Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[Brighton Jambo]

43 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

Feck off.  

 

From day one Corbyn was attacked and smeared.

 

A tory even claimed that it was the Tories who created the NHS, fecking full of no shame and utter delusion. Bit like their draconian policies over the last ten years. The party for all in it together eh....

 

 

 

Corbyn is a racist and an anti Semite as stated over and over by members of his own party.

 

And you talk crap about policies;

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/education-49857748

 

[ri Alban]

9 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

Who said heroes?!  Deny it all you want but every poll going shows labour sleep walking into an election distaster because Boris has used Brexit to position himself as the champion of what people want against the remainer establishment.    Google it, every single poll.

 

and all the laughing emojis in the world won’t change the fact labour are about to be thumped in a general election by the most toxic Tory party in 20 years backed by a historically high level of working class voters.  

 

 

I didn't mention you.

[N Lincs Jambo]

3 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I have already read the Byline  Times article in both its original and updated versions. The FT article is the one I am on about and am puzzled that you claim not have been able to read it - it is in the Fancy a Brew's post you quoted!

 

We have been living in a parallel universe FA and I take my full share of the blame for that.

 

For me, and I'll make no bones about it, I voted remain and would (reluctantly) do so again. Naturally therefore, for me, the Byline Times article which I shared with you is a far more detailed and precise description of what is taking place than the rather theoretical article in FAB's post which I quoted. I do now accept, however, having studied the URL, that this is indeed the FT article you described so my apologies for getting that one wrong. And, as he said, when you click on it it does take you to a paywall.

 

It does explain though as you mentioned in an earlier reply to me, that if you are inclined towards Remain, you will find more credibility in the Byline Times article, whereas you will find more credibility in the FT article if you are inclined towards Leave.

 

Nonetheless having traded derivatives myself before (on a very small basis using my own funds) I am aware that success when taking a position depends on what actually happens in the marketplace. My own most profitable trade came when I shorted the FTSE on Dec 30th 1999 (value of my position about £1.5K, ie not going to do anything to influence the market itself). My reason for this was that the FTSE had just hit an all-time high of 6950 but based on very low volumes of shares traded showing little market sentiment for the high value. That, plus all the fear over the supposed Y2K Millenium bug, convinced me it was time to go short. When the markets reopened on Jan 4th, the FTSE had dropped over 270 points in the first two hours of trading and my position had more than doubled in value. The point remains though that I profited, albeit in a very small way, from billions being wiped off the notional value of British companies when the markets reopened on Jan 4th 2000. 

 

What the FT article doesn't make clear is that short positions are quite literally bets on something going down in value. It could be the pound, it could be the FTSE itself, it could be companies within the FTSE that are shorted.

 

It was widely rumoured in 2001 that Osama Bin Laden, who was a billionaire, had shorted airline stocks around the world through intermediaries shortly before the 9/11 attacks. I have no idea if these rumours were true however it was widely reported after 9/11 that short positions re airlines had been significantly greater in number and value than had been the norm. What we do know is that in the aftermath of 9/11, airline stocks plunged in value and anyone holding a short position immediately prior to 9/11 would have made a significant amount of money so the rumours, whilst unsubstantiated, made perfect sense.

 

The Byline Times article demonstrates that the number of short positions taken out by UK hedge funds has risen from around 10 per week when BJ announced he would stand for PM to around 100 per week now. From January all the way through to May the maximum per week was around 10. Why the increase in these short positions since BJ announced he would be running for PM? It would seem to be more than a coincidence.

 

My opinion is that there is enough sentiment within these funds and markets to believe that A) BJ will deliver a No-Deal Brexit, B), he will deliver it on Oct 31st, and C) The value of the pound and UK stocks and shares will drop significantly if this happens. The hedge funds and high worth individuals who understand derivatives trading, quite clearly see an opportunity to make a profit here and are taking full advantage.

 

Whilst this is speculation (ie that a No-Deal Brexit will result in a drop in the value of the Pound etc) it is worth noting that it would be history repeating itself as the same thing happened at the time of the referendum in 2016.

 

This has influenced people as close to him as his own sister, and also the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer, Philip Hammond, to give the opinion that BJ may well be influenced by these factors to deliver a No-deal Brexit on 31st October and that that, for a Prime Minister, would be a conflict of interest.

 

And this takes us back to where our original discussion started, ie, I don't believe that your average Leave voter voted Leave in the hope and expectation of hedge funds making billions through betting against the UK, ie by shorting the Pound and major UK companies and the FTSE itself and depending on Brexit bringing a calamitous result for the value of the Pound and British businesses. Likewise I don't believe that your average Remain voter voted Remain because they want to see the waste and corruption, which I believe is endemic in the organisations which make up the EU, continue.

