Corbyn win prompts paedophile to join Labour

Original post by GoldenFang

Fine, we are agreed it's moot. Let's move on

Oh ffs. You agree he has links to Islamist groups, you presumably accept that they have a convergence of interests. But you somehow deny that groups with whom he has links would be happy at his ascension to the party leadership?

Would you accept Hamas is an extremist group? (please just answer, I'm going somewhere with this)

But being happy with and 'attracting' people to the Labour party are not the same thing. I'm happy with Sanders rise in America, it doesn't mean i'm attracted to join the Democrats.

I don't think Islamic extremists really give two shits about Corbyn given they'd annihilate him with the rest of us. What are you taking to mean an extremist? To me an extremist is someone who engages in or supports terrorist activity in this context.

As for Hamas, I do think they are a terrorist group, just as I think elements of the IDF are too. They both kill innocent civilians albeit the former intentionally and latter recklessly.

Reply 42

OP

Original post by Bornblue

But being happy with and 'attracting' people to the Labour party are not the same thing.

I am happy to concede the "attracting" thing, it's more trouble than it's worth. But yes, they are happy he is leader. There is a reason for that; they know he would push a policy helpful to them if he had the chance

I don't think Islamic extremists really give two shits about Corbyn given they'd annihilate him with the rest of us. What are you taking to mean an extremist? To me an extremist is someone who engages in or supports terrorist activity in this context.

Precisely. Corbyn is close to these people, he thinks highly of them. And he would pursue a policy that benefits them if he were ever to come to power.

As for Hamas, I do think they are a terrorist group, just as I think elements of the IDF are too. They both kill innocent civilians albeit the former intentionally and latter recklessly.

That's a bit provocative, no? You concede the IDF does not kill civilians intentionally. And why would they? Whenever they make a mistake, Hamas parades the dead children in front of the international media, shouting "Look what the Jews did". The IDF has absolutely no incentive to kill any innocents unnecessarily, and they don't. Even Hamas admits the IDF avoids civilian casualties

Reply 43

Libtardian

Socialists support violence/theft, so one shouldn't be surprised when they expand that ideology to include kids...

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 44

Original post by GoldenFang

I am happy to concede the "attracting" thing, it's more trouble than it's worth. But yes, they are happy he is leader. There is a reason for that; they know he would push a policy helpful to them if he had the chance

I would think most genuine Islamic extremists don't give two sh*ts about our leader of the opposition either way. Be precise about what you mean by the term 'extremist'. I have no doubts he attracts Muslim support- nothing wrong with that but I haven't seen any great evidence he is genuinely being supported by Islamic extremists en masse.

That's a bit provocative, no? You concede the IDF does not kill civilians intentionally. And why would they? Whenever they make a mistake, Hamas parades the dead children in front of the international media, shouting "Look what the Jews did". The IDF has absolutely no incentive to kill any innocents unnecessarily, and they don't. Even Hamas admits the IDF avoids civilian casualties

I don't for a second condone Hamas, but that doesn't mean I support Israel either. I'm not prepared for whole debate about the IDF, i've had it a thousand times so i'll outline my position:

I contend that the IDF don't intend to kill people in the same way Hamas does but that they are so reckless and don't really care if they do, shown by the bombings of schools and hospitals which had no rockets in and they knew children were there.

The 'leaflets' thing to me is nothing more than PR.

Reply 45

KimKallstrom

14

Original post by Bornblue

Well that's disgustingly racist. You're asserting that because someone has a Muslim name, they are therefore a Muslim extremist.

You're saying that the main reason anybody would state that Ibrahim Hewitt and Abou Jahjah etc are Muslim extremists is because they have Muslim names. Have you suffered a head injury? :laugh:

EDIT: I see you later apologised and claimed it was because you didn't know who those people were. I don't believe you. You know full well who Ibrahim Hewitt is. You only apologised because GoldenFang put you in a position where you couldn't squirm out of it any longer. Don't pretend otherwise.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 46

OP

Original post by KimKallstrom

You're saying that the main reason anybody would state that Ibrahim Hewitt and Abou Jahjah etc are Muslim extremists is because they have Muslim names. Have you suffered a head injury? :laugh:

EDIT: I see you later apologised and claimed it was because you didn't know who those people were. I don't believe you. You know full well who Ibrahim Hewitt is. You only apologised because GoldenFang put you in a position where you couldn't squirm out of it any longer. Don't pretend otherwise.

It really is pretty horrible how they will immediately go to accusations of racism. Thanks for sticking up for me

Reply 47

Original post by GoldenFang

It really is pretty horrible how they will immediately go to accusations of racism. Thanks for sticking up for me

No, I genuinely was not familiar with the names and mistakenly thought you had made a racist comment. I genuinely do apologise for that.
Nonetheless, it absolutely does not mean your point about Corbyn and Paedohphile supporters has the slightest bit of merit, which i'm glad you admit now.

