Wednesday 7th December 2016

Post by **refitman** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 7:11 am

Morning all.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 7:24 am

Morning all.

Hospital 'trolley waits' show sharp rise - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38228411" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Check out the barchart. Blinking immigrants no doubt.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 8:23 am

Good morfternoon.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 8:38 am

Morning.

Ignore the provocation Tubby, It's not worth engaging with.

Stick around, good to hear from you. You seem in fine spirit.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 8:55 am

It's not - or rather in my view isn't - "us and them". Temulkar can be a bit rude but he can also liven things up.

Personally I want lots of people here - whether I agree with them or not. I don't like the personal abuse or ganging up, but can cope with it if it keeps things together. (dons blue hat) There is a very large difference however between being tacit and actively approving.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 9:21 am

StephenDolan wrote:Morning all.

Hospital 'trolley waits' show sharp rise - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38228411" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Check out the barchart. Blinking immigrants no doubt.

interesting that France, seen as the best country to follow in national health systems by some out there, seems to have over twice as many beds per thousand as we do. But then, they spend considerably more than we do. Funny that this aspect never seems to get mentioned...

frightful_oik · Post by **frightful_oik** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 9:24 am

yahyah wrote:Morning.

Ignore the provocation Tubby, It's not worth engaging with.
Stick around, good to hear from you. You seem in fine spirit.

Provocation? Odd word to choose. Both tem and tubby make interesting contributions. If someone challenges your ideas you should of course engage. What a very odd post.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 9:47 am

In response to HindleA last night, I just wanted to say that I started coming here for the links, and the continued excellent links keep me coming back. I do try to thank for links I've read, but may not always, so just wanted to say in general that although I don't necessarily respond, the effort from those who post links is always appreciated.

In fact the specialist interests and knowledge of some of the posters here is part of what makes Flythenest more than just a chat forum (although the chat and virtual cake is also very welcome) so it's nice to see Tubby back as I have missed his insights into rail infrastructure and can only regret that RobertSnozers no longer feels able to contribute as his knowledge on health has been very enlightening over the years both here and at the G. I could never agree with RS on Labour, but never felt this a problem when I agreed with him on so much else and that is how I feel generally. We may squabble over party politics, but there is often a consensus around RoT's take on education and HindleA's insights on disability, ephemerid's tireless exposures of the realities of our welfare system and an appreciation of AnatolyKasparov's epic local council roundups. Apologies to others who post on specialist topics that I may have overlooked, they are all appreciated, especially those who read through the dry stuff in the FT and share the gems.

The point I'm making is that there is a lot of agreement here about what is wrong - in society, in politics, in the economy - a consensus of opinion that I don't tend to find in the wider world, I'm afraid, where many people see nothing wrong with practices and policies that appal me. Yes we disagree over solutions, we don't all support the same party, but if FTN was started to continue the discussions and debates that were made impossible by nesting at the Guardian, then it has served and is still serving it's purpose and not liking what others say, believing them wrong or misleading, is all part of it. There was a decision for moderators to operate a light touch after the often seemingly one sided heavy handedness at the G and by and large I think they (Refitman and PaulfromYorkshire in recent times) have done a pretty good job and I wish that people could just accept that avoiding the censorship so many hated at the G involves allowing anyone who sticks to the rules to post their opinions.

Anyway, apologies for the long post, but among Temulkar's posts yesterday there was a generalised attack on the Flythenest website itself, or so it seemed to me, that I felt was unjustified and belittled the efforts of all those who give up their time to share links and facts about a subject that we're all interested in. I just wanted everyone who posts here to know that their contributions are appreciated by me, at any rate and FTN often serves as a starting point for me to look at areas I haven't before and also regularly challenges my own point if view and helps me look at things from different perspectives (however much I won't admit it when embroiled in a robust exchange!) So if you all keep posting, I'll keep reading.

