Topic: Doesn't matter who you vote for as long as it's for the right reasons!

[Nobby Reserve]

I think that ship well and truly sailed in 2019, the current England team and manager represents a fightback against the racist, xenophobic neanderthals - and thats just in the government.

What would I pay to see Hendo refuse to shake that bastard of a PM's hand and instead nut the c*nt. Instant landslide amongst 80% under 40.

It will be interesting to see how things pan out over the weekend, I saw pictures of the police trying to break up parties in London last night - good luck doing that if England does a madness. OK to have 60k at a 'trial' cough cough event - but not if people want to celebrate. Meanwhile, I see the finals at Wimbledon will be at full capacity. Standard.

I suspect most English PL footballers are Tories. Tax innit?

[Commie Bobbie]

I suspect most English PL footballers are Tories. Tax innit?

I wouldn't be shocked to be honest, but think those from supposed working class backgrounds are probably of a redder hue - obviously Carra is the obvious example - do know Sterling campaigned with Tulip Siddiq at the last GE.

[rob1966]

I wouldn't be shocked to be honest, but think those from supposed working class backgrounds are probably of a redder hue - obviously Carra is the obvious example - do know Sterling campaigned with Tulip Siddiq at the last GE.

I'd be amazed if Rashford was a Tory

[Nobby Reserve]

I'd be amazed if Rashford was a Tory

I said 'most' not 'all'.

[Wilmo]

I suspect most English PL footballers are Tories. Tax innit?

I'd be surprised if most of them vote tbf, not that that's much better

[Riquende]

I suspect most English PL footballers are Tories. Tax innit?

I think you can vote in a way that aligns with your interests without becoming a party cheerleader. Enough people on here have talked about reluctant votes for various recent stripes of Labour.

[bigbonedrawky]

Even Chakrabarti has forgotten she wrote a report. Think it happened as soon as she got the ermine though. Kind of overwritten by the legal necessity of the EHRC, to be fair. Not sure who Grima is,

I'm  sure she has'nt and neither have the EHRC infact the legal necessity of the EHRC' as you put it, seeks to ensure  "the steps taken by the Party to implement the recommendation's made in the Chakrabati, Royal and Home Affairs Select Committee reports' are carried out.

Grima is a character in one of the finest pieces of British literature ever written..

[Wild Romany Boy]

I'm  sure she has'nt and neither have the EHRC infact the legal necessity of the EHRC' as you put it, seeks to ensure  "the steps taken by the Party to implement the recommendation's made in the Chakrabati, Royal and Home Affairs Select Committee reports' are carried out.

Grima is a character in one of the finest pieces of British literature ever written..

Yeah, the report vindicates Shami's one in that it says, outright, that not enough was done to implement the recommendations.

Full honesty: I never finished reading Lord of the Rings. I only got 2/3 of the way through The Hobbit to be honest.

[classycarra]

Yeah, the report vindicates Shami's one in that it says, outright, that not enough was done to implement the recommendations.

Full honesty: I never finished reading Lord of the Rings. I only got 2/3 of the way through The Hobbit to be honest.

Don't think vindicate is the word I'd use. The EHRC report documents all the failures to take on board recommendations and to provide training as outlined in the Chakrabarti report.

Her report led with the 'The Labour Party is not overrun by antisemitism.." and then referred to "An occasionally toxic atmosphere is in danger of shutting down free speech". The EHRC report found that neither of these diminishing statements were the case when they found the party had acted unlawfully.

Last point on why I would think saying she was vindicated would be an odd choice of word. The countless failures to take on board recommendations and to train staff, as outlined in EHRC, might just have something to do with her political appointment to the house of lords a month after it was published in July 2016, and then promotion to the shadow cabinet.

[Wild Romany Boy]

Don't think vindicate is the word I'd use. The EHRC report documents all the failures to take on board recommendations and to provide training as outlined in the Chakrabarti report.

Her report led with the 'The Labour Party is not overrun by antisemitism.." and then referred to "An occasionally toxic atmosphere is in danger of shutting down free speech". The EHRC report found that neither of these diminishing statements were the case when they found the party had acted unlawfully.

Last point on why I would think saying she was vindicated would be an odd choice of word. The countless failures to take on board recommendations and to train staff, as outlined in EHRC, might just have something to do with her political appointment to the house of lords a month after it was published in July 2016, and then promotion to the shadow cabinet.

