Yids and irony? Maybe Jez is actually right about you lot and irony. Or maybe it's just you being a particularly thick dog whistle racist Tory and has nothing to do with your ethno-faith. I wonder which :that silly emoji he uses all the time:

:shrug: I also fully understand Muslims who feel threatened in the UK and Europe right now. And if there was an extremist far right party on the fringes of power I would support them in doing all they can to stop that party. But in the UK at least, there isn't.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

Deacon's ace. Only thing I read.

I particularly love all the comments below screaming at him for mocking all equally as opposed to spouting BJ Brexit propaganda.

Cheers me up temporarily having had the sainted Patrick Kidd in the Times replaced by the odious Letts.

I was really pissed off that after shrieking Sherelle Jacob's disastrous QT debut they turned comments off for her next piece.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Joking aside, it has been the most repulsive and depressing aspect of the last three years seeing the visceral, hate-filled snobbery of the Remain-voting middle classes come out into the open. Seeing people who'd vote Labour, talk about 'our NHS' and bleat about 'social justice' in the same breath being happy to characterise anyone below them on the social scale as basically sub-human scum who ought to disenfranchised altogether started off being funny, but now just sickens me.

It's bigotry, plain and simple. In fact, I've seen it in my own family and haven't spoken to my sister for over a year because of it. So yes, I do mean it and no, my mind isn't getting changed on the matter.

But it's not about social class.

By most people's definitions, you are bourgeois, while I am underclass.

Yet it is you who are sub-human scum. Simply because I think right and you think wrong.

Ask any right-thinking person and they'll be sure to agree with me.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

Should have known your glw would be educated, informed and insightful, H.

Hadn't realised estate agents hadn't been getting bonuses recently. My heart bleeds. Do they still have those minis spray painted in the office colours?

Since I moved to the estuary slums, I haven't seen anything like that. But do they still have them in civilisation?

I think they're all riding pushbikes now g

[Burney]

section I magine that at least half of the fulminating swivel eyed loonies contributing are you and Sir C

Nope. It's full of climate change bóllocks, wimmin's stuff, remainers and Labour right-wingers. It's shíte.

Not like the great days under Conrad Black. You had proper right-wingers writing for it back then. They're all pinkos these days.

[Sir C]

section I magine that at least half of the fulminating swivel eyed loonies contributing are you and Sir C

The next time you describe me as 'swivel eyed' I'm going to find you and knock your **** in.

[Burney]

But it's not about social class.

By most people's definitions, you are bourgeois, while I am underclass.

Yet it is you who are sub-human scum. Simply because I think right and you think wrong.

Ask any right-thinking person and they'll be sure to agree with me.

You're not underclass. From what you've told us of your schooling, you're a posh boy who chose to do the late 20th century equivalent of running away to join the circus.

[redgunamo]

Thinking doesn't actually get you anywhere though, does it. It's all about your principles and actually doing something in accordance with them.



But it's not about social class.

By most people's definitions, you are bourgeois, while I am underclass.

Yet it is you who are sub-human scum. Simply because I think right and you think wrong.

Ask any right-thinking person and they'll be sure to agree with me.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

I appreciate that this isn't my argument, but I do feel inclined to suggest that abusing him with racist language in order to condemn him as, erm, racist is either an extreme attempt at self-deprecating irony or a rather badly judged use of language. And if it is extremely stretched irony, it's ironic that you racially insult him by suggesting 'his lot' don't understand irony, whilst singularly failing to understand irony.

Maybe I've got the whole thing árse about face, I don't know. But please don't call him a Yid. It's pretty offensive.

To be perfectly honest, I'd have thought the irony was obvious.

My point was that about the only thing I ever agree with M about is this vile victimhood hierarchy. (Probably because I spend far too long with borgeois lefties who think they're the world's most oppressed while I've watched 6 of my Delhi street kids mate die alone in that time.)

So when the hypocritical fückwit tries to then play the very card he's been using as a stick with which to beat the left for several years, then sorry, I'll call him out.

The fact that I can do so by using one of the most egregious examples of Corbyn's anti-Semitism - Jews not getting English irony, even those "born here" - was, I thought a perfect way of both pointing out M's hypocrisy while also expounding my usual political view of, basically, a plague on both your houses, especially in the Jez vs Brexit choice.

{I accept the above para could just be me laughing at my own joke then looking shocked that no-one else is sniggering. But I'm distressed you couldn't see, C, that I was simply doing this for humour, even if you don't find it funny.}

The use of "his lot" was clearly, I would have hoped, deliberate irony.

Corbyn's comment about Jews not being fully English, M building a racial hierarchy that just like all lefty id-politics, and indeed, all historic racism, divides the world into "us" and "them." His lot is simply in this vein.

