Peter Hain's department has lost thousands of records which have been 
"found" on a roundabout in Exeter! He is launching an "urgent enquiry"!

An incompetence?

All the New Labour supporters have gone very quiet on this group. I wonder 
why?

"Not Today"  wrote in message 
news:1inv7k.3dp.19.1@news.alt.net...
> Peter Hain's department has lost thousands of records which have been 
> "found" on a roundabout in Exeter! He is launching an "urgent enquiry"!
>
> An incompetence?
>
> All the New Labour supporters have gone very quiet on this group. I wonder 
> why?

Gone very quiet?  I've been stunned into silence by learning from your 
previous post that your great-grandfather helped to found the Labour Party. 
Well done, that man!
-- 
Harry Keane

"Harry Keane"  wrote in message
news:Q5akj.153919$036.66508@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> "Not Today"  wrote in message
> news:1inv7k.3dp.19.1@news.alt.net...
>> Peter Hain's department has lost thousands of records which have been
>> "found" on a roundabout in Exeter! He is launching an "urgent enquiry"!
>>
>> An incompetence?
>>
>> All the New Labour supporters have gone very quiet on this group. I
>> wonder why?
>
> Gone very quiet?  I've been stunned into silence by learning from your
> previous post that your great-grandfather helped to found the Labour
> Party. Well done, that man!

You would be even more stunned to know that in my youth I was left of Mao
Tse-tung.  But in youth we are all daft are we not? :-)

To be serious, my family stopped being socialist when my grandfather was
forced out of his job during the Depression because he did not hold a
union card. The fact that he could do his job was not the issue, the close
shop did for him. I ignored it until I was 20ish, foolishly believing in
the "dictatorship of the proletariat". I then had a Thatcher Damascene
conversion, saw the light, and have never looked back.

"Not Today"  wrote in message 
news:1inv7k.3dp.19.1@news.alt.net...
> Peter Hain's department has lost thousands of records which have been 
> "found" on a roundabout in Exeter! He is launching an "urgent enquiry"!
>
> An incompetence?

This one is an odd one- it seems records have been found (more-or-less) in 
the same place before and the recent finder new of this (he was on the radio 
this morning).  That doesn't sound like someone has just been careless.

> All the New Labour supporters have gone very quiet on this group. I wonder 
> why?

More is the question, who do you think supports New Labour on here? I don't 
recall any post for some time that have been "pro" New Labour.

Brian

"Not Today"  wrote



> To be serious, my family stopped being socialist when my grandfather was
> forced out of his job during the Depression




Er, you're not under the impression that we have a Socialist government, are 
you?



-- 
-- 
Regards, Vince.

BUILD MORE ROADS NOW.

"Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message
news:6Fhkj.28036$a61.24115@newsfe3-win.ntli.net...
>
> "Not Today"  wrote in message
> news:1inv7k.3dp.19.1@news.alt.net...
>> Peter Hain's department has lost thousands of records which have been
>> "found" on a roundabout in Exeter! He is launching an "urgent enquiry"!
>>
>> An incompetence?
>
> This one is an odd one- it seems records have been found (more-or-less)
> in the same place before and the recent finder new of this (he was on
> the radio this morning).  That doesn't sound like someone has just been
> careless.
>
>> All the New Labour supporters have gone very quiet on this group. I
>> wonder why?
>
> More is the question, who do you think supports New Labour on here? I
> don't recall any post for some time that have been "pro" New Labour.

HK for one, although he is sensibly keeping off the subject lately apart
from the odd related funny quip which is usually very good.

The others seem to be fellow travellers in that they support New Labour
because they are anti-Tory. K of the R is one of them.

"Knight Of The Road"  wrote in message
news:wYOdnY4Hjc_gNwzanZ2dnUVZ8ternZ2d@bt.com...
>
>
> "Not Today"  wrote
>
>
>
>> To be serious, my family stopped being socialist when my grandfather
>> was
>> forced out of his job during the Depression
>
>
>
>
> Er, you're not under the impression that we have a Socialist government,
> are you?

I do not think I said that did I? However does it matter? Socialist, New
Labour, all left of centre governments have one thing in common, they
think they know what is good for us and are thus certain to fail. They
certainly know what is good for them!

"Not Today"  wrote


However does it matter? Socialist, New
> Labour, all left of centre governments have one thing in common, they
> think they know what is good for us and are thus certain to fail. They
> certainly know what is good for them!




All right-of-centre governments too.


-- 
-- 
Regards, Vince.

BUILD MORE ROADS NOW.