Don't think that you can blame her promotion on the fact that Labour didn't deal with anti-Semitism correctly. Why would she be behind not putting in her own recommendations? I suspect we blame different people in the main for not implementing those recommendations at all or not quickly enough, but it wasn't down to her to implement those actions. And I am not her biggest fan and she 100% should not have done the report AND had the promotion, it was an either/or that has made her report, one that does come across largely well from the EHRC's own report, look heavily compromised as a result.

And on the unlawful point, I believe there were 2 instances where the party acted unlawfully. I believe that both of those instances occurred after 2016.

I'll accept you blaming Corbyn, but her report making recommendations that were not taken on board hardly makes Chakrabarti the main culprit here. These recommendations are still not being used effectively.

[Zeb]

I'm  sure she has'nt and neither have the EHRC infact the legal necessity of the EHRC' as you put it, seeks to ensure  "the steps taken by the Party to implement the recommendation's made in the Chakrabati, Royal and Home Affairs Select Committee reports' are carried out.

No, it wasn't to do that. What it did do was point out that Labour had had multiple reports all pointing to similar issues and not much was done about any of them. Hence the legally binding findings of the EHRC. Not sure where your quote is from, this is from the Executive Summary, p.5.

The investigation aimed to determine whether the Labour Party committed a breach of the Equality Act 2010, related to Jewish ethnicity or Judaism, against its members, associates or guests, through the actions of its employees or agents. We also investigated the steps taken by the Party to implement the recommendations of previous reports, and whether the Party handled antisemitism complaints lawfully, efficiently and effectively.

[classycarra]

Don't think that you can blame her promotion on the fact that Labour didn't deal with anti-Semitism correctly. Why would she be behind not putting in her own recommendations? I suspect we blame different people in the main for not implementing those recommendations at all or not quickly enough, but it wasn't down to her to implement those actions.

She led the inquiry, of course she had some responsibility to implement the actions. Especially once she became a senior leader in the party following her promotions (not to mention she had equality and legal experience that those promoting her lacked).

And I am not her biggest fan and she 100% should not have done the report AND had the promotion, it was an either/or that has made her report, one that does come across largely well from the EHRC's own report, look heavily compromised as a result.

Agreed

And on the unlawful point, I believe there were 2 instances where the party acted unlawfully. I believe that both of those instances occurred after 2016.

I think you've mixed up unlawful with the two examples of unlawful harassment by its agents, in this case an NEC member and a local councillor.

You're right in that the investigations (or lack of) took place following the Chakrabarti report but one (Livingstone's) started before the report in April 2016 (the specifics that were investigated, obviously he's been a bigoted crank much longer). 

I'll accept you blaming Corbyn, but her report making recommendations that were not taken on board hardly makes Chakrabarti the main culprit here. These recommendations are still not being used effectively.

I don't really follow how this links to what I said, as I don't think I called Chakrabarti the main culprit nor mentioned Corbyn.

Which recommendations are not being used effectively at the moment, do you have some examples?

[Wild Romany Boy]

She led the inquiry, of course she had some responsibility to implement the actions. Especially once she became a senior leader in the party following her promotions (not to mention she had equality and legal experience that those promoting her lacked). Agreed I think you've mixed up unlawful with the two examples of unlawful harassment by its agents, in this case an NEC member and a local councillor.

You're right in that the investigations (or lack of) took place following the Chakrabarti report but one (Livingstone's) started before the report in April 2016 (the specifics that were investigated, obviously he's been a bigoted crank much longer). 
I don't really follow how this links to what I said, as I don't think I called Chakrabarti the main culprit nor mentioned Corbyn.

Which recommendations are not being used effectively at the moment, do you have some examples?

1. Although it would be sensible, in some ways, it is rarely, if ever, the job of those doing the report to make sure that it is implemented. It was, possibly, not even her brief to be honest. Though I do kind of agree with Zeb in that the vigour she had before doing the report disappeared when she was part of the leadership team.

2. I am, almost certainly, mixing stuff up there. I have read it 3 times but it has been some time since I have done so.

3. I was careless, dare I say muddled, in my language there. I just feel like Chakrabarti gets a lot of flack from people who haven't actually read the report, just because it fits an easy narrative. She certainly wasn't the driving problem in the Labour party.