[ri Alban]

18 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

Corbyn is a racist and an anti Semite as stated over and over by members of his own party.

 

And you talk crap about policies;

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/education-49857748

 

Is he?

He might be shite, but prove he's racist. The Saudi Arabian rulers, are what you have described, yet the Tory Government sell them arms, so they can slaughter innocent Yemeni people. They Armed Sadam, Gadaffi, IS etc... etc...etc... etc...

Yet you will vote Tory, you know, 'The Workers Party'.

Brexiters voted to keep out foreigners. Especially refugees from non white countries. I know that, you know that. We all know what they voted for.

Proof!? see "Hearsay from bitter ex leavers"

 

Edited October 1, 2019 by ri Alban

[Brighton Jambo]

2 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Is he?

He might be shite, but prove he's racist. The Saudi Arabian rulers, are what you have described, yet the Tory Government sell them arms, so they can slaughter innocent Yemini people. They Armed Sadam, Gadaffi, IS etc... etc...etc... etc...

Yet you will vote Tory, you know, 'The Workers Party'.

Brexiters voted to keep out foreigners. Especially refugees from non white countries. I know that, you know that. We all know what they voted for.

 

There are undoubtedly racist undertones behind brexit it’s shameful, I voted remain and completely disagree with all that.

 

there are undoubtedly racists in the Tory party and they are disgusting.

 

i cannot know for certain, but if Margaret Hodge a highly respected labour MP is willing to say to JC’s face that he is a racist and anti Semite, which she did, that’s good enough for me.

 

also John Mann MP resigned expressly accusing JC of fostering anti semitism 

 

3 labour piers resigned the whip accusing JC of anti semitism

 

Gloria del Piero resigned from the shadow front bench citing lack of tolerance. 

 

I could go on and on.  JC is a racist and an anti Semite, it’s no media conspiracy it’s true.  People who deny that are skirting dangerously close to tacitly supporting those beliefs.  

 

 

[Brighton Jambo]

13 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Is he?

He might be shite, but prove he's racist. The Saudi Arabian rulers, are what you have described, yet the Tory Government sell them arms, so they can slaughter innocent Yemini people. They Armed Sadam, Gadaffi, IS etc... etc...etc... etc...

Yet you will vote Tory, you know, 'The Workers Party'.

Brexiters voted to keep out foreigners. Especially refugees from non white countries. I know that, you know that. We all know what they voted for.

 

The Labour Party have been and always will be the workers party.  You know fine well I’m not suggesting the Conservatives are.

 

Yet come the next general election huge swathes of those voters will vote conservative probably for the first and last time and they will win the election as a result.  All because of labours ineptitude over brexit. 

[ri Alban]

11 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

There are undoubtedly racist undertones behind brexit it’s shameful, I voted remain and completely disagree with all that.

 

there are undoubtedly racists in the Tory party and they are disgusting.

 

i cannot know for certain, but if Margaret Hodge a highly respected labour MP is willing to say to JC’s face that he is a racist and anti Semite, which she did, that’s good enough for me.

 

also John Mann MP resigned expressly accusing JC of fostering anti semitism 

 

3 labour piers resigned the whip accusing JC of anti semitism

 

Gloria del Piero resigned from the shadow front bench citing lack of tolerance. 

 

I could go on and on.  JC is a racist and an anti Semite, it’s no media conspiracy it’s true.  People who deny that are skirting dangerously close to tacitly supporting those beliefs.  

 

 

What about Boris? He's actually on record for racism. A proven liar too. So why do people believe him on anything, whether it's Brexit, affairs or touching up reporters? Yet! See above.

 

For the Record JC(He's hopeless) has to go, because his shadow government are a sinister mob.

Edited October 1, 2019 by ri Alban

[Brighton Jambo]

3 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

What about Boris? He's actually on record for racism. A proven liar too. So why do people believe him on anything, whether it's Brexit, affairs or touching up reporters? Yet! See above.

 

For the Record JC(He's hopeless) has to go, because his shadow government are a sinister mob.

Boris is 100% a racist and not fit for public office. 

 

Edit: and a liar and can’t be trusted on brexit yet the masses are lapping it all up and it will only end in disaster.  

Edited October 1, 2019 by Brighton Jambo

[Mikey1874]

3 hours ago, Brighton Jambo said:

I haven’t seen, anywhere, anyone championing Swinson to lead it.  The names I have seen are Yvette Cooper, Dominic Grieve, Margaret Beckett or Ken Clarke.

 

all of them are viable.  And don’t just blame Swinson for this.  Yes she has said she wouldn’t back corbyn but so have the ‘Change’ group MP’s and so have the Tory Mp’s who have been kicked out. 