"Not Today"  wrote in message 
news:1ip6og.n9v.17.1@news.alt.net...
>
> "Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message
> news:6Fhkj.28036$a61.24115@newsfe3-win.ntli.net...
>>
>> "Not Today"  wrote in message
>> news:1inv7k.3dp.19.1@news.alt.net...
>>> Peter Hain's department has lost thousands of records which have been
>>> "found" on a roundabout in Exeter! He is launching an "urgent enquiry"!
>>>
>>> An incompetence?
>>
>> This one is an odd one- it seems records have been found (more-or-less)
>> in the same place before and the recent finder new of this (he was on
>> the radio this morning).  That doesn't sound like someone has just been
>> careless.
>>
>>> All the New Labour supporters have gone very quiet on this group. I
>>> wonder why?
>>
>> More is the question, who do you think supports New Labour on here? I
>> don't recall any post for some time that have been "pro" New Labour.
>
> HK for one, although he is sensibly keeping off the subject lately apart
> from the odd related funny quip which is usually very good.

My support for Labour is unwavering.  I've just been a little preoccupied 
with other matters recently and haven't had the time or energy to challenge 
some of the more fatuous whingers whose ire has been roused by the latest 
'Daily Mail' rant.
-- 
Harry Keane

"Harry Keane"  wrote in message 
news:_OIkj.229206$S37.92311@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...


> My support for Labour is unwavering.

Even when they have some (hypothetical) policy with which you disagree?

"Manky Badger" <you.must@be.joking> wrote in message 
news:jqydnXK4C5JxNg7anZ2dnUVZ8h-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
> "Harry Keane"  wrote in message 
> news:_OIkj.229206$S37.92311@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
>
>> My support for Labour is unwavering.
>
> Even when they have some (hypothetical) policy with which you disagree?

I don't slavishly follow the party line on everything (we are a democratic 
party, and debate and dissent are part of that) and I can and do make 
critical comments about Government policy.  Having said that, I do support 
the general ethos of the Party in its pursuit of a fair and just society and 
I still believe it offers the ordinary people of Britain a better chance of 
prosperity and social justice than either of the other two mainstream 
parties. I now stand, flak jacket and steel helmet at the ready, awaiting 
the inevitable onslaught from the right-wing ranters.
-- 
Harry Keane

"Harry Keane"  wrote in message 
news:I1Pkj.232989$S37.185323@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> "Manky Badger" <you.must@be.joking> wrote in message 
> news:jqydnXK4C5JxNg7anZ2dnUVZ8h-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>
>> "Harry Keane"  wrote in message 
>> news:_OIkj.229206$S37.92311@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>>
>>> My support for Labour is unwavering.
>>
>> Even when they have some (hypothetical) policy with which you disagree?
>
> I don't slavishly follow the party line on everything (we are a democratic 
> party, and debate and dissent are part of that) and I can and do make 
> critical comments about Government policy.  Having said that, I do support 
> the general ethos of the Party in its pursuit of a fair and just society 
> and I still believe it offers the ordinary people of Britain a better 
> chance of prosperity and social justice than either of the other two 
> mainstream parties. I now stand, flak jacket and steel helmet at the 
> ready, awaiting the inevitable onslaught from the right-wing ranters.

I'm not sure I could do that with any political party.

I've always seen our political system up until ten years ago as being nanny 
state on one hand and wanton greed on the other, with woolly minded drivel 
in between. And I must admit I usually voted for "woolly minded drivel" in 
those days until the big election when labour got in. I voted labour in '97, 
expecting to see big changes, and to be honest, I didn't. From where I'm 
standing they've just carried on the policies of the last however-many 
years.

And now over the last few years every party has nicked each other's policies 
so much I have trouble seeing the difference between them.
It's somewhat akin to "What do you want for a snack - cheese & onion or salt 
& vinegar crisps?" A bag of Monster Munch or quavers or peanuts isn't an 
option.

"Knight Of The Road"  wrote in message 
news:1K-dnamSI85SegzanZ2dnUVZ8uGdnZ2d@bt.com...
>
>
> "Not Today"  wrote
>
>
> However does it matter? Socialist, New
>> Labour, all left of centre governments have one thing in common, they
>> think they know what is good for us and are thus certain to fail. They
>> certainly know what is good for them!
>
>
>
>
> All right-of-centre governments too.
>
>
> -- 

Yep, they all shit in the same pot.
>

"Manky Badger" <you.must@be.joking> wrote in message 
news:jqydnXK4C5JxNg7anZ2dnUVZ8h-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>
> "Harry Keane"  wrote in message 
> news:_OIkj.229206$S37.92311@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
>
>> My support for Labour is unwavering.
>
> Even when they have some (hypothetical) policy with which you disagree?
>
>
Haven't you realised that the politicians only see what the civil(?) service 
put in front of them? They do not change with the government!

"Roy Walker"  wrote in message 
news:U_OdnX69O6-yAAnanZ2dnUVZ8sWhnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "Manky Badger" <you.must@be.joking> wrote in message 
> news:jqydnXK4C5JxNg7anZ2dnUVZ8h-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>
>> "Harry Keane"  wrote in message 
>> news:_OIkj.229206$S37.92311@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>>
>>> My support for Labour is unwavering.
>>
>> Even when they have some (hypothetical) policy with which you disagree?
>>
>>
> Haven't you realised that the politicians only see what the civil(?) 
> service put in front of them? They do not change with the government!

