Too many immigration threads on UK P&P?

[butchersapron]

I'd also be interested to know exactly what nino_savatte meant by that too. Maybe on another thread if you don't feel like dealing with it on this one nino_savatte?

 

[nino_savatte]

you clearly DO give a shit about RA to say this .. and i do not present RA as anything .. i simply metionned them .. i was never a member, it is not my role to defend them and i do have criticisms though that have no place on this thread

BUT just what DID this mean then???

"We all know how the RA came about....don't we? Friggin' sectarian shite"


p.s. i have NO problem with opposition to my ideas .. there have been really good debates with e.g. rmp3 and occasionally MC and VP who all disagreed with my position .. you however do not want to debate and seem to believe i am bnp or similar and should be rubbished not debated ..

p.s. this is your thread .. not content .. just another attempt to rubbish

p.s. do yuo not think it odd to accuse me of trying to shut debate when it is you who is doing that and you who accuse me of starting too many debates

No, you have a problem with opposition to your ideas. There is much evidence of your abusiveness, lying and smearing of other posters.

What I want is for you to acknowledge the fact that your ieas on immigration have been in circulation for some time; they are not new and they come from somewhere. Perhaps you would rather ignore historical fact in order to advance your bizarre ideas of class and immigration.

You have shown, many times, that you don't read anything unless you can select a quote to support your narratives.

p.s. do yuo not think it odd to accuse me of trying to shut debate when it is you who is doing that and you who accuse me of starting too many debates

You don't start "debates", you post narratives and then get upset when they're challenged.

and i do not present RA as anything .. i simply metionned them .

What? Like you mentioned the RCP on another thread? Do you ever read any of the stuff you post on the net?

 

[nino_savatte]

I'd also be interested to know exactly what nino_savatte meant by that too. Maybe on another thread if you don't feel like dealing with it on this one nino_savatte?

The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true.

 

[butchersapron]

The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true.

No it's not true. Not at all.

 

[nino_savatte]

No it's not true. Not at all.

Oh but it is.

Are you familiar with the word "squadism"?

One thing that I've noticed about the RA is that they keep banging on about "the Left" (as if they aren't on "the Left"). Not only are they schismatics, they're notoriously sectarian.

I just had another look at their website and they say that "socialism is dead". Nothing like aping the words of the right -eh? Wasn't Thatcher's stated aim to consign "socialism to the dustbin of history"?

You can kill people but you can't kill ideas.

 

[nino_savatte]

THE ERA OF THE SECT IS OVER
So where, when, how and why did it all go wrong last time round? That there is no single incident, individual or organisation solely to blame is hardly a surprise. Nonetheless, within months of the working class taking power in Russia in 1917, the Bolshevik leadership laid plans (on a basic misunderstanding that a minority administration could impose communism from the top down) to ban all political activity other than their own. A bastardised Marxism, which undeniably prepared the ground for the Stalin led counter-revolution that followed. Thereafter the entire socialist thought process was contaminated in one way or the other. With the moral high ground surrendered, the rise of fascism followed swiftly. From a highpoint in 1917, defeat in the Spanish Civil War less than twenty years later, arguably closed the chapter on working class self-determination in Europe in the 20th century.

This pattern cannot repeat itself. Not least because those organisations who pledge their allegiance to the failed experiment of 1917 and who religiously follow the formula, will never get the opportunity to do so. The era of the sect is over.
http://redaction.org/misc/who.html

Hmmm, you could have fooled me. So, let's get something straight, the RA is not a sect? LOL!!!!

I also see some considerable extrapolations here: namely the fact that the RA are attempting to label all socialists (apart from themselves) as Soviet stooges. Nowt like a smear campaign - eh?

 

[butchersapron]

Oh but it is.

Are you familiar with the word "squadism"?

One thing that I've noticed about the RA is that they keep banging on about "the Left" (as if they aren't on "the Left"). Not only are they schismatics, they're notoriously sectarian.

I just had another look at their website and they say that "socialism is dead". Nothing like aping the words of the right -eh? Wasn't Thatcher's stated aim to consign "socialism to the dustbin of history"?

You can kill people but you can't kill ideas.

I am nino. Very familiar indeed. What's that got to do with your ridiculous assertion that RA were trots? In fact, you even provide eveidence that they were no such thing in your above post. What sort of trot says "socialism is dead"? What sort of trots describe themselves as 'anti-leninists'?

And now you seem to be claiming that they're thatcherites too - thatcherite trots. I see. Do you want to have a little sit down? You appear to be living in the 80s or early 90s.

 

[nino_savatte]

I am nino. Very familiar indeed. What's that got to do with your ridiculous assertion that RA were trots? In fact, you even provide eveidence that they were no such thing in your above post. What sort of trot says "socialism is dead"? What sort of trots describe themselves as 'anti-leninists'?

And now you seem to be claiming that they're thatcherites too - thatcherite trots. I see. Do you want to have a little sit down? You appear to be living in the 80s or early 90s.

Where did I say the RA were "Thatcherites"? I didn't. Please read the post again.

The last time I checked, the SWP were still trots and have been for a very long time. The RA was formed by expelled (schismatic) members of the SWP...or perhaps you disagree with that too?

The RA are notoriously sectarian, that you cannot deny.

 

[butchersapron]

Hang on, let's go back to the start. Are you still claiming that:

"The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true."

 

[nino_savatte]

Hang on, let's go back to the start. Are you still claiming that:

"The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true."

Where did I contradict myself? I didn't. The nature of their politics may differ from the SWP but you cannot deny where they came from...or are you telling me that the RA was not formed by expelled former members of the SWP?