4. This is where I can have some say, because I have been on both sides of this; I have made complaints and a complain was made about me (I was vindicated fully in this scenario)

a. The recommendation of 'a readily accessible complaints procedure explaining with sufficient clarity how and to whom complaints are to be made' is not there yet. It got better under Formby but it hasn't, really ever, been fit for purpose. Under McNicol it seemed aggressively factional.

b. The recommendation to record the identity of complainants to faciliate genuine, sensitive communication and aftercare is not there yet. I made my complaint in May 2020, nothing heard back, and I know many who have been kept in the dark about, quite substantial, complaints that they have made.

c. The recommendation of making 'those in respect of whom allegations have been made' clearly 'informed of the allegation(s) made against them, their factual basis and the identity of the complainant - unless there are good reasons not to do so' is also well behind. Got better under Formby.

d. There is not a comprehensive complaints procedure at the moment, not one that is fit for purpose, and this was a key recommendation of the report. Training is substandard too. My friend on the inside still believes that staff, including her, lack the skills necessary for complaints due to this.

e. I believe that the GLU staff still lack the skills necessary to run a complex complaints system (it is overly complex to be honest) and this was a firm recommendation of the report.

All of this is highlighted in the EHRC one btw. It's worth remembering that the complaints process has always been shite, it's still shite, and it's time they actually implemeted the findings of reports that they actually do. Why they did not do this for Chakrabarti is probably a point of disagreement amongst us, but I don't think that the report's credibility suffers because of that.

[rob1966]

Cannot see anything wrong with what he said

SNP MSP James Dornan reported over Rees-Mogg 'rot in hell' tweet

A post from the Twitter account of an SNP MSP which suggested Jacob Rees-Mogg will "undoubtedly rot in hell" has been reported to the Standards Commission for Scotland.

James Dornan, who represents Glasgow Cathcart, was reportedly replying to the Conservative MP's post about the Nationality and Borders Bill.

Mr Dornan's account can now only be seen by those following him.

The SNP said: "It is essential such callous policies are called out."

Mr Rees-Mogg had quote-tweeted a video from the Commons Leader account, adding: "The bands of blighters bringing illegal entrants to Blighty will be broken up by this brilliant borders bill."

The reply from Mr Dornan's account read: "Hope you remember this the next time you go to confession.

"You and your cronies are already responsible for the deaths of thousands and you're now happy to see the most desperate people in the world suffer and drown.

"If your god exists you will undoubtedly rot in hell."

Mr Dornan's account has since been protected, meaning only the people following him can see any posts made.

'Poisonous and beyond the pale'
Scottish Conservative chief whip Stephen Kerr MSP criticised his Holyrood colleague and called for an immediate apology.

Mr Kerr said: "These comments from James Dornan were poisonous and beyond the pale.

"He is well known for his outbursts on Twitter but this vitriol simply has no place in respectful political debate.

"This gaffe-prone MSP has once again shown his nasty side and shamefully brought religion into his anger at a fellow elected representative."

He added: "It is clear that he wasn't interested in adhering to the MSPs' Code of Conduct when posting this reply, which is why this post has now been reported to the Standards Commissioner.

"James Dornan must urgently apologise for this wholly unacceptable and abusive behaviour immediately."

'Immigration regime'
An SNP spokesman said: "The Scottish Tories' desperation to pass judgment on a tweet while utterly failing to condemn the immigration regime of their bosses in the Westminster government speaks volumes.

"While some people appear determined to be offended regardless of what SNP politicians say, there are fewer things more offensive than a policy which threatens to jail desperate refugees for the crime of trying to save their own lives - and the lives of their infant children - and it is essential such callous policies are called out."

The Standards Commission for Scotland has been contacted for comment.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57785825

[Elmo!]

Cannot see anything wrong with what he said

SNP MSP James Dornan reported over Rees-Mogg 'rot in hell' tweet

A post from the Twitter account of an SNP MSP which suggested Jacob Rees-Mogg will "undoubtedly rot in hell" has been reported to the Standards Commission for Scotland.

James Dornan, who represents Glasgow Cathcart, was reportedly replying to the Conservative MP's post about the Nationality and Borders Bill.

Mr Dornan's account can now only be seen by those following him.

The SNP said: "It is essential such callous policies are called out."

Mr Rees-Mogg had quote-tweeted a video from the Commons Leader account, adding: "The bands of blighters bringing illegal entrants to Blighty will be broken up by this brilliant borders bill."

The reply from Mr Dornan's account read: "Hope you remember this the next time you go to confession.