And you still haven't proven the claim that muslim extremists en masse are 'attracted' to Labour now Corbyn is there. You showed three people on twitter, hardly support of that point. You said 'attracted' which implies such people have joined the party, well how many muslim extremists have?

I don't doubt he has a lot of Muslim support- which there is nothing wrong with, but the idea that he has attracted huge numbers of extremists seems like nonsense and is unevidenced.

I don't like Corbyn as leader and want him replaced, but that doesn't mean you should make nonsense accusations against him. Defending someone from nonsensical comments regarding paeohpilia is not the same as supporting their ideology.

Ps, You've been banned from this site before under a different username haven't you? ExcitedPup isn't it?

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 48

KimKallstrom

14

Original post by GoldenFang

It really is pretty horrible how they will immediately go to accusations of racism. Thanks for sticking up for me

Well even if we believe what he's saying, he's saying that you picked out three random people on Twitter with Muslim names and decided they're extremists based off of literally nothing but the fact that they have Muslim names.

That's what he clearly thinks of you. That you're actually idiotic enough to do that and think it's a good method. It's outrageous and out of order. That's of course if we believe what he said his apology....which I don't. So take your pick

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 49

OP

Original post by KimKallstrom

Well even if we believe what he's saying, he's saying that you picked out three random people on Twitter with Muslim names and decided they're extremists based off of literally nothing but the fact that they have Muslim names.

That's what he clearly thinks of you. That you're actually idiotic enough to do that and think it's a good method. It's outrageous and out of order. That's of course if we believe what he said his apology....which I don't. So take your pick

Indeed. I don't think he wants any kind of genuine debate, look at his new slew of excuses and smears above. Pathetic

Reply 50

OP

Original post by Bornblue

No, I genuinely was not familiar with the names and mistakenly thought you had made a racist comment. I genuinely do apologise for that.

Ps, You've been banned from this site before under a different username haven't you? ExcitedPup isn't it?

You've barely finished apologising for the last smear and you begin with the next one. You have a very censorious mindset, less interested in debate than in attacking and undermining people who disagree with you

Reply 51

knapdarloch

Original post by Bornblue

Ps, You've been banned from this site before under a different username haven't you? ExcitedPup isn't it?

awww, MostUncivilised. He mad.

Reply 52

OP

Original post by knapdarloch

awww, MostUncivilised. He mad.

No idea what you're talking about. But even on the basis of your false accusation, you've just admitted you're a duplicate account.

Whoever MostUncivilised is, I'm sure he'd find it funny that you remember him. The same couldn't be said for you..?

Reply 53

OP

Original post by TheArtofProtest

He was also @wolfie and there was another (@LeoAngliae).

Whoever "he" is, I'm sure he'd be thrilled that you've got such a hard on for him. Did he hurt your feelings?

Reply 54

Howard

5

I'm sure all kinds of unsavoury people have belonged to various political parties over the years. I don't think Corbyn is relevant.

Reply 55

OP

Original post by Howard

I'm sure all kinds of unsavoury people have belonged to various political parties over the years. I don't think Corbyn is relevant.

True. But does it not speak volumes that, for example, George Galloway has signalled he wants to return to the Labour Party now? That various hard left parties have indicated they would support a Corbyn-led Labour?

It indicates that the hard left now perceive Labour to be favourable to their interests

Reply 56

Original post by GoldenFang

You've barely finished apologising for the last smear and you begin with the next one. You have a very censorious mindset, less interested in debate than in attacking and undermining people who disagree with you

You've thrown your fair share of cheap shots including here, after I made a genuine apology, so let's not take the high ground.
That wasn't an attack, a genuine question. Were you on here under the username excitedpup beforehand?

A lot of similar qualities. Both labour, both hate Corbyn, think he's an anti Semite and both have a particular affinity towards Israel (not saying that's wrong)

Mind you, he said that if have pushed my own family into the gas chambers and was therefore banned.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 57

Original post by GoldenFang

True. But does it not speak volumes that, for example, George Galloway has signalled he wants to return to the Labour Party now? That various hard left parties have indicated they would support a Corbyn-led Labour?

It indicates that the hard left now perceive Labour to be favourable to their interests

You've shifted the goalposts, your point was about Paedophiles. If you want a Galloway smear though, how about the likes of UKIP and the Tory right which are campaigning and hosting events with Galloway for brexit?

Then there's the fact that many who support corbyn are likely to do so for his economic views, rather than his foreign ones. His foreign views are dodgy but there's not an awful lot evil with his economic views even if you disagree, as I do.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 58

Howard

5

Original post by GoldenFang

True. But does it not speak volumes that, for example, George Galloway has signalled he wants to return to the Labour Party now? That various hard left parties have indicated they would support a Corbyn-led Labour?

It indicates that the hard left now perceive Labour to be favourable to their interests

Well it is. Corbyn is hard left so naturally he's a magnet for other jurrassic leftovers from the 1980's. I'm surprised Arthur Scargill isn't trying to edge his way in.

Reply 59

OP