HE is the one that described "his lot" of being triple oppressed and thus puts "his lot" at the top of the victimhood hierarchy.

You cannot have a victimhood hierarchy, if you don't divide each group into it's own lot.

Oh, and lastly, don't call him a Yid.

So sorry. How racist of me. I'm on awimb so I should use the PC terms of "big nosed cünt", "coin-lender", "something about foreskins" etc etc.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

The next time you describe me as 'swivel eyed' I'm going to find you and knock your **** in.

Don't be ridiculous c. Your a posh tosser and I'm a working class son of toil. I could probably knock you out with an open handed slap, such are the hard leathery callouses on my tradesman's hands. I expect you get blisters from handling cooking utensils.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

:shrug: I also fully understand Muslims who feel threatened in the UK and Europe right now. And if there was an extremist far right party on the fringes of power I would support them in doing all they can to stop that party. But in the UK at least, there isn't.

Your version of a lefty saying "While gay men are still oppressed, and must be helped, us disabled, lesbian, trans Palestinians are the most oppressed, so we come top."

M, you created a victimhood hierarchy, the very thing you have slagged off daily for years.

There are two possibilities for this.

1. That in some circs, when a minority feels threatened, it's natural in this day and age to create a hierarchy of victimhood to reach out for support. {Thus meaning people who slag of the victimhood snowflakes, including you and I, are both a bit wrong and should consider their views a bit more evenly.}

2. You really are just a hypocritical, dog-whistle racist.

I wonder which. {And this time, I genuinely don't know. The completely natural way you came out with it, with no abuse of anyone else, is making me learn towards 1. Though I obviously wish it was 2.}

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

I think they're all riding pushbikes now g

Wicked, H.

Are they all spray painted up in the office colours? Or do they have to buy their own Grifters and Choppers or what ever the modern chap rides nowadays?

[Sir C]

Nicely put, g.

I think you can have a victimhood hierarchy, though. I mean I'm an oppresseed minority. The child of immigrants, didn't have much education, regularly mocked and treated as an outsider... but I'm not as oppressed as, say, an Israeli trying to get to work while Hamas chuck rockets at his head. One needs to maintain a sense of perspective.

[Burney]

To be perfectly honest, I'd have thought the irony was obvious.

My point was that about the only thing I ever agree with M about is this vile victimhood hierarchy. (Probably because I spend far too long with borgeois lefties who think they're the world's most oppressed while I've watched 6 of my Delhi street kids mate die alone in that time.)

So when the hypocritical fückwit tries to then play the very card he's been using as a stick with which to beat the left for several years, then sorry, I'll call him out.

The fact that I can do so by using one of the most egregious examples of Corbyn's anti-Semitism - Jews not getting English irony, even those "born here" - was, I thought a perfect way of both pointing out M's hypocrisy while also expounding my usual political view of, basically, a plague on both your houses, especially in the Jez vs Brexit choice.

{I accept the above para could just be me laughing at my own joke then looking shocked that no-one else is sniggering. But I'm distressed you couldn't see, C, that I was simply doing this for humour, even if you don't find it funny.}

The use of "his lot" was clearly, I would have hoped, deliberate irony.

Corbyn's comment about Jews not being fully English, M building a racial hierarchy that just like all lefty id-politics, and indeed, all historic racism, divides the world into "us" and "them." His lot is simply in this vein.

HE is the one that described "his lot" of being triple oppressed and thus puts "his lot" at the top of the victimhood hierarchy.

You cannot have a victimhood hierarchy, if you don't divide each group into it's own lot.

Oh, and lastly, don't call him a Yid.

So sorry. How racist of me. I'm on awimb so I should use the PC terms of "big nosed cünt", "coin-lender", "something about foreskins" etc etc.

So because Delhi street kids die, a western Jew isn't entitled to express alarm at a rise in anti-semitic sentiment and anti-semitic attacks and the fact that the political opposition is riddled with anti-semites? This on a continent in which 6 million Jews were murdered within living memory? And if he dares to express alarm, he's playing the identity politics game and creating a 'hierarchy of victimhood'?

Do fúck off.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

You're not underclass. From what you've told us of your schooling, you're a posh boy who chose to do the late 20th century equivalent of running away to join the circus.

The interesting point in your reply is that you don't deny being sub-human scum. Nor that I am right thinking. Nor my genius logical proof - namely people I consider right-thinking would agree with me that you're wrong thinking.

[Monty92]

Your version of a lefty saying "While gay men are still oppressed, and must be helped, us disabled, lesbian, trans Palestinians are the most oppressed, so we come top."

M, you created a victimhood hierarchy, the very thing you have slagged off daily for years.

There are two possibilities for this.