"You and your cronies are already responsible for the deaths of thousands and you're now happy to see the most desperate people in the world suffer and drown.

"If your god exists you will undoubtedly rot in hell."

Mr Dornan's account has since been protected, meaning only the people following him can see any posts made.

'Poisonous and beyond the pale'
Scottish Conservative chief whip Stephen Kerr MSP criticised his Holyrood colleague and called for an immediate apology.

Mr Kerr said: "These comments from James Dornan were poisonous and beyond the pale.

"He is well known for his outbursts on Twitter but this vitriol simply has no place in respectful political debate.

"This gaffe-prone MSP has once again shown his nasty side and shamefully brought religion into his anger at a fellow elected representative."

He added: "It is clear that he wasn't interested in adhering to the MSPs' Code of Conduct when posting this reply, which is why this post has now been reported to the Standards Commissioner.

"James Dornan must urgently apologise for this wholly unacceptable and abusive behaviour immediately."

'Immigration regime'
An SNP spokesman said: "The Scottish Tories' desperation to pass judgment on a tweet while utterly failing to condemn the immigration regime of their bosses in the Westminster government speaks volumes.

"While some people appear determined to be offended regardless of what SNP politicians say, there are fewer things more offensive than a policy which threatens to jail desperate refugees for the crime of trying to save their own lives - and the lives of their infant children - and it is essential such callous policies are called out."

The Standards Commission for Scotland has been contacted for comment.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-57785825

I don't either really but Dornan is a moron who has a long history of making a tit of himself on Twitter, and could really do with quitting it altogether.

[Circa1892]

I think it was the “your god” bit people jumped on?

[Elmo!]

I think it was the “your god” bit people jumped on?

I'm pretty sure Dornan is catholic himself though could be a non-practising catholic I suppose.

[So… Howard Philips]

I'm pretty sure Dornan is catholic himself though could be a non-practising catholic I suppose.

Would have been better for Dornan to refer Lord Snooty to Pope Feancis's comments on refugees;

https://www.xavier.edu/jesuitresource/online-resources/quote-archive1/pope-francis

[bigbonedrawky]

No, it wasn't to do that. What it did do was point out that Labour had had multiple reports all pointing to similar issues and not much was done about any of them. Hence the legally binding findings of the EHRC. Not sure where your quote is from, this is from the Executive Summary, p.5.

Its the last sentence ( terms of reference) just above the " download as PDF " button on the EHRC website.
I realise the Chakrabati report had different terms of reference ie how widspread was anti-semitism within The Labour Party and attempted to define a new definition of anti-Semitism by drawing parallels with other form of racism.
While the EHRC report dealt with how The Labour Party dealt specifically with cases of anti-Semitism once they had been identified as such, however...
Point is I'm sure Chakrabati and the EHRC haven't forgot about it. Yet Starmer who is well aware of the definitions of racism highlighted in the Chakrabati report has either forgotten or chosen to ignore it or he was somehow unaware  David Abrahams was some kind of racial /ethno - fascist, when he personally invited him back into The Labour Party.
Now given the damage these issues have caused to The Labour Party over the last few years and his claims of a zero tolerance coupled with his hardline and somewhat authoritarian approach to one of the forms of racism highlighted in the Chakrabati report...I find it astonishing he did what he did.

PS
I'm fairly sure you know of the beliefs /claims of Mr Abrahams regarding "divided loyalty" "nature of the  beast" etc and his retro defence of apartheid SA  ( we don't need a code book) but given the bubbles we can find ourselves in nowadays, there's a chance you don't.
However one thing I do know is, neither of us ( and I've never even been a member) would want that c*nt anywhere near The Labour Party.

[Zeb]

Its the last sentence ( terms of reference) just above the " download as PDF " button on the EHRC website.
I realise the Chakrabati report had different terms of reference ie how widspread was anti-semitism within The Labour Party and attempted to define a new definition of anti-Semitism by drawing parallels with other form of racism.
While the EHRC report dealt with how The Labour Party dealt specifically with cases of anti-Semitism once they had been identified as such, however...
Point is I'm sure Chakrabati and the EHRC haven't forgot about it. Yet Starmer who is well aware of the definitions of racism highlighted in the Chakrabati report has either forgotten or chosen to ignore it or he was somehow unaware  David Abrahams was some kind of racial /ethno - fascist, when he personally invited him back into The Labour Party.
Now given the damage these issues have caused to The Labour Party over the last few years and his claims of a zero tolerance coupled with his hardline and somewhat authoritarian approach to one of the forms of racism highlighted in the Chakrabati report...I find it astonishing he did what he did.

