From webstump at ..iark.greenend.org.uk Sat Aug 10 16:43:47 2024 Return-path: To: JNugent73 at ..il.com Subject: Re: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IElzIG11bHRpLWxldmVsIOKAmGxhd+KAmSBub3cgdGhlIG5vcm0/?= References: <3831324856.176a2cef@uninhabited.net> In-Reply-To: Reply-To: matthewv+ulmtestmod at ..riolis.greenend.org.uk Errors-To: webstump+ulm-bounces at ..iark.greenend.org.uk X-Webstump-Event: [17232986092727] reject notnew Message-Id: From: webstump+ulm-bounces at ..iark.greenend.org.uk Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:43:47 +0100 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 The post that you submitted to uk.legal.moderated has been rejected by a moderator. This post contains insufficient new material. Similar points have been made already in this discussion, which is in danger of becoming too repetitive. The group charter and moderation policy can be found at https://uklegal.weebly.com/ Disputed moderation decisions can be discussed in the newsgroup uk.net.news.moderation ============================================ Full text of your message follows > From webstump@chiark.greenend.org.uk Sat Aug 10 15:03:29 2024 > Return-path: > Envelope-to: webstump+?@slimy.greenend.org.uk > Received-SPF: pass (mailhub-hex-d.mythic-beasts.com: domain of uni-berlin.de designates 130.133.4.89 as permitted sender) client-ip=130.133.4.89; envelope-from=mod-submit@uni-berlin.de; helo=outpost5.zedat.fu-berlin.de; > X-STUMP-Warning-0: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > X-STUMP-Warning-1: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > X-STUMP-Warning-2: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > X-STUMP-Warning-3: Next header (DKIM-Signature) truncated! > DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uni-berlin.de; s=fub01; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Mime-Version:Reply-To:References:Message-ID:Date:Subject:From:To :Sender:Cc:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=wxoYp40DFOso+zdFpAVDNnzYmPgZAiqTuBQzbpA9SuE=; t=1723298608; x=1723903408; b=hrXKy/V1e0tB1IA > From: JNugent > Newsgroups: uk.legal.moderated > Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IElzIG11bHRpLWxldmVsIOKAmGxhd+KAmSBub3cgdGhlIG5vcm0/?= > Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:03:26 +0100 > Organization: Home User > Message-ID: > References: > > <3831324856.176a2cef@uninhabited.net> > Reply-To: JNugent73@mail.com > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > X-Orig-X-Trace: individual.net I3oPqDDYWzIILCTdpPwlbAkIjU5kKEkcbE48YBrTt0WoVwfvJ8 > Cancel-Lock: sha1:8thYmClS0eN4ix5J+hgqPoMmRXg= sha256:3XPaqPnT0rPni9WmgTTx5GiFrY9wHUXENZM1aY/qWM0= > User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 > Content-Language: en-GB > X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 240810-2, 8/10/2024), Outbound message > X-Antivirus-Status: Clean > X-Originating-IP: 130.133.4.5 > X-ZEDAT-Hint: RO > X-Mythic-Source-External: YES > X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: 41 > X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.2 > Delivered-To: usenet-uk-legal-moderated@usenet.org.uk > X-BlackCat-To: usenet-uk-legal-moderated@usenet.org.uk > X-Mythic-Originator: uid-1081-on-lynx.mythic-beasts.com > X-STUMP-Warning-4: Unfolded headers Received: Received: Received: Received: Received: DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature: DKIM-Signature: User-Agent: > > On 09/08/2024 10:18 pm, Roger Hayter wrote: > > On 9 Aug 2024 at 20:57:58 BST, "The Todal" wrote: > > > >> On 09/08/2024 20:27, JNugent wrote: > >>> On 09/08/2024 08:19 pm, The Todal wrote: > >>>> On 09/08/2024 17:27, JNugent wrote: > >>>>> On 09/08/2024 05:12 pm, Owen Rees wrote: > >>>>>> JNugent wrote: > >>>>>>> On 09/08/2024 02:11 pm, The Todal wrote: > >>>>>>>> On 09/08/2024 13:51, JNugent wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On 09/08/2024 01:17 pm, The Todal wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On 09/08/2024 10:48, Pamela wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> On 23:13 8 Aug 2024, The Todal said: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Antisemitism has been exaggerated and weaponised in the UK. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> My impression is the opposite. I believe antisemitism has been > >>>>>>>>>>> downplayed by the authorities for a long time. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I really can't imagine how you can have that belief. > >>>>>>>>>> The abhorrent actions of Israel, from time to time over the years, > >>>>>>>>>> have often led to antisemitic incidents which tend to be thuggish > >>>>>>>>>> behaviour of individuals. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> That reads like an attempt at justification. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> It reads like an example of cause and effect. When I say > >>>>>>>> "thuggish" it > >>>>>>>> does not mean that I sympathise with that behaviour. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The why list the claimed "provocation" as though it justified anything > >>>>>>> at all on the streets of the UK? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> In organisations, Jews are not discriminated against when applying > >>>>>>>>>> for posts or for promotions. You'd find it very difficult to > >>>>>>>>>> find any > >>>>>>>>>> Jew who can cite an incident of antisemitism except perhaps for > >>>>>>>>>> distant memories of the school playground. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> In recent years, this is particularly notable in the case of > >>>>>>>>>>> left-leaning political activists who appear to be willing to > >>>>>>>>>>> sacrifice > >>>>>>>>>>> even-handedness towards Jews in pursuit of what they see as > >>>>>>>>>>> greater > >>>>>>>>>>> objectives. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I don't think that is true at all. I wonder if you can cite any > >>>>>>>>>> proof. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Have the Labour Party's Corbyn-era internal squabbles been forgotten > >>>>>>>>> so soon? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Not by me. With all due respect I think maybe you have forgotten the > >>>>>>>> details or never fully apprised yourself of the details. > >>>>>>>> Is this a good time to discuss all the details? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> If you want to. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> One could perhaps start with the EHRC Report, which identified > >>>>>>>> just two > >>>>>>>> miscreants, Ken Livingstone and Pam Bromley, and claimed that their > >>>>>>>> behaviour was antisemitic (without properly defining the term) and > >>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>> somehow the entire Labour Party was responsible for what the two > >>>>>>>> people > >>>>>>>> had said, in the manner of an employer being vicariously liable > >>>>>>>> for the > >>>>>>>> actions of employees. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Those who believe that Ken Livingstone is or was antisemitic might > >>>>>>>> want > >>>>>>>> to cite examples. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Didn't the writers of the report do that? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Even-handedness towards Jews? Are you perhaps conflating this with > >>>>>>>>>> even-handedness towards the actions of Israel? If so, that's > >>>>>>>>>> plainly > >>>>>>>>>> unreasonable. And conflating the two is a form of antisemitism - > >>>>>>>>>> because it implies that Jews are responsible for Israel's actions. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I am sure that that is precisely what they are talking about. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Your comment is ambiguous. You're sure they are conflating the two? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> What else would be causing the current and continuing left-wing > >>>>>>> antagonism towards Jewish people? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Why else would a police officer advise a an apparently-Jewish man > >>>>>>> against appearing "openly Jewish" in London? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> He was a known agitator who was there to stir up trouble. > >>>>> > >>>>> He was not accused of that. > >>>>> > >>>>> He was apparently advised that an openly Jewish person might be in > >>>>> danger. > >>>>> > >>>>> Was there any good reason why he should be in danger? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> As usual, the truth will set you free. Gideon Falter has a history of > >>>> accusing lots of politicians in all parties of antisemitism. He's very > >>>> biased in favour of Israel. A truly lovely man, of course. > >>> > >>> Is there any good reason why he should be in danger in a street in > >>> London for being "openly Jewish"? > >>> > >>> You forgot to answer that bit. > >>> > >> > >> Oh, I do apologise. > >> > >> No, there was no conceivable risk to him of being in danger in a London > >> street even in proximity to a pro-Palestinian demo. He could easily have > >> joined the other Jews marching behind their banner. > >> > >> Unless he was determined to behave like a cunt, obstructing the > >> demonstration and shouting abuse at the people. But I feel sure he would > >> not have descended to such abhorrent behaviour. His objective was to > >> show that the police showed favouritism towards the pro-Palestinian > >> demonstrators, the ordinary folk with their children in pushchairs > >> objecting to the slaughter that was taking place in Gaza. > >> > >> Hope this helps to answer your question. > > > > Yes, JNugent does not seem to have considered that the police officer was > > neither frank nor accurate in the reasons he gave for asking a known > > troublemaker with a bevy of violent acolytes to keep away from the march. A > > shame really he did not give a frank assessment of the scum in front of him, > > rather than treat him as a Jewish gentlemam. Then Palter might have had to > > record that assessment. > > > > Again, Jews were not in danger from the march. Those proudly supporting the > > slaughter of Palestinians were perhaps less safe from criticism, whether > > jewish or not. > > Listen to yourself and exercise just a little source-criticism. > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEfWu6wfyjzX88oocanSrwpvmn4x4FAma3irMACgkQnSrwpvmn 4x6Hpgf/aDE5FkW1X9tbdbLz3iXo9g1tKp/Lq/u+tQ5ggu7hrtMvp7JrrAS2fWuP ULSCeZDsWW5FsLYihz8d7ueTL+uRpFekHgmBCwPT08UMwV6oiaptowDsq3miTPPV NJNvtCzA9TtrMElfZXxJCPZ/MtdPY2T8ogP/zS5/qBWOorGUHixTMFkNaix6xnES S0YHlmAK6uUfWA5ox4u3TZrExWiklQusW9o3v1ic9bl5b9+ZmZBHLIq3z7Y5smO4 xRYMNOk35xbSrZBouvJrckdJiYHC4TPnVy1r6WIt0lx78k+KmQOfP8P8SoUqmXLU KKHo+0t6c0cRw79q2IfnQN4H0GdurA== =qHv5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----