 

Its simple if JC insists on leading a unity government it won’t happen.  I believe they have even let him select who should.  This is his chance to put country before personal ambition - will he? 

 

Swinson is vetoing it. Or so she says.

 

She probably would rather have No Deal than a Labour Government. Modern Lib Dems.

[AlimOzturk]

Ken  Clarke wouldnt be a bad choice in the current circumstances

[Brighton Jambo]

7 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Swinson is vetoing it. Or so she says.

 

She probably would rather have No Deal than a Labour Government. Modern Lib Dems.

But so are all the other groups I mentioned and without all of them it doesn’t work in terms of numbers.

 

even if she supported corbyn the others wouldn’t.  Not sure I understand this vendetta against Jo Swinson. 

[Mikey1874]

10 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

But so are all the other groups I mentioned and without all of them it doesn’t work in terms of numbers.

 

even if she supported corbyn the others wouldn’t.  Not sure I understand this vendetta against Jo Swinson. 

 

No vendetta. 

 

You make a fair point that it's not just Swinson who doesn't  want Corbyn. 

 

But politically I support a Government that will take radical action to tackle under investment and disadvantage. Ironically that could be a majority Boris Johnson Government. But we'll see. 

 

Swinson was part of the austerity loving Government that pushed people towards voting Leave as a protest. You have I think said about the effects (you might say the financial crisis rather than austerity) locally so you know how bad it has been. Ironic that the Revoke Party allowed Brexit to happen. 

Edited October 1, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Francis Albert]

2 hours ago, N Lincs Jambo said:

 

We have been living in a parallel universe FA and I take my full share of the blame for that.

 

For me, and I'll make no bones about it, I voted remain and would (reluctantly) do so again. Naturally therefore, for me, the Byline Times article which I shared with you is a far more detailed and precise description of what is taking place than the rather theoretical article in FAB's post which I quoted. I do now accept, however, having studied the URL, that this is indeed the FT article you described so my apologies for getting that one wrong. And, as he said, when you click on it it does take you to a paywall.

 

It does explain though as you mentioned in an earlier reply to me, that if you are inclined towards Remain, you will find more credibility in the Byline Times article, whereas you will find more credibility in the FT article if you are inclined towards Leave.

 

Nonetheless having traded derivatives myself before (on a very small basis using my own funds) I am aware that success when taking a position depends on what actually happens in the marketplace. My own most profitable trade came when I shorted the FTSE on Dec 30th 1999 (value of my position about £1.5K, ie not going to do anything to influence the market itself). My reason for this was that the FTSE had just hit an all-time high of 6950 but based on very low volumes of shares traded showing little market sentiment for the high value. That, plus all the fear over the supposed Y2K Millenium bug, convinced me it was time to go short. When the markets reopened on Jan 4th, the FTSE had dropped over 270 points in the first two hours of trading and my position had more than doubled in value. The point remains though that I profited, albeit in a very small way, from billions being wiped off the notional value of British companies when the markets reopened on Jan 4th 2000. 

 

What the FT article doesn't make clear is that short positions are quite literally bets on something going down in value. It could be the pound, it could be the FTSE itself, it could be companies within the FTSE that are shorted.

 

It was widely rumoured in 2001 that Osama Bin Laden, who was a billionaire, had shorted airline stocks around the world through intermediaries shortly before the 9/11 attacks. I have no idea if these rumours were true however it was widely reported after 9/11 that short positions re airlines had been significantly greater in number and value than had been the norm. What we do know is that in the aftermath of 9/11, airline stocks plunged in value and anyone holding a short position immediately prior to 9/11 would have made a significant amount of money so the rumours, whilst unsubstantiated, made perfect sense.

 

The Byline Times article demonstrates that the number of short positions taken out by UK hedge funds has risen from around 10 per week when BJ announced he would stand for PM to around 100 per week now. From January all the way through to May the maximum per week was around 10. Why the increase in these short positions since BJ announced he would be running for PM? It would seem to be more than a coincidence.

 

My opinion is that there is enough sentiment within these funds and markets to believe that A) BJ will deliver a No-Deal Brexit, B), he will deliver it on Oct 31st, and C) The value of the pound and UK stocks and shares will drop significantly if this happens. The hedge funds and high worth individuals who understand derivatives trading, quite clearly see an opportunity to make a profit here and are taking full advantage.

 

Whilst this is speculation (ie that a No-Deal Brexit will result in a drop in the value of the Pound etc) it is worth noting that it would be history repeating itself as the same thing happened at the time of the referendum in 2016.

 

This has influenced people as close to him as his own sister, and also the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer, Philip Hammond, to give the opinion that BJ may well be influenced by these factors to deliver a No-deal Brexit on 31st October and that that, for a Prime Minister, would be a conflict of interest.