I think that's all. Anyone for coffee? I could use a cup after all that.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 9:48 am

Jacob Rees-Mogg is proving more malign than I had hitherto thought. I confess to being one of those who - never having paid an awful lot of attention to the content of his utterences - had considered him to be a mildly entertaining upper-class twit and not to be taken too seriously (ie not in the Boris Johnson mould).

The right-wing is getting braver. Being forced to take Jacob Rees-Mogg seriously is extremely worrying.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 9:55 am

Great post willow.

There's more we generally agree with than disagree. This is still my come to place for policy related information. The more doing this the better.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 9:57 am

PorFavor wrote:Jacob Rees-Mogg is proving more malign than I had hitherto thought. I confess to being one of those who - never having paid an awful lot of attention to the content of his utterences - had considered him to be a mildly entertaining upper-class twit and not to be taken too seriously (ie not in the Boris Johnson mould).

The right-wing is getting braver. Being forced to take Jacob Rees-Mogg seriously is extremely worrying.

I've always had a very low opinion of Rees-Mogg. He can't help being an upper-class twit, but he actively chose to make his money by investing in tobacco and fracking in emerging markets (ie.markets with inadequate regulations to protect people and environment) and it's on this I have judged him and found him wanting. His comments about importing goods from India made by people in unacceptable conditions and with dire consequences for their local environment don't surprise me at all. These are the people who want Brexit and I still don't want to give in and let them have it, even if they did manage to get a few more people to vote for their side. If that makes me undemocratic, so be it.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 10:00 am

PorFavor wrote:Jacob Rees-Mogg is proving more malign than I had hitherto thought. I confess to being one of those who - never having paid an awful lot of attention to the content of his utterences - had considered him to be a mildly entertaining upper-class twit and not to be taken too seriously (ie not in the Boris Johnson mould).

The right-wing is getting braver. Being forced to take Jacob Rees-Mogg seriously is extremely worrying.

My attitude to him changed after seeing that documentary series on the Commons where he talked out a decent bill on housing by a LibDem (who's name I forget now but think he lost in 2015) and you could see him smirking about it. Thoroughly nasty piece of work.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 10:32 am

About that strong economy which we're told means we'll be fine after Brexit...

Industrial output suffers biggest fall in four years - ONS

http://news.sky.com/story/industrial-ou ... s-10686389

UK industrial production fell at its fastest rate in more than four years in October, according to official figures.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) measured a 1.3% decline month-on-month - citing the temporary closure of the major Buzzard oilfield in the North Sea and lower factory output, particularly among pharmaceutical firms.

It was the sharpest decline since September 2012, the body said, when the Nexen-operated oil field also endured production woes.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 10:37 am

From Benefits and Work

"PIP mobility improvements
It’s very good news if true.

But few claimants will be holding their breath whilst they wait for further news of major improvements to the PIP mobility component and the Motability scheme.

Penny Mordaunt, minister for disabled people, told MPs last week that she was planning to:

Allow claimants to keep their Motability vehicle whilst appealing a decision that they do not qualify for the enhanced rate of the mobility component of PIP.

Allow claimants to continue receiving the mobility component of PIP if they are abroad for more than 13 weeks, even where the reason for absence is not connected with medical treatment.

Allow claimants to access the Motability scheme even if they are not in receipt of the enhanced rate of the mobility component of PIP.

That the DWP is considering letting claimants to keep their Motability vehicle whilst appealing – where they will have around a 60% chance of success – is surprising,

But it is the last of these suggestions that is the most remarkable.

The standard rate for PIP mobility is £21.80 a week. The enhanced rate is £57.45.

If Mordaunt is suggesting that claimants getting the standard rate should also have access to Motability then the obvious question is: how will the shortfall be made up?

If the proposal is that simply that standard rate mobility recipients can get a Motability vehicle provided they make up the shortfall of £35.65 a week themselves, then this is not much of a gesture.

On the other hand, it is very hard to see how the cost of a Motability vehicle could be reduced to just £21.80 a week.

Worryingly, Mordaunt referred in her announcement to people in receipt of the “higher Motability component”. By that, the minister appeared to mean the enhanced rate of the mobility component.