1. That in some circs, when a minority feels threatened, it's natural in this day and age to create a hierarchy of victimhood to reach out for support. {Thus meaning people who slag of the victimhood snowflakes, including you and I, are both a bit wrong and should consider their views a bit more evenly.}

2. You really are just a hypocritical, dog-whistle racist.

I wonder which. {And this time, I genuinely don't know. The completely natural way you came out with it, with no abuse of anyone else, is making me learn towards 1. Though I obviously wish it was 2.}

I understand why it was irresistible for you to go with this line of attack, but it just doesn't work.

If at any point I'd said anything along the lines of "It can never be the case that a minority group are justified in feeling disproportionately threatened by the political or social climate" then you may have a point. But I never have, because that would be an absurd thing to say.

Also, unless I'm mistaken, you seem to actually agree with me that Jews have a right to feel uniquely threatened right now.

[Sir C]

Don't be ridiculous c. Your a posh tosser and I'm a working class son of toil. I could probably knock you out with an open handed slap, such are the hard leathery callouses on my tradesman's hands. I expect you get blisters from handling cooking utensils.

:hehe: I used a shovel for about 20 minutes one day last summer and couldn't use my hands fro three days.

[Burney]

The interesting point in your reply is that you don't deny being sub-human scum. Nor that I am right thinking. Nor my genius logical proof - namely people I consider right-thinking would agree with me that you're wrong thinking.

No, I just dismantled your false 'underclass' premise instead. :shrug:

And I seriously doubt anyone could read your unique blend of rambling prolixity, hideously conjoined metaphors and acid casualty Indian mysticism and describe your thinking as 'right'. Your mechanism clearly went some while back.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

Nicely put, g.

I think you can have a victimhood hierarchy, though. I mean I'm an oppresseed minority. The child of immigrants, didn't have much education, regularly mocked and treated as an outsider... but I'm not as oppressed as, say, an Israeli trying to get to work while Hamas chuck rockets at his head. One needs to maintain a sense of perspective.

Thanks, C.

But I don't think you can ever that that full top trump hierarchy that they aspire to. You know, my genocide has a 1999cc engine while yours has a 1997cc so I take your top trump.

Is an Israeli who gets attacked but never injured really more marginalised that my street kids mates who are persecuted for years then die alone and unloved on the streets?

Or, and this gets me into fights with Corbynistas - are the Palestinians more oppressed by Imperialists than the noble, holy, loving Tibetans?

Of course we can talk about oppression. You, I and everyone on awimb is better off than the girls who get the virginity auctioned before fücking truckers for the next 20 years at £3.30 a trick (that the glw has been documenting for the last 5 years.)

Of course I'd rather be born the average Scandi than the average Haitian.

But a proper, top trumps hierarchy of the Momentum sort M was imitating? No.

I find it counter-productive. It divides people who should be working together, and as you know, C, that sort of division is pretty much the opposite of what I want to see happen.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

So because Delhi street kids die, a western Jew isn't entitled to express alarm at a rise in anti-semitic sentiment and anti-semitic attacks and the fact that the political opposition is riddled with anti-semites? This on a continent in which 6 million Jews were murdered within living memory? And if he dares to express alarm, he's playing the identity politics game and creating a 'hierarchy of victimhood'?

Do fúck off.

Your logic really fails you at times. And you know it, the Do Fück Off at the end is a give away.

Did the Delhi street kids refer to Western Jews and anti-Sem. No it didn't.

Let me quote you the sentence:

Probably because I spend far too long with borgeois lefties who think they're the world's most oppressed while I've watched 6 of my Delhi street kids mate die alone in that time.

See? It specifically referred to Momentum types (M isn't a lefty, is he?) - the very ones who built this evil victimhood hierarchy - and the fact that I can't stand them telling me that they're the world's most oppressed because, despite daddy's earning being in or near the top 1% globally, they're gay or identifying as female at that point in time.

Thus, the street kids comment, in the only sentence in which it was used referred explicitly to those leftwing snowflake students who created the very hierarchy that M and I have both slagged off for years.

So you pulled your usual trick. And it rather upsets me that you still try it even though I see through it every time.

Being unable to counter my arguments either as a whole or point by point, you took one statement, tried to twist it to refer to something completely different, and then shouted Do Fück Off in the vain hope that your fellow Tories will go "Oooh, B's reallt angry with him. No point in me checking, of course B will be in the right and the crusty drop-out the wrong.

C, after having criticised me and effectively accused me of racism, had the decency to reply that he now fully understood what I was saying.

Why do you find it so hard? I mean, it's not that often that I'm vindicated, is it?

[Sir C]

Point of order, I didn't (or didn't mean to) accuse you of racism, merely of using a racist term, which isn't the same thing at all.