 

And this takes us back to where our original discussion started, ie, I don't believe that your average Leave voter voted Leave in the hope and expectation of hedge funds making billions through betting against the UK, ie by shorting the Pound and major UK companies and the FTSE itself and depending on Brexit bringing a calamitous result for the value of the Pound and British businesses. Likewise I don't believe that your average Remain voter voted Remain because they want to see the waste and corruption, which I believe is endemic in the organisations which make up the EU, continue.

OK we disagree but at least we are back in the same dimension. And I suppose speculation about speculation is not unreasonable.

[Mikey1874]

You know, maybe Boris WILL get a  Deal

 

Or not

 

And a link

 

 

Edited October 1, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Victorian]

The Irish government has totally pied the rumoured UK proposals.     Not acting in good faith says Varadkar.

 

Tory MP 'sent home' from conference after police were called over an argument about the wrong ID to enter a coffee room.     

 

Johnson doing some bizarre rambling.

 

Scum being scum.

Edited October 1, 2019 by Victorian

[Brighton Jambo]

56 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

You know, maybe Boris WILL get a  Deal

 

Or not

 

And a link

 

 

Oh please your majesty, do it!! In all seriousness it might be needed to set a precedent that if a PM knowingly and willingly breaks the law he will be removed.  

 

I am raging though that the Queen has been dragged into this.  She should never be

[kila]

48 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

Oh please your majesty, do it!! In all seriousness it might be needed to set a precedent that if a PM knowingly and willingly breaks the law he will be removed.  

 

I am raging though that the Queen has been dragged into this.  She should never be

 

Gives her something to do at least until she gets wheeled out at xmas

[Francis Albert]

Wonder if Phlip's Diana hit squad is still available?

[shaun.lawson]

13 hours ago, Brighton Jambo said:

i challenge you to defend Margaret Hodge facing deselection.   

 

Well done on completely proving my point. Margaret Hodge:

 

1. Covered up a child abuse scandal

 

2. Her family's company paid 0.01% tax

 

3. Beat the BNP in Barking by, er, copying all their policies

 

4. Secretly taped a conversation with her own leader

 

5. Has manipulated, exaggerated and flat out bullshitted about Labour's 'antisemitism crisis' for political gain. 

 

In my life observing British politics, I've never seen anything that gets anywhere close to the absolute nonsense surrounding Labour's 'antisemitism': despite all data showing it to be much lower on the left than on the right; despite it having fallen in Labour since Corbyn became leader; despite the far right rising and no-one doing a damn thing about it. And I say that as the grandson of a Holocaust survivor who lost most of her extended family in the camps. 

 

This is what Hodge said about Corbyn in 2016:

 

 

What changed after that? Labour did much, much better than anyone expected at the general election - so the self-serving Labour right realised that the left were here to stay. Cue a disgusting, never-ending campaign of lies: which you, because you've not bothered to look at the evidence, you've not bothered to look at the research, because data is just too much like hard work for you, have swallowed completely. 

 

You think that the deselection of someone who abused her own leader in public - then lied about it - covered up child abuse and copied racist policies is "absolutely scandalous". That makes you the perfect illustration of the problem here. Yet another poster who thinks they're sensible and yet does not have the first clue. 

Edited October 1, 2019 by shaun.lawson

[Victorian]

If they had devoted as much time and effort to trying to deal with the EU as has obviously been devoted to the deception of a deal then they might have got somewhere.

 

This latest ruse is totally transparent.    Offer a 'take it or leave it' final offer to replace the backstop.    Know full well that the contents of the offer will be dismissed out of hand as unacceptable.    At the same time,  leak the offer to the media and cry foul about some mysterious entity sabotaging the negotiations by performing the leak.    Chucks the EU under the bus and sets the demands of leavers against an invented remainer plot to sabotage the negotiations by leaking the offer.    

[Victorian]

Jonathan Powell on Newsnight saying exactly the same thing.     

[Victorian]

Before.

 

We wont install a hard border.   We wont be doing any customs checks.

 

Now.

 

Well of course,   there will have to be customs checks.   That's just the reality.

 

Before.

 

The EU will reopen the negotiations.   The EU are known to give nothing until the very last minute.   They'll move at the very last minute.

 

Now.

 

Here's our 'proposals'.    Take it or leave it and negotiations are over (over four weeks to go until the very last minute).   We're walking away.

 

Not good faith?    You bet your ass.

Edited October 1, 2019 by Victorian

[redjambo]

4 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

You know, maybe Boris WILL get a  Deal

 

Or not

 

And a link

 

 

 

I've had a tough old day. The thought of this has put a smile on my face though. You go for it, Brenda!