A minister who has yet to master even the most basic terminology relating to her portfolio is not one who inspires confidence . . . let alone hope."

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 10:40 am

In other news...the scaffolding that has been up since the house was painted has finally been taken down nearly three weeks after the decorators left.

And I now have in my possession printed and bound copies of something wot I wrote. 3 copies to be driven to Milton Keynes on Friday morning. 1 copy to be retained - couldn't possibly not keep a copy for myself!

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 10:44 am

I liked tinybgoat's post in the wee small hours, so I'll just repost it here.

From my view point, Tem was mostly talking sense whilst attacking Tubby (who was also talking sense) initially for something he didn't actually say, then eventally changing the specific attack reason . It was an unecessarily drawn out (although disturbingly entertaining) skirmish, but would have better if Tem had just pointed out his views on the S.W.P in the first place.
It's enough to know people have differing views & that there is evidence to support them, without needing to try and (usually unsuccessfully) beat someone into submission.
I'm always grateful to see those views & try and form an opinion accordingly.

Separate to this, but probably connected, a question for Robert:
Since the departure of a lot of valued posters, there has been less accusation of ftn being an echo chamber, do the ex posters feel that their new home is less or more of an echo chamber than this one?

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 10:54 am

Scary graph from Danny Dorling.
http://www.dannydorling.org/?p=5797" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The government that came to power in 2010 in the UK chose to try to spend a lower proportion of GDP on the public good than almost any other government in Europe. At one point it was even forecast to spend less than the US. It did not manage to do that, because UK debt repayments are too high, which are included in government spending. But its successor government elected in 2015 clearly aims to get close to being that internationally minimal public provider by 2020.

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 11:08 am

yahyah wrote:Morning.

Ignore the provocation Tubby, It's not worth engaging with.
Stick around, good to hear from you. You seem in fine spirit.

It is not provocation to call liars out, yahyah, espescially when they smear over a million people with their bullshit. It is principled; I wouldnt expect you to understand though.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 11:20 am

To the extent that the word provocation suggests you don't fully believe what you write, it's not provocation.

But re your comments on this board in general, your language was OTT imo and if you truly have such disdain for all of us then what are you doing here?
Life's too short to waste on criticising people you have no respect for.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 11:22 am

Interesting to see this.

Pippa Crerar ‏@PippaCrerar 11m11 minutes ago

Tory MP @neill_bob calls on Chris Grayling to stand down: "He’s acted for party reasons and not acted in the interests of London commuters".

It's about this story.

Transport Secretary Chris Grayling blocked takeover of London's suburban rail routes to keep trains out of Labour's control, leaked letter reveals

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transpor ... 14216.html

The Transport Secretary was today accused of putting party politics ahead of commuters after a leaked letter revealed he opposed handing over control of suburban rail to keep it “out of the clutches” of Labour.

Chris Grayling formally rejected Sadiq Khan’s bid to take over commuter routes yesterday when he dismissed the plan as “deckchair shifting” with no real improvement for passengers.

But in a letter written before the new Mayor took over, he admitted he was against rail devolution to keep services away from any future Labour mayor, rather than because of the impact on commuters.

In the private note sent to former mayor Boris Johnson three years ago he claimed he had “no fears” over the future of services if the Tories were still running City Hall.

Off you go Grayling. Awful politician - just thoroughly incompetent.

StephenDolan · Post by **StephenDolan** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 11:25 am

Imho this isn't an echo chamber as a repetition chamber. Same arguments, different day.

I quite enjoyed tinyclanger2 post from this day in history style posting, even if it was a bit tongue in cheek. Any chance of this being a standard thing? Reflection on where we specifically were at some point in the past instead of the memories broad brushstrokes I find interesting. Could just be me

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 11:26 am

tinyclanger2 wrote:It's not - or rather in my view isn't - "us and them". Temulkar can be a bit rude but he can also liven things up.