I don't chuck accusations of racism around willy, or even nilly.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

I understand why it was irresistible for you to go with this line of attack, but it just doesn't work.

If at any point I'd said anything along the lines of "It can never be the case that a minority group are justified in feeling disproportionately threatened by the political or social climate" then you may have a point. But I never have, because that would be an absurd thing to say.

Also, unless I'm mistaken, you seem to actually agree with me that Jews have a right to feel uniquely threatened right now.

Dear God. Let's go paragraph by paragraph.

1. It's not a line of attack. I'm simply discussing the point. The difference is that I am interested in objective truth (this is why I fall out with my fellow lefties all the time and hate the id-pol victimhood brigade as much as you do) while you are simply trying to point score in a pathetic internet culture war that is part of the ruination of western society.

You say it just doesn't work. But then don't do through it point by point explaining how and why my analysis fails. Strange that.

Almost like it's so much easier just to say Wrong than to actually bother proving your assertion.

2. This is sick. You put in quotes the following and then deny ever having said or implied it.

"It can never be the case that a minority group are justified in feeling disproportionately threatened by the political or social climate"

Yet what did I actually say:

"when a minority feels threatened, it's natural in this day and age to create a hierarchy of victimhood to reach out for support."

And yes, you have "at any point I'd said anything along the lines" of criticism of those who create victimhood hierarchies.

You really think I'd fall for you leaving out the most relevant section of the quotes? Idiot.

3. "Also, unless I'm mistaken, you seem to actually agree with me that Jews have a right to feel uniquely threatened right now. "

Sort of. You haven't fully understood the nuance.

I'm not saying they have any more (or less) right to feel threatened than a Muslamic, or as oppressed as a Tibetan.

What I am saying, as someone who's never experienced racism in his life, is that given the way you, after slagging off victimhood hierarchies for years, suddenly created a victimhood hierarchy with you at the top in an attempt to justify your feelings of threat, then perhaps this also explains why disabled, lesbian Muslamics et al do it.

Perhaps I don't know what it's like. And that given the rise of id-pol this decade, perhaps it is normal for minorities to feel forced to justify their weakness or exclusion through the creation of victimhood hierarchies.

{Oh, and as I side issue, I don't want a reply to cos I simply want to discuss the victimhood hierarchies, of course I understand why Jews have every right to be afeared. I joined Lab in 2015 to try to get rid of Corbyn. I spent the next 3+ years arguing with morons, disproving their ahistorical conspiracies and calling the racist scum out, before suspending my membership the day Luciana Berger quit and gave that speech.

Do I think that in European terms (largely for historical reasons like the Reformation and the Jews not being allowed back till the 1650s) we were relatively untouched by anti-Sem historically. Yet in 4 years of Corbyn we're pretty much at Dreyfuss and pogrom level? Yes.

Do I think that being a middle class, straight, male Jew makes you top of the victimhood hierarchy? No because I don't agree with victimhood top trumps.}

[Sir C]

You have assumed his sexuality and his gender. :-(

This is a fúcking hate crime mate.

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

No, I just dismantled your false 'underclass' premise instead. :shrug:

And I seriously doubt anyone could read your unique blend of rambling prolixity, hideously conjoined metaphors and acid casualty Indian mysticism and describe your thinking as 'right'. Your mechanism clearly went some while back.

Oh, is that your fall back position to try and take everyone's mind off the orginal point? Fair play.

1. Where shall we start? Ok. How could I really claim to be underclass considering how I always go on about those really suffering in the 3rd world? I have a passport whose welfare state makes me global gentry.

2. However, if we look how much you've paid into the exchequer in the last 25 years and how much I've taken out as giros and housing benefit, and showed those stats to an academic, they would actually define us as such. I'd be E for most of the time, you'd be AB. (Though it would have changed when I was studying again.)

3. But what was it you said earlier about exaggeration for comic effect?

The whole point, {which was in part based on the premise that we went to similar schools and probably unis*} was the set up for what I hoped would be a joke about you being sub-human scum on the basis of me using Jorge logic - namely I must be right-thinking because all right-thinking people say I am.

See? It was all, 'ow you zay, a joke. Primary based around the anti-lefty "right-thinking people" punchline.

You seem to have a sense of humour failure when the joke (one that you'd otherwise agree with) is being made by someone nominally from the other side. Which is sad, as you're actually one of the funniest people on here.

Yet if one of your Tory mates slags of Jorgism or victimhood, you laugh.

But when I - a not really, but soi disant lefty - do it, you get all touchy and try to find something to disagree with.

Strange attitude. Why, B, why? Are you really worried that if you ever laugh at even one of my anti-lefty jokes, your entire edifice will crumble, and you'll run off to India with dreadlocks and a dog on a bit of string?



*Were you Oxbridge or Russel Group?