You've been watching too much "Yes, Minister"!!
-- 
Harry Keane

"Harry Keane"  wrote in message
news:_OIkj.229206$S37.92311@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> "Not Today"  wrote in message
> news:1ip6og.n9v.17.1@news.alt.net...
>>
>> "Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:6Fhkj.28036$a61.24115@newsfe3-win.ntli.net...
>>>
>>> "Not Today"  wrote in message
>>> news:1inv7k.3dp.19.1@news.alt.net...
>>>> Peter Hain's department has lost thousands of records which have been
>>>> "found" on a roundabout in Exeter! He is launching an "urgent
>>>> enquiry"!
>>>>
>>>> An incompetence?
>>>
>>> This one is an odd one- it seems records have been found
>>> (more-or-less)
>>> in the same place before and the recent finder new of this (he was on
>>> the radio this morning).  That doesn't sound like someone has just
>>> been
>>> careless.
>>>
>>>> All the New Labour supporters have gone very quiet on this group. I
>>>> wonder why?
>>>
>>> More is the question, who do you think supports New Labour on here? I
>>> don't recall any post for some time that have been "pro" New Labour.
>>
>> HK for one, although he is sensibly keeping off the subject lately
>> apart
>> from the odd related funny quip which is usually very good.
>
> My support for Labour is unwavering.  I've just been a little
> preoccupied with other matters recently and haven't had the time or
> energy to challenge some of the more fatuous whingers whose ire has been
> roused by the latest 'Daily Mail' rant.

Lol. For "fatuous whingers whose ire has been roused by the latest  'Daily
Mail' rant" read me, and anyone else who has had enough of this
government's perpetual cock-ups!

As for "unwavering", it is reminiscent of the pre-war communist
sympathisers such as Bernard Shaw, Malcolm Muggeridge and their ilk, who
persuaded themselves that the Russians were building a socialist paradise
in spite of the gulags, until reality caught up with them when the Soviet
government  imposed such a paradise in Hungary and Czechoslovakia with
tanks.

"Harry Keane"  wrote in message
news:I1Pkj.232989$S37.185323@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> "Manky Badger" <you.must@be.joking> wrote in message
> news:jqydnXK4C5JxNg7anZ2dnUVZ8h-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>
>> "Harry Keane"  wrote in message
>> news:_OIkj.229206$S37.92311@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>>
>>> My support for Labour is unwavering.
>>
>> Even when they have some (hypothetical) policy with which you disagree?
>
> I don't slavishly follow the party line on everything (we are a
> democratic party, and debate and dissent are part of that) and I can and
> do make critical comments about Government policy.  Having said that, I
> do support the general ethos of the Party in its pursuit of a fair and
> just society and I still believe it offers the ordinary people of
> Britain a better chance of prosperity and social justice than either of
> the other two mainstream parties. I now stand, flak jacket and steel
> helmet at the ready, awaiting the inevitable onslaught from the
> right-wing ranters.

"we are a democratic party, and debate and dissent are part of that"?????

Tell that to Walter Wolfgang, the 82 year old Labour activist who dared to
shout nonsense at Jack Straw at a stage managed Labour Conference and was
promptly manhandled by Labour storm-troopers and thrown out of the hall.
If it is one thing Blair and Brown had in common it is that neither of
them could and can tolerate "debate and dissent".

And for how much longer will people be persuaded that "the general ethos
of the Party is in pursuit of a fair and just society"? The gap between
rich and poor has widened in the last ten years. Capital gains tax has
been halved for speculators and increased by 80% for small business. It is
easy to see where New Labour's priorities lie and it is certainly not for
a fair and just society.

"Not Today"  wrote in message 
news:1ivcme.rfd.19.1@news.alt.net...
 > If it is one thing Blair and Brown had in common it is that neither of
> them could and can tolerate "debate and dissent".


Don't confuse "debate and dissent" with yobbish behaviour and rudeness. 
There is not excuse for the latter- not even being "old".

Brian
(Not pro New Labour, before you ask.)

"Harry Keane"  wrote in message
news:vA1lj.159067$036.31874@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> "Roy Walker"  wrote in message
> news:U_OdnX69O6-yAAnanZ2dnUVZ8sWhnZ2d@bt.com...
>>
>> "Manky Badger" <you.must@be.joking> wrote in message
>> news:jqydnXK4C5JxNg7anZ2dnUVZ8h-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>
>>> "Harry Keane"  wrote in message
>>> news:_OIkj.229206$S37.92311@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>>
>>>
>>>> My support for Labour is unwavering.
>>>
>>> Even when they have some (hypothetical) policy with which you
>>> disagree?
>>>
>>>
>> Haven't you realised that the politicians only see what the civil(?)
>> service put in front of them? They do not change with the government!

Not changing with the government is one of the few strengths left of our
system. But New Labour is doing its best to politicise the Civil Service 
so that may not last much longer.

"Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message 
news:gl5lj.84917$wD5.61898@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Not Today"  wrote in message 
> news:1ivcme.rfd.19.1@news.alt.net...
> > If it is one thing Blair and Brown had in common it is that neither of
>> them could and can tolerate "debate and dissent".
>
>
> Don't confuse "debate and dissent" with yobbish behaviour and rudeness. 
> There is not excuse for the latter- not even being "old".
>
> Brian
> (Not pro New Labour, before you ask.)

You have got to be joking? You equate shouting "Nonsense" with yobbish 
behaviour and rudeness? I do hope not. Remember the circumstances, Jack 
Straw was defending what subsequently turned out to be false and a lie, 
the reasons for New Labour invading Iraq. It was more than "nonsense", it 
was criminal.

If you equate heckling for yobbish behaviour then you have little 
experience of politics when they meant something. Old Labour and Tory 
ministers thrived on heckling.

"Not Today"  wrote in message 
news:1ivep7.3kg.19.1@news.alt.net...
>
> "Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:gl5lj.84917$wD5.61898@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>>
>> "Not Today"  wrote in message 
>> news:1ivcme.rfd.19.1@news.alt.net...
>> > If it is one thing Blair and Brown had in common it is that neither of
>>> them could and can tolerate "debate and dissent".
>>
>>
>> Don't confuse "debate and dissent" with yobbish behaviour and rudeness. 
>> There is not excuse for the latter- not even being "old".
>>
>> Brian
>> (Not pro New Labour, before you ask.)
>
> You have got to be joking? You equate shouting "Nonsense" with yobbish 
> behaviour and rudeness? I do hope not.

And you witnessed this? Or are you basing your views on some media version?

Usually, when the media report the "abuse" of some "innocent" there is more 
to the story which, if presented, would stop it being a story.


Brian

"Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message 
news:bS5lj.84923$wD5.40054@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>
>
> "Not Today"  wrote in message 
> news:1ivep7.3kg.19.1@news.alt.net...
>>
>> "Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message 
>> news:gl5lj.84917$wD5.61898@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>>>
>>> "Not Today"  wrote in message 
>>> news:1ivcme.rfd.19.1@news.alt.net...
>>> > If it is one thing Blair and Brown had in common it is that neither 
>>> > of
>>>> them could and can tolerate "debate and dissent".
>>>
>>>
>>> Don't confuse "debate and dissent" with yobbish behaviour and 
>>> rudeness. There is not excuse for the latter- not even being "old".
>>>
>>> Brian
>>> (Not pro New Labour, before you ask.)
>>
>> You have got to be joking? You equate shouting "Nonsense" with yobbish 
>> behaviour and rudeness? I do hope not.
>
> And you witnessed this? Or are you basing your views on some media 
> version?

Well let me put it this way, I watched it live on BBC Conference Special 
or whatever they called it. Are you saying that you did not know about 
this incident? Oh dear!

>
> Usually, when the media report the "abuse" of some "innocent" there is 
> more to the story which, if presented, would stop it being a story.

Usually? Ask Harry, his politics are crap but I do not think he will 
contradict this. Particularly as Jack Straw subsequently apologised about 
it.

Is there anyone on this group who is politically aware? I thought the 
world and his wife knew about this tawdry episode. Or, as an ex-poster 
used to say, "you teachers who live in an ivory tower".

"Not Today"  wrote in message 
news:1ivkad.lbr.17.1@news.alt.net...
 >>>
>>> You have got to be joking? You equate shouting "Nonsense" with yobbish 
>>> behaviour and rudeness? I do hope not.
>>
>> And you witnessed this? Or are you basing your views on some media 
>> version?
>
> Well let me put it this way, I watched it live on BBC Conference Special 
> or whatever they called it. Are you saying that you did not know about 
> this incident? Oh dear!

I knew of it but I don't recall it being filmed at the time. Even then, I 
assume you know of editing.

> Is there anyone on this group who is politically aware?

Just because someone doesn't share your views doesn't make them "unaware".

>I thought the world and his wife knew about this tawdry episode. Or, as an 
>ex-poster used to say, "you teachers who live in an ivory tower".

Actually, maybe we are just less prepared to believe what the media present.

Brian

"Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message 
news:ow7lj.690$HV6.212@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
> "Not Today"  wrote in message 
> news:1ivkad.lbr.17.1@news.alt.net...
> >>>
>>>> You have got to be joking? You equate shouting "Nonsense" with 
>>>> yobbish behaviour and rudeness? I do hope not.
>>>
>>> And you witnessed this? Or are you basing your views on some media 
>>> version?
>>
>> Well let me put it this way, I watched it live on BBC Conference 
>> Special or whatever they called it. Are you saying that you did not 
>> know about this incident? Oh dear!
>
> I knew of it but I don't recall it being filmed at the time. Even then, 
> I assume you know of editing.
>

It was live! Are you suggesting that the BBC censor live broadcasts? If so 
you are as paranoid as the anti-mason posters!