Personally I want lots of people here - whether I agree with them or not. I don't like the personal abuse or ganging up, but can cope with it if it keeps things together. (dons blue hat) There is a very large difference however between being tacit and actively approving.

Yes, this. At the end of the day both Tubby and Tem have useful things to say.

It was excellent to see Robert S popping in as well.

Lost Soul · Post by **Lost Soul** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 11:34 am

Finally - The chairmen of the board's plea is answered :

https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... omers-find" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 11:44 am

gilsey wrote:To the extent that the word provocation suggests you don't fully believe what you write, it's not provocation.

But re your comments on this board in general, your language was OTT imo and if you truly have such disdain for all of us then what are you doing here?
Life's too short to waste on criticising people you have no respect for.

I think it's OTT to claim a million people are dupes for rape apologists in a desperate attempt to smear an individual. And I dont hold everyone in disdain, only those who choose to lie and smear. We all complain when Faragists or Trumpers spread their poison, and call it out - why should supposedly left wing commentators be allowed to post lies just as mendacious and disgusting and not be called out? We're supposed to be better than the right, have principles and morality that we stand for. If we allow oour own side to debaase others with deceit we are no better thann the kippers, we demean ourselves. I will not stand for it anymore.

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 11:57 am

So we're going to be no further forward on the "Brexit" plan after today.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 12:29 pm

PorFavor wrote:So we're going to be no further forward on the "Brexit" plan after today.

Ian Mearns MP ‏@IanMearnsMP 3m3 minutes ago

Ian Mearns MP Retweeted Mirror Politics

Hard Brexit, Soft Brexit, UnReady Brexit, more like Dogs Brexit.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 12:30 pm

Good-afternoon, everyone.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 12:32 pm

A "win" for Emily Thornberry at PMQs apparently. The PM is away.

Her successful approach was to quote substitute David Lidington on Brexit, starting her question with

"Does he agree with himself...?"

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 12:36 pm

Caroline Lucas Verified account  ‏@CarolineLucas · 12m12 minutes ago

Surely the non-answers from Lidington should persuade Labour not to back Govt amendment today? There simply is no plan. #PMQs

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 12:36 pm

Ah, very nice from ET there

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 12:37 pm

Richard Burgon MP Verified account  ‏@RichardBurgon · 10m10 minutes ago

At #PMQs @EmilyThornberry asked and asked Tory Government to finally provide basic information on Brexit plan. Again they failed and failed.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 12:37 pm

It's hotting up. Anyone know when the Labour debate is likely to start?

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 12:49 pm

Temulkar wrote:
gilsey wrote:To the extent that the word provocation suggests you don't fully believe what you write, it's not provocation.

But re your comments on this board in general, your language was OTT imo and if you truly have such disdain for all of us then what are you doing here?
Life's too short to waste on criticising people you have no respect for.
I think it's OTT to claim a million people are dupes for rape apologists in a desperate attempt to smear an individual. And I dont hold everyone in disdain, only those who choose to lie and smear. We all complain when Faragists or Trumpers spread their poison, and call it out - why should supposedly left wing commentators be allowed to post lies just as mendacious and disgusting and not be called out? We're supposed to be better than the right, have principles and morality that we stand for. If we allow oour own side to debaase others with deceit we are no better thann the kippers, we demean ourselves. I will not stand for it anymore.

"Convenor Weyman Bennett- SWP".

You can't get away from that. It isn't a smear. People explicitly put it to Corbyn before he attended but he did anyway. It would have been a huge blow to the guilty SWP high ups if the Labour contingent had not attended.

That's a misjudgement. I don't think Sturgeon would have made it, as I said. And I think she, as a popular centre left leader in the UK, is the yardstick for Corbyn.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 12:58 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Caroline Lucas Verified account  ‏@CarolineLucas · 12m12 minutes ago

Surely the non-answers from Lidington should persuade Labour not to back Govt amendment today? There simply is no plan. #PMQs

It seems a bad time to start the clock anyway. French and German elections will put the two biggest EU members on edge till November. That's 8 months basically wasted.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 12:59 pm

Angela Rayner MP ‏@AngelaRayner · 24m24 minutes ago

The PM said it was a Red,White and Blue Brexit, however after today at #PMQs it seems to be a Grey Brexit, terrible answers from PM stand in

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:15 pm

Oh do bore off you tiresome twonk.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:16 pm

Says Rebecca, [not RR], who swore at more people in a grumpy mood than a grumpy git with piles ever did.

