Discussion about UK politics forum

[Gumbert]

hes stated as much at the meetings hes spoke at. but i suppose if the mainstream media ask loaded questions then the answers will give off allsorts of impressions, no..

 

[Dubversion]

There's bound to be a Galloway bashing thread for this...

and there's the b, telling people what to post where again..


get over yourself, please. the comments about galloway were in DIRECT response to your doppelganger nate's comments...

 

[ernestolynch]

There's bound to be a Galloway bashing thread for this...

Fuck off - tell you what, why don't you post up your views on economics or summat.

 

[the B]

It wasn't directed at just you Dub...and I think it's quite reasonable for people to post about Galloway on a thread about Galloway...

Otherwise I'll start posting whatever I like, wherever I like - even if it has nothing to do with the thread involved...how about some economics? Do you really want to read some Ernie?

And fuck off - just for good measure.

 

[butchersapron]

Didn't see him denying it here:
www.respectcoalition.com/index.php?aid=26

 

[Gumbert]

There's bound to be a Galloway bashing thread for this...

posting a position wether its attack or defence on u75, just do it. just be ready to back up your argument..

thats my 2p on this thread subject.

 

[Dubversion]

Otherwise I'll start posting whatever I like, wherever I like - even if it has nothing to do with the thread involved...

astonishing. you say that like you've never done it before, yet half the time it's ALL you do..


breathtaking lack of self-awareness there...

 

[Dubversion]

Didn't see him denying it here:
www.respectcoalition.com/index.php?aid=26

excellent, thanks butchers:

Typically, for a man of his contradictions, Galloway is a staunch believer in capital punishment. Given his knowledge of Saddam's crimes he would presumably, after due process, advocate the death penalty in his case?

'If he was convicted by a kangaroo court of invaders, certainly not.'

But he writes in his book how Saddam took it upon himself personally to murder friends he thought might become political enemies. If he believes in capital punishment and that is not a capital offence what is?

'The people who would hang Saddam are guilty of bigger crimes than he is.'

But murder is still murder?

'To hand Saddam over to an illegal puppet administration, who will not give any of the Iraqi leaders a fair trial - how could they, because the Baathists would then tell all the secrets of American and British involvement back to the Seventies? - would be no justice.'

unless there's been some VERY judicious editing and the interviewers questions bore little relation in fact to how they appear in print, i see no denial or contradiction..

so RESPECT is led by an AVOWEDLY anti-abortion, very PROBABLY pro-death penalty, religious extremist.

nice...

 

[the B]

astonishing. you say that like you've never done it before, yet half the time it's ALL you do..


breathtaking lack of self-awareness there...

Is this the bit where Dubversion shall find 250 posts of mine, in the last 500, which have nothing to do with the thread involved or any of the contents?

 

[Gumbert]

excellent, thanks butchers:
so RESPECT is led by an AVOWEDLY anti-abortion, very PROBABLY pro-death penalty, religious extremist.

nice...

i wouldnt say 'led by' myself. i would say 'well known figure is member of'...

Respect...

 

[Dubversion]

like i could be arsed...

 

[Dubversion]

i wouldnt say 'led by' myself. i would say 'well known figure is member of'...

Respect...

you say 'potato', i say vodka.

let's call the whole thing off

 

[ernestolynch]

excellent, thanks butchers:




unless there's been some VERY judicious editing and the interviewers questions bore little relation in fact to how they appear in print, i see no denial or contradiction..

so RESPECT is led by an AVOWEDLY anti-abortion, very PROBABLY pro-death penalty, religious extremist.

nice...

What I cannot reconcile is his previous antipathy to Trotskyism, which he used as a reason not to join the Scottish Socialist Party (whereas its more likely that he felt he couldn't control it with the rival tanned personality of Sheridan in competition), yet now he is mixing with all manner of mad Trot dogs.

 

[ernestolynch]

i wouldnt say 'led by' myself. i would say 'well known figure is member of'...

Respect...

My voting slip will say

"Respec' - The Unity Coalition - George Galloway", and so will yours. The party is named after the big man. Even Uncle Joe didn't rename the CPSU after himself...

 

[Gumbert]

you say 'potato', i say vodka.

let's call the whole thing off

aye 'capitalism' let's call the whole thing off ...