>> Is there anyone on this group who is politically aware?
>
> Just because someone doesn't share your views doesn't make them 
> "unaware".
>
>>I thought the world and his wife knew about this tawdry episode. Or, as 
>>an ex-poster used to say, "you teachers who live in an ivory tower".
>
> Actually, maybe we are just less prepared to believe what the media 
> present.
>

No, you are just as paranoid as the anti-mason brigade. Maybe they have a 
point. I watched 9/11 live, maybe that was just "editing". Just when I 
thought you had something worthwhile to say you come up with this gem! :-(

"Not Today"  wrote in message 
news:1ivcjq.n9i.17.1@news.alt.net...
>
> "Harry Keane"  wrote in message
> news:_OIkj.229206$S37.92311@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> "Not Today"  wrote in message
>> news:1ip6og.n9v.17.1@news.alt.net...
>>>
>>> "Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:6Fhkj.28036$a61.24115@newsfe3-win.ntli.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Not Today"  wrote in message
>>>> news:1inv7k.3dp.19.1@news.alt.net...
>>>>> Peter Hain's department has lost thousands of records which have been
>>>>> "found" on a roundabout in Exeter! He is launching an "urgent
>>>>> enquiry"!
>>>>>
>>>>> An incompetence?
>>>>
>>>> This one is an odd one- it seems records have been found
>>>> (more-or-less)
>>>> in the same place before and the recent finder new of this (he was on
>>>> the radio this morning).  That doesn't sound like someone has just
>>>> been
>>>> careless.
>>>>
>>>>> All the New Labour supporters have gone very quiet on this group. I
>>>>> wonder why?
>>>>
>>>> More is the question, who do you think supports New Labour on here? I
>>>> don't recall any post for some time that have been "pro" New Labour.
>>>
>>> HK for one, although he is sensibly keeping off the subject lately
>>> apart
>>> from the odd related funny quip which is usually very good.
>>
>> My support for Labour is unwavering.  I've just been a little
>> preoccupied with other matters recently and haven't had the time or
>> energy to challenge some of the more fatuous whingers whose ire has been
>> roused by the latest 'Daily Mail' rant.
>
> Lol. For "fatuous whingers whose ire has been roused by the latest  'Daily
> Mail' rant" read me, and anyone else who has had enough of this
> government's perpetual cock-ups!
>
> As for "unwavering", it is reminiscent of the pre-war communist
> sympathisers such as Bernard Shaw, Malcolm Muggeridge and their ilk, who
> persuaded themselves that the Russians were building a socialist paradise
> in spite of the gulags, until reality caught up with them when the Soviet
> government  imposed such a paradise in Hungary and Czechoslovakia with
> tanks.

Oh, come now!  Not even you would try and equate the worst excesses of the 
Soviet era with what the Labour Governments have done since 1997?  Or have 
you been so thoroughly indoctrinated by the Tory press that you're unable to 
make any political comment without resorting to hyperbole and hysteria (ooh, 
nice bit of alliteration there!).

-- 
Harry Keane

"Harry Keane"  wrote in message 
news:MV7lj.159883$036.146746@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> "Not Today"  wrote in message 
> news:1ivcjq.n9i.17.1@news.alt.net...
>>
>> "Harry Keane"  wrote in message
>> news:_OIkj.229206$S37.92311@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>> "Not Today"  wrote in message
>>> news:1ip6og.n9v.17.1@news.alt.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message
>>>> news:6Fhkj.28036$a61.24115@newsfe3-win.ntli.net...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Not Today"  wrote in message
>>>>> news:1inv7k.3dp.19.1@news.alt.net...
>>>>>> Peter Hain's department has lost thousands of records which have 
>>>>>> been
>>>>>> "found" on a roundabout in Exeter! He is launching an "urgent
>>>>>> enquiry"!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> An incompetence?
>>>>>
>>>>> This one is an odd one- it seems records have been found
>>>>> (more-or-less)
>>>>> in the same place before and the recent finder new of this (he was 
>>>>> on
>>>>> the radio this morning).  That doesn't sound like someone has just
>>>>> been
>>>>> careless.
>>>>>
>>>>>> All the New Labour supporters have gone very quiet on this group. I
>>>>>> wonder why?
>>>>>
>>>>> More is the question, who do you think supports New Labour on here? 
>>>>> I
>>>>> don't recall any post for some time that have been "pro" New Labour.
>>>>
>>>> HK for one, although he is sensibly keeping off the subject lately
>>>> apart
>>>> from the odd related funny quip which is usually very good.
>>>
>>> My support for Labour is unwavering.  I've just been a little
>>> preoccupied with other matters recently and haven't had the time or
>>> energy to challenge some of the more fatuous whingers whose ire has 
>>> been
>>> roused by the latest 'Daily Mail' rant.
>>
>> Lol. For "fatuous whingers whose ire has been roused by the latest 
>> 'Daily
>> Mail' rant" read me, and anyone else who has had enough of this
>> government's perpetual cock-ups!
>>
>> As for "unwavering", it is reminiscent of the pre-war communist
>> sympathisers such as Bernard Shaw, Malcolm Muggeridge and their ilk, 
>> who
>> persuaded themselves that the Russians were building a socialist 
>> paradise
>> in spite of the gulags, until reality caught up with them when the 
>> Soviet
>> government  imposed such a paradise in Hungary and Czechoslovakia with
>> tanks.
>
> Oh, come now!  Not even you would try and equate the worst excesses of 
> the Soviet era with what the Labour Governments have done since 1997? 
> Or have you been so thoroughly indoctrinated by the Tory press that 
> you're unable to make any political comment without resorting to 
> hyperbole and hysteria (ooh, nice bit of alliteration there!).