You couldn't make it up as a certain politician might say.
Is the site called ''Bitter, angry, and always right'' ?

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:18 pm

Rusty wrote:As you might also expect, the place is a veritable smorgasbord of barely-literate drivel like that and I thoroughly encourage the uninitiated to take a look and have a chuckle as I have. Don't bank on getting to post anything however, as first comments are moderated by Egophemerid and pals to ensure that nothing remotely challenging or interesting is accidentally posted amidst the loud echos. No sign of 'Sharon' yet mind you, which is odd as all of 'her' favourite posters are there...

Can I just point out that this is simply incorrect!

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:20 pm

Do they spend all their time peeking here to get a hit of outrage, then send in the periodic flamer to make trouble ? Dearie me.

Life is far too short. Very sad. Had respect for some of them once.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:20 pm

Please don't take the bait. It's exactly what s/h/it wants.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:22 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:Please don't take the bait. It's exactly what s/h/it wants.

Indeed. Happy to point out simple inaccuracies though

Temulkar · Post by **Temulkar** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:25 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Temulkar wrote:
gilsey wrote:To the extent that the word provocation suggests you don't fully believe what you write, it's not provocation.

But re your comments on this board in general, your language was OTT imo and if you truly have such disdain for all of us then what are you doing here?
Life's too short to waste on criticising people you have no respect for.
I think it's OTT to claim a million people are dupes for rape apologists in a desperate attempt to smear an individual. And I dont hold everyone in disdain, only those who choose to lie and smear. We all complain when Faragists or Trumpers spread their poison, and call it out - why should supposedly left wing commentators be allowed to post lies just as mendacious and disgusting and not be called out? We're supposed to be better than the right, have principles and morality that we stand for. If we allow oour own side to debaase others with deceit we are no better thann the kippers, we demean ourselves. I will not stand for it anymore.
"Convenor Weyman Bennett- SWP".

You can't get away from that. It isn't a smear. People explicitly put it to Corbyn before he attended but he did anyway. It would have been a huge blow to the guilty SWP high ups if the Labour contingent had not attended.

That's a misjudgement. I don't think Sturgeon would have made it, as I said. And I think she, as a popular centre left leader in the UK, is the yardstick for Corbyn.

It was a lie and a smear, and you knnow it. It is frankly pathetic you havent got the decency to apologise for you bullshit. You demean yourself asnd this bboard. The green party are not dupes for the SWP, NUT are not dupes for the SWP, Amnesty are not dupes for the SWP, Labour and their leadership are not dupes for the SWP. Nonne of us support rape apologists, and the inference that corbyn hangs out with rape apologists is disgusting. You smeared a million + people with your lies. Stand up to Racism and Stop the War, are not fronts for the SWP. They are npt recruiting vehicles, because as we know their already miniscule membership is still dwindlng. Every smear you made last night was easily disproven by the actual facts. You're a liar.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:26 pm

So as far as I can tell, May has promised that she will publish a Brexit "plan" by Jan 2017 at latest.

This appears to be a win for Labour. But, reasonably enough, some MPs, including Lucas and some Labour ones, won't vote for the Tory amendment because:
(a) the plan could be a crock of the proverbial and what would Parliament do then?
(b) voting for the amendment appears by inference to be condoning the triggering of article 50.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:26 pm

That site's probably in meltdown now. Needed a good giggle, this has provided it.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:29 pm

yahyah wrote:That site's probably in meltdown now. Needed a good giggle, this has provided it.

No I don't think it has. And they should be left in peace.

yahyah · Post by **yahyah** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:32 pm

Yes, leave them in peace. I don't even know their website address and certainly have no interest in going there. What on earth would be the point ?