[annushorribilis III]

2 hours ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Well done on completely proving my point. Margaret Hodge:

 

1. Covered up a child abuse scandal

 

2. Her family's company paid 0.01% tax

 

3. Beat the BNP in Barking by, er, copying all their policies

 

4. Secretly taped a conversation with her own leader

 

5. Has manipulated, exaggerated and flat out bullshitted about Labour's 'antisemitism crisis' for political gain. 

 

In my life observing British politics, I've never seen anything that gets anywhere close to the absolute nonsense surrounding Labour's 'antisemitism': despite all data showing it to be much lower on the left than on the right; despite it having fallen in Labour since Corbyn became leader; despite the far right rising and no-one doing a damn thing about it. And I say that as the grandson of a Holocaust survivor who lost most of her extended family in the camps. 

 

This is what Hodge said about Corbyn in 2016:

 

 

What changed after that? Labour did much, much better than anyone expected at the general election - so the self-serving Labour right realised that the left were here to stay. Cue a disgusting, never-ending campaign of lies: which you, because you've not bothered to look at the evidence, you've not bothered to look at the research, because data is just too much like hard work for you, have swallowed completely. 

 

You think that the deselection of someone who abused her own leader in public - then lied about it - covered up child abuse and copied racist policies is "absolutely scandalous". That makes you the perfect illustration of the problem here. Yet another poster who thinks they're sensible and yet does not have the first clue. 

This is a brexit thread. 

[annushorribilis III]

12 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Glad you got to the articles. I am not sure what your "WOW" is about. The updated Byline Times article simply doubles the number it first thought of with  no more substantiation for what the FT comprehensively dismisses as a conspiracy theory. But you accept the conspiracy theory as fact and use it  as an argument that if the conspiracy were fact and the Leave voters had known it was a fact they would not have voted Leave.

 

But in a way it is an illustration of the problem with the "debate". Each side believes what it wants to believe. I suspect a lot of Remainers think that criminal breach of campaign funding rules by the Leave campaign is a "fact" despite subsequent appeal court decisions and the outcome of a criminal investigation to the contrary. 

Indeed they did - but no one said it was a conspiracy theory. Those parties - widely named - shorted the pound and backed the Leave campaign AND paid for advisors for BJ & Gove plus others. 

 

So just to be clear : it's not a conspiracy theory it's a fact - Crispin Odey & his ilk bet on Leave winning, funded the Leave campaign and stand to make millions/billions if/when UK leaves. . Or more importantly, stand to LOSE even more. 

 

But you know that. 

 

PS  Each side believes what it wants to believe ?  - No , it doesn't. But you do. 

 

PPS criminal breach of campaign funding rules by the Leave campaign is a "fact" -  check out the court case - the judge said BECAUSE it was an advisory referendum he had no powers to act because it did not bind the govt to act. HAD it been a binding referendum he would have decided  differently. How come you don't know this FA ? 

Edited October 1, 2019 by annushorribilis III

[JyTees]

Brilliant. All the republicans who'd normally spout bile and spit blood at the mere mention of the monarchy find themselves popping a semi at some bollocks made up about her majesty by the left wing press.

 

Gotta love the mindless state of just under half the nation.

[ri Alban]

8 hours ago, Brighton Jambo said:

Oh please your majesty, do it!! In all seriousness it might be needed to set a precedent that if a PM knowingly and willingly breaks the law he will be removed.  

 

I am raging though that the Queen has been dragged into this.  She should never be

If the Queen wants the family to continue, she'd be advised to stay quiet. Otherwise they'll be relegated to postage stamp fame.

Edited October 2, 2019 by ri Alban

[Brighton Jambo]

9 hours ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Well done on completely proving my point. Margaret Hodge:

 

1. Covered up a child abuse scandal

 

2. Her family's company paid 0.01% tax

 

3. Beat the BNP in Barking by, er, copying all their policies

 

4. Secretly taped a conversation with her own leader

 

5. Has manipulated, exaggerated and flat out bullshitted about Labour's 'antisemitism crisis' for political gain. 

 

In my life observing British politics, I've never seen anything that gets anywhere close to the absolute nonsense surrounding Labour's 'antisemitism': despite all data showing it to be much lower on the left than on the right; despite it having fallen in Labour since Corbyn became leader; despite the far right rising and no-one doing a damn thing about it. And I say that as the grandson of a Holocaust survivor who lost most of her extended family in the camps. 

 

This is what Hodge said about Corbyn in 2016:

 

 

What changed after that? Labour did much, much better than anyone expected at the general election - so the self-serving Labour right realised that the left were here to stay. Cue a disgusting, never-ending campaign of lies: which you, because you've not bothered to look at the evidence, you've not bothered to look at the research, because data is just too much like hard work for you, have swallowed completely. 