Now did I say that? I compared the self-delusion of communist 
fellow-travellersin the 30s with the blind loyalty of New Labour 
supporters. You stated your support was "unwavering". Presumably that 
means whatever New Labour does you will not waver in your support?

You also mention hysteria. The only argument that New Lab supporters have 
when faced with critics is that they have been "indoctrinated by the Tory 
press". It is an arrogant, patronising, silly and very undignified 
argument. You are not a fool, you should rise above it.

There is still a divide in British politics; those that think a government 
can improve our lot by dictat and those that think they cannot. If you 
think the former vote New Labour, the latter Conservative. I did not read 
that in the Daily Mail!

"Not Today"  wrote in message 
news:1ivmm8.utq.17.1@news.alt.net...
 >>
>> Actually, maybe we are just less prepared to believe what the media 
>> present.
>>
>
> No, you are just as paranoid as the anti-mason brigade.

Do you really think that the Beeb "just happened" to have a camera on the 
right chap in the hall?

Do you recall the report of the Queen "storming out" of something? As I 
recall, it later came to light she was going IN !

>Maybe they have a point. I watched 9/11 live, maybe that was just 
>"editing". Just when I thought you had something worthwhile to say you come 
>up with this gem! :-(

There you go, you just can't keep it civil.

Brian

"Not Today"  wrote in message 
news:1ivprr.c7h.17.1@news.alt.net...

> Now did I say that? I compared the self-delusion of communist 
> fellow-travellersin the 30s with the blind loyalty of New Labour 
> supporters. You stated your support was "unwavering". Presumably that 
> means whatever New Labour does you will not waver in your support?
>
> You also mention hysteria. The only argument that New Lab supporters have 
> when faced with critics is that they have been "indoctrinated by the Tory 
> press". It is an arrogant, patronising, silly and very undignified 
> argument. You are not a fool, you should rise above it.
>

Can you tell me why you think someone who proclaims "unwavering" support for 
a party is anymore of a fool than someone who shows "unwavering" antipathy 
for a party?

Surely the wise thing is to see the good bits a party does?

> There is still a divide in British politics; those that think a government 
> can improve our lot by dictat and those that think they cannot. If you 
> think the former vote New Labour, the latter Conservative. I did not read 
> that in the Daily Mail!

So, are you "unwavering" in your support for the Conservatives?

Brian

On Jan 18, 5:37 pm, "Not Today"  wrote:
> Peter Hain's department has lost thousands of records which have been
> "found" on a roundabout in Exeter! He is launching an "urgent enquiry"!
>
> An incompetence?
>
> All the New Labour supporters have gone very quiet on this group. I wonder
> why?

Labor, Tory... all the same... politicians... incompetent cretins.

"Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message 
news:ow7lj.690$HV6.212@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
>
> Just because someone doesn't share your views doesn't make them "unaware".
>

M3OSN, is this really you?

"Eyebee"  wrote in message 
news:3929e061-609f-4bc4-b43e-6c33c3806ac7@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 18, 5:37 pm, "Not Today"  wrote:
>> Peter Hain's department has lost thousands of records which have been
>> "found" on a roundabout in Exeter! He is launching an "urgent enquiry"!
>>
>> An incompetence?
>>
>> All the New Labour supporters have gone very quiet on this group. I 
>> wonder
>> why?
>
> Labor, Tory... all the same... politicians... incompetent cretins.

It's very easy to label everybody else as incompetent.  Why not pick a 
policy (any policy), state why you think the politicians have got it wrong, 
and suggest your own alternative policy?  Then we can all chip in with our 
views and have a debate...  who knows, we might end up with the answers to 
all of our society's ills?
-- 
Harry Keane

"Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message
news:Pl9lj.65754$h35.21270@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
> "Not Today"  wrote in message
> news:1ivmm8.utq.17.1@news.alt.net...
> >>
>>> Actually, maybe we are just less prepared to believe what the media
>>> present.
>>>
>>
>> No, you are just as paranoid as the anti-mason brigade.
>
> Do you really think that the Beeb "just happened" to have a camera on
> the right chap in the hall?
>
> Do you recall the report of the Queen "storming out" of something? As I
> recall, it later came to light she was going IN !