I meant that the purists would be melting down after getting their daily peek here, not suggesting others troll or flame them. That would be counterproductive and just giving them what they want.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:39 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:So as far as I can tell, May has promised that she will publish a Brexit "plan" by Jan 2017 at latest.

This appears to be a win for Labour. But, reasonably enough, some MPs, including Lucas and some Labour ones, won't vote for the Tory amendment because:
(a) the plan could be a crock of the proverbial and what would Parliament do then?
(b) voting for the amendment appears by inference to be condoning the triggering of article 50.

I think they're right to be wary. Although Corbyn has indicated he will vote for article 50 whatever, it's only an indication and could easily change if something happened to significantly change things. Voting for this amendment now is essentially voting for the government to trigger article 50 as and when it wants, neatly getting around a potential ruling against their using the royal prerogative in a similar way.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:42 pm

Willow904 wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:So as far as I can tell, May has promised that she will publish a Brexit "plan" by Jan 2017 at latest.

This appears to be a win for Labour. But, reasonably enough, some MPs, including Lucas and some Labour ones, won't vote for the Tory amendment because:
(a) the plan could be a crock of the proverbial and what would Parliament do then?
(b) voting for the amendment appears by inference to be condoning the triggering of article 50.
I think they're right to be wary. Although Corbyn has indicated he will vote for article 50 whatever, it's only an indication and could easily change if something happened to significantly change things. Voting for this amendment now is essentially voting for the government to trigger article 50 as and when it wants, neatly getting around a potential ruling against their using the royal prerogative in a similar way.

That's the point some of us have been making all along, the situation is highly fluid and Labour people (on either "side") should be wary of making too many cast iron commitments right now. Making the government "own" what emerges (especially if it is as unappetising as it might well be) should be the priority.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:42 pm

Temulkar wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Temulkar wrote: I think it's OTT to claim a million people are dupes for rape apologists in a desperate attempt to smear an individual. And I dont hold everyone in disdain, only those who choose to lie and smear. We all complain when Faragists or Trumpers spread their poison, and call it out - why should supposedly left wing commentators be allowed to post lies just as mendacious and disgusting and not be called out? We're supposed to be better than the right, have principles and morality that we stand for. If we allow oour own side to debaase others with deceit we are no better thann the kippers, we demean ourselves. I will not stand for it anymore.
"Convenor Weyman Bennett- SWP".

You can't get away from that. It isn't a smear. People explicitly put it to Corbyn before he attended but he did anyway. It would have been a huge blow to the guilty SWP high ups if the Labour contingent had not attended.

That's a misjudgement. I don't think Sturgeon would have made it, as I said. And I think she, as a popular centre left leader in the UK, is the yardstick for Corbyn.
It was a lie and a smear, and you knnow it. It is frankly pathetic you havent got the decency to apologise for you bullshit. You demean yourself asnd this bboard. The green party are not dupes for the SWP, NUT are not dupes for the SWP, Amnesty are not dupes for the SWP, Labour and their leadership are not dupes for the SWP. Nonne of us support rape apologists, and the inference that corbyn hangs out with rape apologists is disgusting. You smeared a million + people with your lies. Stand up to Racism and Stop the War, are not fronts for the SWP. They are npt recruiting vehicles, because as we know their already miniscule membership is still dwindlng. Every smear you made last night was easily disproven by the actual facts. You're a liar.

There's a lie right there. I never said Stop the War was an SWP front. I said it has Putin apologists (and indeed Assad apologists) involved with it. Caroline Lucas withdrew from it because it's become a joke.

"Million plus" people is utterly infathomable. Probably a lie as well.

For the hundredth time, it doesn't matter whether the SWP are recruiting many members through Stand Up to Racism. They're there, convening it, laundering their reputation, trying to get back into left politics with no apology for what they did. People who used to be in the SWP will tell you this.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 07 Dec, 2016 1:43 pm

It really isn't worth talking about this any more.