From here: http://www.agediscrimination.info/current-uk-population - it usese ONS statistics but I may be reading the 64-74 as 18-24 though you can't tell that well due to the colours being repeated
How about responding to the post that responded to your post that also made this point then, ColinNeither of you have read my post in the context of the post I was responding to.
in full?
https://www.channel4.com/news/factc...tion-ihra-antisemitism-definition-or-examples
Is there a new document?
You really are just stupendous, Colin.Neither of you have read my post in the context of the post I was responding to.
Woah. @Sassy Colin might act like a bit of a twunt but he's MY twunt. That was completely uncalled for and I challenge you to a duel.I'm struggling to use my words when I come across thick shit like this. Are you dyslexic or illiterate? You've quoted the answer you tool. They are not new registrations, they are applications to register. Lots of people move home and fall off the register.
Everything you write is most certainly true, and I agree it’s absurd to suggest Corbyn himself had any racist or anti semetic tendencies. I can’t think of anyone else practicing in UK politics who has fought for the rights of minorities more than him.From my last post.
The Labour Party has done far more than just saying sorry a couple of times and they certainly haven't dismissed it. The party is in far better place with these changes but for some people there is
1)A complete denial that the party has taken steps to fight anti semitism.
2)To view these changes as nothing more than saying sorry.
3)Demand bizarre actions such as disowning Facebook groups and toxic social media accounts.
The data shows the labour party isn't full of anti semites, the party isn't in anyway a threat to British Jews etc. There is small element of semitism in labour and the party has taken action to fight against that. There can be serious discussion on anti semitism but asking labour to disown social media accounts is beyond stupid.
Oh look everyone, some real breaking news here that is absolutely worth mentioning. Dominic Cummings is writing his blog again.
Or if we put it another way, Laura is promoting the personal blog of her "Source close to Number 10".
How about responding to the post that responded to your post that also made this point then, Colin
@Pexbo tell us how you really feel.
Because my head hurts now.
Woah. @Sassy Colin might act like a bit of a twunt but he's MY twunt. That was completely uncalled for and I challenge you to a duel.
In other news - feck the Tories.
Ugh it's feckin wind up mate. We're lumped paying a licence fee for a supposedly impartial service and in return we get a political editor who might as well have a desk in No 10.
I think Johnson will do it and there will be something of an apology for his remarks about muslim women. If he doesn't then Cummings isn't doing his job right.
So let's say the polls are right and Johnson wins a majority, what do we expect will happen to the NHS in the next five years? Will it even exist?
Yes because he said it's not for sale. End of story.
Well one thing is for sure. If that happens then it will be like the entire conservative party jumping into a Kamikaze plane and flying it into a mountain. Labour can then restore it and rule forever. So vote TorySo let's say the polls are right and Johnson wins a majority, what do we expect will happen to the NHS in the next five years? Will it even exist?
You say that like unashamedly avoiding genuine scrutiny while your political opponents are ravaged by right-wing media attack dogs hasn't been an increasingly popular strategy for three successive Conservative leaders over half a decade or so.That just could be an opinion. I still say he'll be a fool to back down. Take the kicking like everyone else.
Snap.That makes it three successive Prime Ministers who were (or are) desperate to avoid scrutiny.
“Boris wastes no time voiding bowels, whilst Corbyn dithers on Brexit”
If Boris doesn't go for the interview, it's a massive mistake, almost malpractice, by corbyn and his team that they agreed to go. It's a fight for power not a morality contest.
That is exactly the point! It should be a 'a running political sore for the Tories'. But the difference in media coverage means you don't think it is.I read the word order in the sense of magnitude, eg as a being of a different political magnitude. The Chief Rabbi weighing in on an issue that has been a running sore for Labour for years. It set the news agenda for the day. Yes, the tories do have an islam issue but it's not yet a running political sore for the Tories as antisemisim has been for labour - although I suspect if Labour could sort their own issue out, it could become one.
Er...again I literally listed the way to which the party and leadership have made changes to tackle antisemitism. And what about Corbyn record of standing up against anti semitism, how can the two examples you gave cause utter panic about the return of the 1940's but Corbyn supporting Britain taking in Yemeni Jews means nothing ? I can give concrete examples of how the party has change to fight against anti semitism and the counter is - well there is a sense that the Labour leadership doesn't care.But the concerns of British Jews go beyond Labour members - it's a sense that the Labour leadership either don't care about this or have aided or abetted in it. Corbyn himself has described groups with extraordinarily anti-Jewish records as 'friends' in the past. Richard Burgon has called Zionism the 'enemy of peace' - granted, there's plenty of discussion to be had over Zionism and its benefits/drawbacks, but blanket statements like that reinforce the idea the Labour leadership doesn't really care about anti-Semitism or has aided it at times.
No because the tories cause material misery both to british muslims and muslims abroad, it's not the odd Facebook group or some crank tweeting. Its - Prevent, The selling of weapons which is causing the deaths of muslims in Yemen, continuing the war on terror, failing to support rescue missions in the Mediterranean, failure to take in a credible number of refugees, christ even austerity has hurts women of colour the most (Which a large part will be muslim women) The tory islamophobia goes far deeper than Boris and his letterbox comment.If the Tories were to within the next week apologise for anti-Islam elements within the party, while saying they'll follow protocols to ensure it doesn't happen again while also suspending party members responsible for such remarks, would you be completely fine with them, and willing to take them at face value?
If Boris doesn't go for the interview, it's a massive mistake, almost malpractice, by corbyn and his team that they agreed to go. It's a fight for power not a morality contest.
Ongoing discussions.....
Oh look everyone, some real breaking news here that is absolutely worth mentioning. Dominic Cummings is writing his blog again.
Or if we put it another way, Laura is promoting the personal blog of her "Source close to Number 10".
What word in Leaders debate do they not understand?
The media coverage reflects what's newsworthy as much as it shapes it. Media isn't just about what's right or wrong, it's about what gets attention. In short, big names have challenged Labour over antisemitism over an extended period. Big organisations have got involved. As a result, it's got more attention and the Tories' problem has been overshadowed. That's why Labour should have worked harder to publicly kill this story. (Labour's media management is amateur hour but that's another story). No conspiracy is needed here.That I'd exactly the point! It should be a 'a running political sore for the Tories'. But the difference in media coverage means you don't think it is.
Clive James - some Australian broadcaster - is the headline now.
It's so fecking obvious that the BBC want the Tories to win. Absolutely nothing can make me believe otherwise after the last few months of utter dross that's come from them.
You do know who Clive James was right?
I’m not a saying it ‘like’ anything mate.You say that like unashamedly avoiding genuine scrutiny while your political opponents are ravaged by right-wing media attack dogs hasn't been an increasingly popular strategy for three successive Conservative leaders over half a decade or so.
Snap.
The media coverage reflects what's newsworthy as much as it shapes it. Media isn't just about what's right or wrong, it's about what gets attention. In short, big names have challenged Labour over antisemitism over an extended period. Big organisations have got involved. As a result, it's got more attention and the Tories' problem has been overshadowed. That's why Labour should have worked harder to publicly kill this story. (Labour's media management is amateur hour but that's another story). No conspiracy is needed here.