PS
I'm fairly sure you know of the beliefs /claims of Mr Abrahams regarding "divided loyalty" "nature of the  beast" etc and his retro defence of apartheid SA  ( we don't need a code book) but given the bubbles we can find ourselves in nowadays, there's a chance you don't.
However one thing I do know is, neither of us ( and I've never even been a member) would want that c*nt anywhere near The Labour Party.

Point I was making, as the EHRC pointed out, was that about the only thing in the Chakrabarti report actually actioned was having legal advice. And that took two years to do and the advice was treated as optional.

Have absolutely no idea who David Abrahams is, no. Or rather, if it's the person I know of that name I'd rather not imagine whose blog you've been reading.

[bigbonedrawky]

Point I was making, as the EHRC pointed out, was that about the only thing in the Chakrabarti report actually actioned was having legal advice. And that took two years to do and the advice was treated as optional.

Have absolutely no idea who David Abrahams is, no. Or rather, if it's the person I know of that name I'd rather not imagine whose blog you've been reading.

You need to get out of your bubble then or keep letting your imagination run away with you.
Blog, video, national newspapers your not as clued up about your party as I gave you credit for.

[Zeb]

You need to get out of your bubble then or keep letting your imagination run away with you.
Blog, video, national newspapers your not as clued up about your party as I gave you credit for.

Oh crikey, I certainly don't know what the crank left's current talking point is on any given day. Think we can all safely assume that it'll be a Jew, or the Jews, or Israel, and various circumlocutions around those things, so I'll pass on following them down a rabbit hole of selective quotations and interpretations. Sure anything serious will have been reported under the party's processes which they were assuring us just last year were absolutely wonderful. Even better, they've been improved since so if there's anything to it then you'd think appropriate action and/or sanctions would be taken.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

You need to get out of your bubble then or keep letting your imagination run away with you.
Blog, video, national newspapers your not as clued up about your party as I gave you credit for.

bubble bobble?

[bigbonedrawky]

Oh crikey, I certainly don't know what the crank left's current talking point is on any given day. Think we can all safely assume that it'll be a Jew, or the Jews, or Israel, and various circumlocutions around those things, so I'll pass on following them down a rabbit hole of selective quotations and interpretations. Sure anything serious will have been reported under the party's processes which they were assuring us just last year were absolutely wonderful. Even better, they've been improved since so if there's anything to it then you'd think appropriate action and/or sanctions would be taken.

Well you said you did'nt want bigots in your party which is fair enough and then you extended it to those who you perceive to be turning a blind eye to bigotry, anywhere near your party.
I'm sorry Starmer doesn't live up to your extended Ideals but unfortunately The Labour Party needs the money and he has turned a blind eye to bigotry.
You can  continue to shoot the messenger and feign ignorance all you like but sooner or later it starts to look like your doing the very thing, you criticise the other factions for.

bubble bobble?

Toil and trouble, these algorithms have a lot to answer for.

[Zeb]

Well you said you did'nt want bigots in your party which is fair enough and then you extended it to those who you perceive to be turning a blind eye to bigotry, anywhere near your party.
I'm sorry Starmer doesn't live up to your extended Ideals but unfortunately The Labour Party needs the money and he has turned a blind eye to bigotry.
You can  continue to shoot the messenger and feign ignorance all you like but sooner or later it starts to look like your doing the very thing, you criticise the other factions for.

Aye, saying that if there's bigotry to report it for the party to deal with is definitely all kinds of crazy. (Starmer has no role in the process. None.) I really must move into reading the blogs of cranks who can't find a Jew in British politics without seeing a conspiracy theory to link to them. Soz for not being convinced by Hamas supporters shouting 'ethnofascist'.

[rob1966]

At least the c*nt can't use England winning the Euros as a shield now.

[killer-heels]

Hopefully Boris drank himself to death.

[bigbonedrawky]

Aye, saying that if there's bigotry to report it for the party to deal with is definitely all kinds of crazy. (Starmer has no role in the process. None.) I really must move into reading the blogs of cranks who can't find a Jew in British politics without seeing a conspiracy theory to link to them. Soz for not being convinced by Hamas supporters shouting 'ethnofascist'.

Here we go again alway boils down same thing with you doesn't it... How simple your life must be. 