 

[TeeJay]

This thread though isn't you making impartial suggestions as to how p&p could be improved, it is a result of, and continuation of, the arguments you've had with me and butchers and others.

Not at all. I can't remember talking with you or butchers about the number of SWP threads. The whole issue of personal abuse was brought up by other people and has been amply demonstrated by various people in this thread. The level of abuse is a general thing and nothing to do with a specific dispute between me, you and butchers. It is an ongoing feature of UK p&p, therefore my mentioning it after it had been arosed as an issue is entirely legitimate and trying to dismiss this as a personal fued with you is simply not true.

 

[ernestolynch]

if you can't stand the heat

 

[the B]

Shit, it's all gone wrong...how does this happen...

 

[Dubversion]

are you going to post that shit pic on every thread?

 

[the B]

Why can't I?

Are you trying to impose your will on me like some kind of dictator...?

 

[TeeJay]

You really have got a persecution complex going haven't you. You're calling for bans and binnings - even if I had no idea who you were, I'd oppose this - the fact that you're calling for it after a large argument with certain posters make me take your suggestions even less seriously.

Several people have made specific references to me by name and have dismissed this thread as a personal vendetta I have rather than admit that the UK p&p situation is an ongoing thing. I started this thread without mentioning any personal dispute I have had with anyone, and it has been other people who have tried to introduce arguments about my so called "hidden agenda" and questioned my "honesty". I didn't bring these things up. Would you like to explain how these things are directly relevant to the general behaviour of the bulk of UK p&p posters? And do you believe in any kind of moderation policy at all on internet forums? Do you think there should be any kind of limits on the level and type of abuse that is tolerated? Is it OK to make all sorts of false claims about people? And how would you enforce these things? I suggest that you would be better off on a "total free speech" type forum where all kind of vile stuff is tolerated or do you in reality actually support rules and limits, like there are on urban75? Doesn't it actually come doen to an argument where the lines are drawn, and so you are not actually that different from the B, you just have a different place that you would draw the line? Maybe you simply prefer the status quo and don't want things changed, hence you are using the the 'lassiez faire' argument, but presumably if the statud quo wasn't to your liking then you wouldn't be saying 'let people continuing doing what they are doing'?

 

[ernestolynch]

Several people have made specific references to me by name and have dismissed this thread as a personal vendetta I have rather than admit that the UK p&p situation is an ongoing thing. I started this thread without mentioning any personal dispute I have had with anyone, and it has been other people who have tried to introduce arguments about my so called "hidden agenda" and questioned my "honesty". I didn't bring these things up. Would you like to explain how these things are directly relevant to the general behaviour of the bulk of UK p&p posters? And do you believe in any kind of moderation policy at all on internet forums? Do you think there should be any kind of limits on the level and type of abuse that is tolerated? Is it OK to make all sorts of false claims about people? And how would you enforce these things? I suggest that you would be better off on a "total free speech" type forum where all kind of vile stuff is tolerated or do you in reality actually support rules and limits, like there are on urban75? Doesn't it actually come doen to an argument where the lines are drawn, and so you are not actually that different from the B, you just have a different place that you would draw the line? Maybe you simply prefer the status quo and don't want things changed, hence you are using the the 'lassiez faire' argument, but presumably if the statud quo wasn't to your liking then you wouldn't be saying 'let people continuing doing what they are doing'?

Have you heard of using paragraphs?

 

[the B]

It wasn't that hard to read...I managed it so surely oh wise Ernie could too...

And making that kind of demand is rampantly dictatorial isn't it

 

[ernestolynch]

.......................

 

[TeeJay]

Have you heard of using paragraphs?

You're not a teacher by any chance?

 

[the B]

.......................

Careful, any more random smilie using and you could turn into Nate

 

[ernestolynch]

That was certainly not random.

 

[oisleep]

And making that kind of demand is rampantly dictatorial isn't it

Making petty remarks like this at every fecking post isn't making you look very clever

 

[silentNate]

Careful, any more random smilie using and you could turn into Nate

We're on form tonight

 

[ernestolynch]

Making petty remarks like this at every fecking post isn't making you look very clever

All that money spent on his ejoocayshun as well.