 

You think that the deselection of someone who abused her own leader in public - then lied about it - covered up child abuse and copied racist policies is "absolutely scandalous". That makes you the perfect illustration of the problem here. Yet another poster who thinks they're sensible and yet does not have the first clue. 

John Mann MP resigned expressly accusing JC of fostering anti semitism 

 

3 labour piers resigned the whip accusing JC of anti semitism

 

Gloria del Piero resigned from the shadow front bench citing lack of tolerance. 

 

The issue with the book foreword, the Mural, the recent issue with the painting etc etc 

 

The repeated accusations of direct interference from JC office in anti semitism investigations.

 

the likes of Harriet Harman, Yvette Cooper attending a protest against anti semitism in the party.

 

the re-admittance of Williamson despite being caught on video saying labour had been too apologetic.  

 

I could go on and on.  

 

Dont come on here and patronise  me.  JC is an anti Semite, it’s no conspiracy it’s true.  People who deny that are skirting dangerously close to tacitly supporting those beliefs.  

 

you need to have a long look at what you are defending as it’s disgusting.  

[Brighton Jambo]

7 hours ago, annushorribilis III said:

This is a brexit thread. 

Sorry I have further perpetuated the deviation on the thread by replying to Shaun.  I couldn’t let that patronising **** get away without a response.  I will ignore any further responses from him now though.  Anyway back to Brexit....

[kila]

1 hour ago, Brighton Jambo said:

John Mann MP resigned expressly accusing JC of fostering anti semitism 

 

3 labour piers resigned the whip accusing JC of anti semitism

 

Gloria del Piero resigned from the shadow front bench citing lack of tolerance. 

 

The issue with the book foreword, the Mural, the recent issue with the painting etc etc 

 

The repeated accusations of direct interference from JC office in anti semitism investigations.

 

the likes of Harriet Harman, Yvette Cooper attending a protest against anti semitism in the party.

 

the re-admittance of Williamson despite being caught on video saying labour had been too apologetic.  

 

I could go on and on.  

 

Dont come on here and patronise  me.  JC is an anti Semite, it’s no conspiracy it’s true.  People who deny that are skirting dangerously close to tacitly supporting those beliefs.  

 

you need to have a long look at what you are defending as it’s disgusting.  

What is your definition of antisemitism? Criticising Israel and their policies it seems. Certain folk don’t want the UK to fall out with Israel as they are a good customer of UK weapon sales. 

 

 

[Brighton Jambo]

6 minutes ago, kila said:

What is your definition of antisemitism? Criticising Israel and their policies it seems. Certain folk don’t want the UK to fall out with Israel as they are a good customer of UK weapon sales. 

 

 

Don’t ask me a question then answer it.  No that’s not my definition at all.  Anti semitism is a prejudice against Jewish people, it is language and views that discriminate against them and perpetuates long held stereotypes of them and their role in the world.  

 

Amazing how how many people are willing to defend and deny something so disgusting.

Edited October 2, 2019 by Brighton Jambo

[The Real Maroonblood]

5 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

Don’t ask me a question then answer it.  No that’s not my definition at all.  Anti semitism is a prejudice against Jewish people, it is language and views that discriminate against them and perpetuates long held stereotypes of them and their role in the world.  

 

Amazing how how many people are willing to defend and deny something so disgusting.

Has Corbyn actually said he hates Jews?

Just for the record I think Corbyn is a dick.

Edited October 2, 2019 by The Real Maroonblood

[Justin Z]

9 hours ago, Victorian said:

Before.

 

We wont install a hard border.   We wont be doing any customs checks.

 

Now.

 

Well of course,   there will have to be customs checks.   That's just the reality.

 

Before.

 

The EU will reopen the negotiations.   The EU are known to give nothing until the very last minute.   They'll move at the very last minute.

 

Now.

 

Here's our 'proposals'.    Take it or leave it and negotiations are over (over four weeks to go until the very last minute).   We're walking away.

 

Not good faith?    You bet your ass.

"Perfide Albion". Some things never change.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidious_Albion

[Justin Z]

5 hours ago, JyTees said:

Brilliant. All the republicans who'd normally spout bile and spit blood at the mere mention of the monarchy find themselves popping a semi at some bollocks made up about her majesty by the left wing press.

 

Gotta love the mindless state of just under half the nation.

 

😂😂😂

 

Ah, great comedy writing to start the day with, cheers Jy.

[A Boy Named Crow]

Ok, I am neither Tory nor Labour, the petty infighting of the Westminster bubble interests me not a bit, but there is nothing in these claims of antisemitism that proves Corbyn or Labour are anti Jewish. What he clearly is, is no friend of the stare of a Israel, and I think that probably ok, given some of the treatment dealt out by Israel to their neighbours, from the mid-20th century till now. 