This is hard work! The Beeb "just happened" to have a camera in the hall
as it was a *live* broadcast. It was focussed on the Conference speaker,
and when Walter Wolfgang shouted "Nonsense!" and a bunch of bouncers
started to manhandle him, the camera naturally then focussed on the 
commotion.Worse, as I recall, he was then arrested by the police under 
anti-terrorism legislation.

The report of the Queen "storming out" was an edited recording. Do you
see the difference?

"Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message
news:1s9lj.84968$wD5.72241@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>
>
> "Not Today"  wrote in message
> news:1ivprr.c7h.17.1@news.alt.net...
>
>> Now did I say that? I compared the self-delusion of communist
>> fellow-travellersin the 30s with the blind loyalty of New Labour
>> supporters. You stated your support was "unwavering". Presumably that
>> means whatever New Labour does you will not waver in your support?
>>
>> You also mention hysteria. The only argument that New Lab supporters
>> have when faced with critics is that they have been "indoctrinated by
>> the Tory press". It is an arrogant, patronising, silly and very
>> undignified argument. You are not a fool, you should rise above it.
>>
>
> Can you tell me why you think someone who proclaims "unwavering" support
> for a party is anymore of a fool than someone who shows "unwavering"
> antipathy for a party?

 No problem. I never called anyone a fool!
 "unwavering " support for any party is dangerous. It leads to extreme
left or right dictatorships."unwavering" antipathy for any party is
healthy, it keeps its members on their toes if they know their every
action will be looked at critically. I suspect many people have
"unwavering" hostility to the BNP.

>
> Surely the wise thing is to see the good bits a party does?

More pragmatic than wise I would have thought.

>
>> There is still a divide in British politics; those that think a
>> government can improve our lot by dictat and those that think they
>> cannot. If you think the former vote New Labour, the latter
>> Conservative. I did not read that in the Daily Mail!
>
> So, are you "unwavering" in your support for the Conservatives?

No, not at all. I think all this global warming spouting is misguided
rubbish. If it were based on good science rather than fashion then I might
take it seriously but even if it is proved beyond doubt I see no reason
why we should put our 55 million heads above the economic parapet as an
example to the worlds 6 billion plus. There are numerous other
Conservative policies I take exception to as well, e.g the EU and
education. When it comes to voting you have to make a choice, or abstain,
and to date I have chosen to vote Tory as the best of the options. I think
they are the best of the options because they are less inclined to want to
interfere in our lives, Labour's inclination is to interfere in
everything.

"Not Today"  wrote in message 
news:1j2247.9lv.17.1@news.alt.net...
>
> "Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message
> news:1s9lj.84968$wD5.72241@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>>
>>
>> "Not Today"  wrote in message
>> news:1ivprr.c7h.17.1@news.alt.net...
>>
>>> Now did I say that? I compared the self-delusion of communist
>>> fellow-travellersin the 30s with the blind loyalty of New Labour
>>> supporters. You stated your support was "unwavering". Presumably that
>>> means whatever New Labour does you will not waver in your support?
>>>
>>> You also mention hysteria. The only argument that New Lab supporters
>>> have when faced with critics is that they have been "indoctrinated by
>>> the Tory press". It is an arrogant, patronising, silly and very
>>> undignified argument. You are not a fool, you should rise above it.
>>>
>>
>> Can you tell me why you think someone who proclaims "unwavering" support
>> for a party is anymore of a fool than someone who shows "unwavering"
>> antipathy for a party?
>
> No problem. I never called anyone a fool!
> "unwavering " support for any party is dangerous. It leads to extreme
> left or right dictatorships."unwavering" antipathy for any party is
> healthy, it keeps its members on their toes if they know their every
> action will be looked at critically. I suspect many people have
> "unwavering" hostility to the BNP.
>
>>
>> Surely the wise thing is to see the good bits a party does?
>
> More pragmatic than wise I would have thought.
>
>>
>>> There is still a divide in British politics; those that think a
>>> government can improve our lot by dictat and those that think they
>>> cannot. If you think the former vote New Labour, the latter
>>> Conservative. I did not read that in the Daily Mail!
>>
>> So, are you "unwavering" in your support for the Conservatives?
>
> No, not at all. I think all this global warming spouting is misguided
> rubbish. If it were based on good science rather than fashion then I might
> take it seriously but even if it is proved beyond doubt I see no reason
> why we should put our 55 million heads above the economic parapet as an
> example to the worlds 6 billion plus. There are numerous other
> Conservative policies I take exception to as well, e.g the EU and
> education. When it comes to voting you have to make a choice, or abstain,
> and to date I have chosen to vote Tory as the best of the options. I think
> they are the best of the options because they are less inclined to want to
> interfere in our lives, Labour's inclination is to interfere in
> everything.

as has been proven beyond all doubt. 



-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Not Today"  wrote in message 
news:1j21e7.6r1.17.1@news.alt.net...
 >> Do you really think that the Beeb "just happened" to have a camera on
>> the right chap in the hall?
>>
>> Do you recall the report of the Queen "storming out" of something? As I
>> recall, it later came to light she was going IN !
>
> This is hard work!