 

[butchersapron]

Where did I contradict myself? I didn't. The nature of their politics may differ from the SWP but you cannot deny where they came from...or are you telling me that the RA was not formed by expelled former members of the SWP?

A simple yes or no would suffice. You were pretty sure that you were definitvely correct when you posted

"The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true."

Are you still so confident that this is true now? Do you still claim that RA are trots?

 

[nino_savatte]

A simple yes or no would suffice. You were pretty sure that you were definitvely correct when you posted

"The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true."

Are you still so confident that this is true now? Do you still claim that RA are trots?

Ah, the auld "yes/no" question.

Which part of my post did you not understand?

Are you a trot, B'elanna?

 

[butchersapron]

Some questions can be answered with a yes or a no. Do you still think RA are trots for example. Or no, i'm not a trot. That's another one.

"The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true."

Cough it up man.

 

[nino_savatte]

Some questions can be answered with a yes or a no. Do you still think RA are trots for example. Or no. i'm not a trot. That's another one.

"The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true."

Cough it up man.

You're either blind, incredibly thick or trolling. Either way, it's tedious.

 

[butchersapron]

Wow, you really are genuinely that pig-headed aren't you It's allright nino, we all make mistakes now and then, we mature by admitting to them. It's a strength not a weakness.

"The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true."

Do you still claim this is true?

 

[audiotech]

Wow, you really are genuinely that pig-headed aren't you It's allright nino, we all make mistakes now and then, we mature by admitting to them. It's a strength not a weakness.

"The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true."

Do you still claim this is true?

It was true, then the trots left and anarcho's took over didn't they?

 

[butchersapron]

RA were anarchists? Is this true nino?

 

[butchersapron]

Anyone?

 

[becky p]

No, you have a problem with opposition to your ideas. There is much evidence of your abusiveness, lying and smearing of other posters.

What I want is for you to acknowledge the fact that your ieas on immigration have been in circulation for some time; they are not new and they come from somewhere. Perhaps you would rather ignore historical fact in order to advance your bizarre ideas of class and immigration.

You have shown, many times, that you don't read anything unless you can select a quote to support your narratives.


You don't start "debates", you post narratives and then get upset when they're challenged.

So speaks good old nino. The man who brings his own brand of tolerance,intellectual rigour and free thinking to every debate.

 

[nino_savatte]

Wow, you really are genuinely that pig-headed aren't you It's allright nino, we all make mistakes now and then, we mature by admitting to them. It's a strength not a weakness.

"The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true."

Do you still claim this is true?

You're like a stuck record...oh, you're too young to remember things like vinyl, aren't you?

So you're saying that the RA are what? Anarchists? Social Democrats? Marxist-Leninists?

Do one.

 

[nino_savatte]

becky p
This message is hidden because becky p is on your ignore list.

Some knobheids just don't pay attention.

 

[butchersapron]

You're like a stuck record...oh, you're too young to remember things like vinyl, aren't you?

So you're saying that the RA are what? Anarchists? Social Democrats? Marxist-Leninists?

Do one.

Do one

Yes sir!

What an odd insult as well - 'too young to remember vinyl'?

Come on nino, just admit that you made a mistake when you called RA 'trots' - it's not such a big thing that you need to so publically lose your rag like this. It does, however, bring into doubt your political understanding and use of certain terms - maybe that's why you're acting like this?

 

[nino_savatte]

Do one

Yes sir!

What an odd insult as well - 'too young to remember vinyl'?

Come on nino, just admit that you made a mistake when you called RA 'trots' - it's not such a big thing that you need to so publically lose your rag like this. It does, however, bring into doubt your political understanding and use of certain terms - maybe that's why you're acting like this?

I made no "mistake". You didn't read my post properly. Try taking responsibility for your own behaviour instead of trying to pin the blame onto others.

Oh and the moral high ground doesn't suit you.

 

[butchersapron]

Looks pretty clear what you were saying to me:

"The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true."

Which part of it did i read wrong? Does this post not say that RA are trots?

 

[nino_savatte]

Looks pretty clear what you were saying to me:

"The RA are schismatic trots who left the SWP. What's the problem with that statement? It's true."

Which part of it did i read wrong? Does this post not say that RA are trots?

There's only one thing to do with a poster like you.

 

[nino_savatte]

Trolls eh?

torres
This message is hidden because torres is on your ignore list.

I suggest you fuck off back to MATB.

 

[butchersapron]

Wow! You really are like like this aren't you? I thought you were joking, just putting it on. Seems i was wrong.

And trolling? Do you even know what that means anymore? It doesn't mean anyone that doesn't agree with you and it ceratinly doesn't mean people who ask you to clarify what you've inaccurately said about a group that they happen to have some knowledge of. Well, ok better you lop me onto ignore than have to deal with your mistake - if that's how you want to deal with it fine.

 

[nino_savatte]

torres
This message is hidden because torres is on your ignore list.

Do pay attention (difficult for one such as you, who has the attention span of a goldfish).

 

[Knotted]

Wow! You really are like like this aren't you? I thought you were joking, just putting it on. Seems i was wrong.

And trolling? Do you even know what that means anymore? It doesn't mean anyone that doesn't agree with you and it ceratinly doesn't mean people who ask you to clarify what you've inaccurately said about a group that they happen to have some knowledge of. Well, ok better you lop me onto ignore than have to deal with your mistake - if that's how you want to deal with it fine.

Its the fact that you asked him to clarify rather than the fact that you disagree with him that makes him behave this way. He NEVER clarifies, no matter how trivial the matter. Don't waste your time trying to make him do it.

 

[simon foster]

I suggest you fuck off back to MATB.

Who's from that site? I registered there last week and can't log in there any more.