 

In in terms of Brexit (which none of the above has any relevance to), I would say the sensible progression from here would be a vote of no confidence in the current government (who among us wouldn’t agree they are self serving liars, who are wilfully dragging this country off s a cliff to serve their own devices, potentially to lining their own pockets?) then a unity government, headed maybe by Corbyn in the interests of getting it passed, but really better if it was someone else, given the apparent lack of clarity from the man and his inherent untrustworthiness and poor judgement (who in their right mind would have Dianne Abbott in their shadow cabinet for example).

 

really what I am saying is, this lot are bad and are leading the UK down the road to ruin, the other ,lot are pretty awful too, but we need to do something to put a brake on this terrible trajectory! 

[Mikey1874]

39 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

Don’t ask me a question then answer it.  No that’s not my definition at all.  Anti semitism is a prejudice against Jewish people, it is language and views that discriminate against them and perpetuates long held stereotypes of them and their role in the world.  

 

Amazing how how many people are willing to defend and deny something so disgusting.

 

Anti semitism in the general population found to be at least equal to Labour party members being ignored while opponents of Labour use it to try to undermine Corbyn. 

[Justin Z]

2 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Anti semitism in the general population found to be at least equal to Labour party members being ignored while opponents of Labour use it to try to undermine Corbyn. 

 

Yep. The blatant dishonesty.

 

Corbyn is in my view a terrible leader with zero charisma and he ought to step aside. But there's never been anything anti-Semitic ever actually attributed to him, which you can't say about the racism of the likes of Johnson. Has Corbyn been critical of Israeli governments and their untold human rights abuses? Sure, and anyone sensible would be. It's scary and Orwellian the way criticism of a nation's official policies of abuse and violation of international legal norms has been conflated with anti-Semitism. Imagine the US pulling off mental gymnastics like that.

[I P Knightley]

27 minutes ago, A Boy Named Crow said:

really what I am saying is, this lot are bad and are leading the UK down the road to ruin, the other ,lot are pretty awful too, but we need to do something to put a brake on this terrible trajectory! 

This is exactly where we're at. 

I heard Rory Stewart describing the political scene as having changed from being a "bell curve", where there was a massive middle ground onto which both (new) Labour and the Conservatives moved their policies and appeal. It's now - largely because of Brexit - a U-shaped curve with people being forced to choose between one extreme and another, when most of us haven't changed our basic needs or wants. It's depressing. 

 

15 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

It's scary and Orwellian the way criticism of a nation's official policies of abuse and violation of international legal norms has been conflated with anti-Semitism. Imagine the US pulling off mental gymnastics like that.

That conflation becomes easy for anyone who wants to stir when you're dealing with a religious state.

Corbyn can be accused of many things. I don't think I've seen any evidence that he's said or done anything anti-Semitic. He's cosied up to Israel's 'enemies', which only helps to fan the fires but he's not helped himself by dragging his heels over sparking an investigation into claims that the party he leads is anti-Semitic. 

[Brighton Jambo]

28 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

Yep. The blatant dishonesty.

 

Corbyn is in my view a terrible leader with zero charisma and he ought to step aside. But there's never been anything anti-Semitic ever actually attributed to him, which you can't say about the racism of the likes of Johnson. Has Corbyn been critical of Israeli governments and their untold human rights abuses? Sure, and anyone sensible would be. It's scary and Orwellian the way criticism of a nation's official policies of abuse and violation of international legal norms has been conflated with anti-Semitism. Imagine the US pulling off mental gymnastics like that.

But it’s not just opponents of labour is it.  As per my post above and widely available info everywhere it is multiple, in some cases senior and long standing members of the Labour Party themselves.

 

how can you defend that? 

[Boris]

16 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

But it’s not just opponents of labour is it.  As per my post above and widely available info everywhere it is multiple, in some cases senior and long standing members of the Labour Party themselves.

 

how can you defend that? 

 

Because they have no axe to grind with the leadership...

[XB52]

23 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

But it’s not just opponents of labour is it.  As per my post above and widely available info everywhere it is multiple, in some cases senior and long standing members of the Labour Party themselves.

 

how can you defend that? 

Because they are blairites who hate the fact that the Labour party has moved back to the left. Also some detest the fact that Labour supports Palestinian rights. Show me any evidence of Corbyn being in any way anti semitic

[Justin Z]

38 minutes ago, I P Knightley said:

That conflation becomes easy for anyone who wants to stir when you're dealing

Corbyn can be accused of many things. I don't think I've seen any evidence that he's said or done anything anti-Semitic. He's cosied up to Israel's 'enemies', which only helps to fan the fires but he's not helped himself by dragging his heels over sparking an investigation into claims that the party he leads is anti-Semitic. 