Only because you are twisting what I said.

>The Beeb "just happened" to have a camera in the hall
> as it was a *live* broadcast.

I suggest you read what I said.

Now, I recall this event, and the "stir" it caused. I do not recall any 
coverage of the actual pre-removal activity- if that was available, surely 
it would have featured?

>It was focussed on the Conference speaker,
> and when Walter Wolfgang shouted "Nonsense!" and a bunch of bouncers
> started to manhandle him, the camera naturally then focussed on the 
> commotion.Worse, as I recall, he was then arrested by the police under 
> anti-terrorism legislation.

Either way, the audience were there it hear the speaker(s), not some old boy 
shouting. What right has he to shout down someone who others want to here?
If the old boy has widely different view, let him secure a speaking slot or 
even stand for election.

> The report of the Queen "storming out" was an edited recording. Do you
> see the difference?

I do indeed. But if a news organisation can "stray" that far, what 
confidence can we have in their other coverage.

Brian

"Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message
news:zcXlj.66460$h35.21956@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
>
>
> "Not Today"  wrote in message
> news:1j21e7.6r1.17.1@news.alt.net...
> >> Do you really think that the Beeb "just happened" to have a camera on
>>> the right chap in the hall?
>>>
>>> Do you recall the report of the Queen "storming out" of something? As
>>> I
>>> recall, it later came to light she was going IN !
>>
>> This is hard work!
>
> Only because you are twisting what I said.

I think not. You are equating a live broadcast of a party conference with
a sub-contracted programme which had been edited for advertising
purposes. The producer/director was fired over it.

>
>>The Beeb "just happened" to have a camera in the hall
>> as it was a *live* broadcast.
>
> I suggest you read what I said.

I suggest you read what I said.

>
> Now, I recall this event, and the "stir" it caused. I do not recall any
> coverage of the actual pre-removal activity- if that was available,
> surely it would have featured?
>
>>It was focussed on the Conference speaker,
>> and when Walter Wolfgang shouted "Nonsense!" and a bunch of bouncers
>> started to manhandle him, the camera naturally then focussed on the
>> commotion.Worse, as I recall, he was then arrested by the police under
>> anti-terrorism legislation.
>
> Either way, the audience were there it hear the speaker(s), not some old
> boy shouting. What right has he to shout down someone who others want to
> here?
> If the old boy has widely different view, let him secure a speaking slot
> or even stand for election.

He did and was, after this incident, elected to Labour's National
Executive.

What you appear to be promoting is that it is ok for political party
conferences to be stage managed with the audience sitting in rapt
silence. In this case, the speaker was defending the reasons for going to
war with Iraq, something half the country was protesting against. This
debate was not about some esoteric discussion on the merits or otherwise
of comprehensive education, it was about an attempted justification for
killing tens of thousands of people by one of its prime instigators. It
has come to a sorry state when politicians, particularly Jack Straw, one
time left-wing student activist in the 70s, cannot handle a shout of
"Nonsense" from the hall, particularly since the heckler in question had
been a Labour Party member since the late 40s.

>
>> The report of the Queen "storming out" was an edited recording. Do you
>> see the difference?
>
> I do indeed. But if a news organisation can "stray" that far, what
> confidence can we have in their other coverage.

Rather more confidence than the government's spin machine which distorted
intelligence reports so that it could justify going to war.

"Brian Reay" <see@website.invalid> wrote in message 
news:zcXlj.66460$h35.21956@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
>
>
> "Not Today"  wrote in message 
> news:1j21e7.6r1.17.1@news.alt.net...
> >> Do you really think that the Beeb "just happened" to have a camera on
>>> the right chap in the hall?
>>>
>>> Do you recall the report of the Queen "storming out" of something? As I
>>> recall, it later came to light she was going IN !
>>
>> This is hard work!
>
> Only because you are twisting what I said.
>
>>The Beeb "just happened" to have a camera in the hall
>> as it was a *live* broadcast.
>
> I suggest you read what I said.
>
> Now, I recall this event, and the "stir" it caused. I do not recall any 
> coverage of the actual pre-removal activity- if that was available, surely 
> it would have featured?
>
>>It was focussed on the Conference speaker,
>> and when Walter Wolfgang shouted "Nonsense!" and a bunch of bouncers
>> started to manhandle him, the camera naturally then focussed on the 
>> commotion.Worse, as I recall, he was then arrested by the police under 
>> anti-terrorism legislation.
>
> Either way, the audience were there it hear the speaker(s), not some old 
> boy shouting. What right has he to shout down someone who others want to 
> here?
> If the old boy has widely different view, let him secure a speaking slot 
> or even stand for election.
>
>> The report of the Queen "storming out" was an edited recording. Do you
>> see the difference?
>
> I do indeed. But if a news organisation can "stray" that far, what 
> confidence can we have in their other coverage.

what are you still doing here?  you lost this argument ages ago 



-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com