And no it's a Liverpool supporter shouting ethnofascist.

[Zeb]

Here we go again alway boils down same thing with you doesn't it... How simple your life must be. 

And no it's a Liverpool supporter shouting ethnofascist.

Aw thank you. It's wonderful not diving into a slurry pit, yeah. Should try it rather than running round looking for Grima Wormtongue some time.

[bigbonedrawky]

Aw thank you. It's wonderful not diving into a slurry pit, yeah. Should try it rather than running round looking for Grima Wormtongue some time.

First you claim you dont know who he is or what he said. Then you claim its a case of selective quotations and interpretations really !! It tells me you know exactly who he is and what he said on his own tw@ter account . But to then defend him and claim it's anti-Semitic for calling out his racism... f*cking hell that some orwellian bullsh *t your pushing right there.
But dont let that stop you dismissing anyone who disagrees with you as a bigot ,anti-semite or even hamas supporter... Make's life a whole lot simpler for you doesn't it.
PS
You should quit your membership of the The Labour Party though, you don't want the likes of you, anywhere near it do you.

[Zeb]

First you claim you dont know who he is or what he said. Then you claim its a case of selective quotations and interpretations really !!

You: "No it's the Chakrabati report he's ignoring it could of course be the Grima's in his ear who led him to ignore it... "
My reply: " Not sure who Grima is, I'm with Simon Fletcher (who'd obviously know) that the idea of some particular figures being involved are piss funny projections from those imagining them."


Have fun bigbonedrawky. x

[Nobby Reserve]

Aye, saying that if there's bigotry to report it for the party to deal with is definitely all kinds of crazy. (Starmer has no role in the process. None.) I really must move into reading the blogs of cranks who can't find a Jew in British politics without seeing a conspiracy theory to link to them. Soz for not being convinced by Hamas supporters shouting 'ethnofascist'.

Zzzzz...

[TepidT2O]

Thought this tweet from Warsi to Patel was interesting

Patel was complaining about racist abuse

Priti -we as govt, as @Conservatives need to think about our role in feeding this culture in our country
If we “whistle” & the”dog” reacts we cant be shocked if it barks &bites
It’s time to stop the culture wars that are feeding division
Dog whistles win votes but destroy nations

[Zeb]

Zzzzz...

Bless. You slept through a corker in bigbonedrawky's post there too.

[Kenny's Jacket]

Thought this tweet from Warsi to Patel was interesting

Patel was complaining about racist abuse

Warsi usually comes across quite well, for one of them

[Nobby Reserve]

Bless. You slept through a corker in bigbonedrawky's post there too.

I just find it tiresome how you continuously harp on about, and try to turn all political discussion towards, anti-semitism.

[Zeb]

I just find it tiresome how you continuously harp on about, and try to turn all political discussion towards, anti-semitism.

I find it tiresome when people dive into conversations without actually reading them. We all have our burdens to bear.

[rob1966]

Warsi usually comes across quite well, for one of them

She was on The Last leg on Friday and was giving the Govt plenty of shit. I didn't realise she was a Tory at first.

[classycarra]

Zzzzz...

what a weird and childish post

I just find it tiresome how you continuously harp on about, and try to turn all political discussion towards, anti-semitism.

It was a conversation about Chakrabarti's report on... antisemitism

If yuo have a problem with it coming up as a topic, you should consider being more proactive in confronting bigotry as opposed to minimising it as you so regularly have done on here.

When confronted with clear and obvious examples of bigotry before, you minimised it saying "only examples of alleged anti-Semitism I've seen are linked to criticism of Israel and using tired, old stereotypes. I'm not saying using stereotypes is right because it isn't, but it's right at the 'soft' end of the scale" https://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=343874.msg16879067#msg16879067

And as you've said before, you don't think this bigotry is "anything to get particularly worked up about"
(https://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=343874.msg16879308#msg16879308)

Which I guess, using a more recent example, would be a bit like saying the racist abuse of Saka Rashford and Sancho last night is 'right at the soft end of the scale, cos it's just emoji's and the monkey thing is old'.

PS maybe bibbonedrawky could also consider sharing a conspiracy theory that's a bit less focused on jewish people, unlike his recent repetitions. That could help you too.

[Kenny's Jacket]

She was on The Last leg on Friday and was giving the Govt plenty of shit. I didn't realise she was a Tory at first.

Yeah I saw that he seems a good egg