 

One of many examples of his utter lack of political nous and awareness.

 

@Brighton Jambo if you took anything I just said as a defence of Labour, which I analogise to the US Democratic Party (and therefore have nothing but contempt for), that illustrates perfectly your inability to think objectively on this issue. The honest refrain is, "Corbyn can't be bothered to investigate claims of anti-Semitism in his own party"--and that's fair, even if his reasoning is, not giving such accusations the light of day when it appears to be a phenomenon that occurs at a rate no greater than the general population, as pointed out. He needs to realise that doesn't matter, and it doesn't matter if the only motivation for Tories pushing it is bald political opportunism, not any concern for Jews and the treatment of them in society at large.

 

Edited October 2, 2019 by Justin Z

[Governor Tarkin]

1 hour ago, A Boy Named Crow said:

Ok, I am neither Tory nor Labour, the petty infighting of the Westminster bubble interests me not a bit, but there is nothing in these claims of antisemitism that proves Corbyn or Labour are anti Jewish. What he clearly is, is no friend of the stare of a Israel, and I think that probably ok, given some of the treatment dealt out by Israel to their neighbours, from the mid-20th century till now. 

 

In in terms of Brexit (which none of the above has any relevance to), I would say the sensible progression from here would be a vote of no confidence in the current government (who among us wouldn’t agree they are self serving liars, who are wilfully dragging this country off s a cliff to serve their own devices, potentially to lining their own pockets?) then a unity government, headed maybe by Corbyn in the interests of getting it passed, but really better if it was someone else, given the apparent lack of clarity from the man and his inherent untrustworthiness and poor judgement (who in their right mind would have Dianne Abbott in their shadow cabinet for example).

 

really what I am saying is, this lot are bad and are leading the UK down the road to ruin, the other ,lot are pretty awful too, but we need to do something to put a brake on this terrible trajectory! 

 

Good post. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Justin Z said:

 

Yep. The blatant dishonesty.

 

Corbyn is in my view a terrible leader with zero charisma and he ought to step aside. But there's never been anything anti-Semitic ever actually attributed to him, which you can't say about the racism of the likes of Johnson. Has Corbyn been critical of Israeli governments and their untold human rights abuses? Sure, and anyone sensible would be. It's scary and Orwellian the way criticism of a nation's official policies of abuse and violation of international legal norms has been conflated with anti-Semitism. Imagine the US pulling off mental gymnastics like that.

 

And another one.

[Governor Tarkin]

1 hour ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Has Corbyn actually said he hates Jews?

Just for the record I think Corbyn is a dick.

 

Despite never having met him, I hate 'Sir' Philip Green.

 

Does that make me an anti-Semite? 

[The Real Maroonblood]

7 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Despite never having met him, I hate 'Sir' Philip Green.

 

Does that make me an anti-Semite? 

I’ll join you with that post.

 

[Brighton Jambo]

41 minutes ago, XB52 said:

Because they are blairites who hate the fact that the Labour party has moved back to the left. Also some detest the fact that Labour supports Palestinian rights. Show me any evidence of Corbyn being in any way anti semitic

If a whole bunch of senior labour officials, MP’s and peers saying so isn’t evidence I don’t know what is. The foreword he wrote to that book isn’t bad evidence either,  the liking of the anti-Semitic mural also.

 

how about refusing to resign from patron of the pro Palestinian group despite being made aware of anti Semitic cartoons, propaganda and imagery being circulated by said group.  

 

You will no doubt pass all these off as misunderstandings, over dramatisation etc.

 

you are an apologist for anti semitism.  

[Brighton Jambo]

30 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

I’ll join you with that post.

 

I have actually met him and I hate him too! 

[Boris]

12 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

If a whole bunch of senior labour officials, MP’s and peers saying so isn’t evidence I don’t know what is. The foreword he wrote to that book isn’t bad evidence either,  the liking of the anti-Semitic mural also.

 

how about refusing to resign from patron of the pro Palestinian group despite being made aware of anti Semitic cartoons, propaganda and imagery being circulated by said group.  

 

You will no doubt pass all these off as misunderstandings, over dramatisation etc.

 

you are an apologist for anti semitism.  

 

Referring to Hobson's Imperialism?

 

I studied that at university.  OMG, Glasgow Uni is anti-semitic!

[Brighton Jambo]

9 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Referring to Hobson's Imperialism?

 

I studied that at university.  OMG, Glasgow Uni is anti-semitic!

Yeah i often find this is a good subject to make fun of too.  

[Brighton Jambo]

13 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

Referring to Hobson's Imperialism?

 

I studied that at university.  OMG, Glasgow Uni is anti-semitic!

Also just to check are you saying Hobson was neither racist nor anti-Semitic in his views?