Boris Johnson: Why is a proven liar in power?

[Psamathe]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/17/andrew-sabisky-boris-johnsons-ex-adviser-in-his-own-words

from the racists mouth

Jesus H Christ!

There are excellent reasons to think the very real racial differences in intelligence are significantly – even mostly – genetic in origin ... though whether the politicians will pay any attention is debatable.

It would be nice if they did from the standpoint of immigration control (in the UK, that is).

And this is the creep who BoJo is in bed with - resignation notwithstanding:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... ed-workers

It gets worse

“Theologically speaking, she is your wife and should submit to you as unto the Lord, so if you want doggy, then it is your place to command her to get onto her hands and knees and her place to obey,” the former aide wrote, according to the paper.
...
On another occasion, Mr Sabisky reportedly told a man who was looking to lose his virginity that they could “pay lots of money for a really good hooker”.

Ian

[carpetcleaner]

Well, parties need the votes of everyone, not just those with politically correct opinions.

The Labour Party readmitted Naz Shah after she admitted making racist remarks. Her majority at the next election in 2017 was much larger than previously and it rose sharply again in 2019. The people of Bradford West obviously have no problems at all with her racism issues.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-36802075

You persist with the Naz Shah case so please tell exactly what it is she is supposed to have said that is so racist.I've read the link and can only conclude from what is reported in that link that I agree with her,Israel along with it's financier the USA as caused more trouble than enough in the middle east and IMO has far too much power in the area,it's in breach of international law by it's persecution of the Palastinians and is responsible alone for a the nuclear arms race in the area.That isn't an antisemitic stance but fact about a rogue nation state
So please reveal all.

Check my link to the BBC article. I suggest you contact Ms Shah for her reasons for her admission.

[pwa]

Well, parties need the votes of everyone, not just those with politically correct opinions.

The Labour Party readmitted Naz Shah after she admitted making racist remarks. Her majority at the next election in 2017 was much larger than previously and it rose sharply again in 2019. The people of Bradford West obviously have no problems at all with her racism issues.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-36802075

You persist with the Naz Shah case so please tell exactly what it is she is supposed to have said that is so racist.I've read the link and can only conclude from what is reported in that link that I agree with her,Israel along with it's financier the USA as caused more trouble than enough in the middle east and IMO has far too much power in the area,it's in breach of international law by it's persecution of the Palastinians and is responsible alone for a the nuclear arms race in the area.That isn't an antisemitic stance but fact about a rogue nation state
So please reveal all.

Check my link to the BBC article. I suggest you contact Ms Shah for her reasons for her admission.

You do seem keener to talk about Ms Shah than about Sabisky. I'm no fan of Ms Shah and had things to say about her at the time, but what about this particular case we are meant to be talking about now? Is that excused because of what Shah said?

[661-Pete]

This debate about Naz Shah appears to have been initiated solely to deflect argument away from criticism of the current Tory regime. If that's what some on this forum want, so be it. I find that deplorable.

Looking at the article in which Shah admits to, and apologises for, what she refers to as anti-semitism, I note two incidents. In one, she is said to have superimposed a map of Israel on the map of the USA, with the caption "Solution for Israel-Palestine conflict - relocate Israel into United States". In the other she is alleged to have likened Israeli policies to the Nazis.

Both of these actions are, I agree, highly insulting to Israel, and to Israelis: even those who don't support Netanyahu's expanionist policies. I think the insults are somewhat OTT, albeit understandable. But anti-semitic? Marginally so, in my view, since these are direct attacks on Israel rather than Jews in general. And the Israeli regime (which many Israelis don't support) has done its fair share of insults and ill-treatment - directed at the Palestinians.

Anyway, back to Naz Shah. I do not think she hates Jews. She may well hate Israelis - although perhaps she should look at the wide spread of public opinion - some of it humanitarian and sympathetic to Palestinians - amongst Israelis themselves.

None of us are perfect.

Incidentally, I don't need any lessons on what is anti-semitism, please - not from anyone on this forum! I admit to a fair knowledge of the subject. And yes there have been anti-semites within the Labour party - and other parties. There are always going to be some...

[carpetcleaner]

This debate about Naz Shah appears to have been initiated solely to deflect argument away from criticism of the current Tory regime. If that's what some on this forum want, so be it. I find that deplorable.

Looking at the article in which Shah admits to, and apologises for, what she refers to as anti-semitism, I note two incidents. In one, she is said to have superimposed a map of Israel on the map of the USA, with the caption "Solution for Israel-Palestine conflict - relocate Israel into United States". In the other she is alleged to have likened Israeli policies to the Nazis.

Both of these actions are, I agree, highly insulting to Israel, and to Israelis: even those who don't support Netanyahu's expanionist policies. I think the insults are somewhat OTT, albeit understandable. But anti-semitic? Marginally so, in my view, since these are direct attacks on Israel rather than Jews in general. And the Israeli regime (which many Israelis don't support) has done its fair share of insults and ill-treatment - directed at the Palestinians.

Anyway, back to Naz Shah. I do not think she hates Jews. She may well hate Israelis - although perhaps she should look at the wide spread of public opinion - some of it humanitarian and sympathetic to Palestinians - amongst Israelis themselves.

None of us are perfect.

Incidentally, I don't need any lessons on what is anti-semitism, please - not from anyone on this forum! I admit to a fair knowledge of the subject. And yes there have been anti-semites within the Labour party - and other parties. There are always going to be some...

I wasn't giving you any lessons on anti-Semitism. Some others on the forum see eager to do that and I'll leave them to it. I have stated that Ms Shah made anti-Semitic comments, and has admitted doing so. I have also stated that she is now back in the Labour Party. I did this in order to show that all political parties tolerate racism to some extent, not just the Conservatives.

[Psamathe]

This debate about Naz Shah appears to have been initiated solely to deflect argument away from criticism of the current Tory regime. If that's what some on this forum want, so be it. I find that deplorable.

Looking at the article in which Shah admits to, and apologises for, what she refers to as anti-semitism, I note two incidents. In one, she is said to have superimposed a map of Israel on the map of the USA, with the caption "Solution for Israel-Palestine conflict - relocate Israel into United States". In the other she is alleged to have likened Israeli policies to the Nazis.

Both of these actions are, I agree, highly insulting to Israel, and to Israelis: even those who don't support Netanyahu's expanionist policies. I think the insults are somewhat OTT, albeit understandable. But anti-semitic? Marginally so, in my view, since these are direct attacks on Israel rather than Jews in general. And the Israeli regime (which many Israelis don't support) has done its fair share of insults and ill-treatment - directed at the Palestinians.

Anyway, back to Naz Shah. I do not think she hates Jews. She may well hate Israelis - although perhaps she should look at the wide spread of public opinion - some of it humanitarian and sympathetic to Palestinians - amongst Israelis themselves.

None of us are perfect.

Incidentally, I don't need any lessons on what is anti-semitism, please - not from anyone on this forum! I admit to a fair knowledge of the subject. And yes there have been anti-semites within the Labour party - and other parties. There are always going to be some...

I wasn't giving you any lessons on anti-Semitism. Some others on the forum see eager to do that and I'll leave them to it. I have stated that Ms Shah made anti-Semitic comments, and has admitted doing so. I have also stated that she is now back in the Labour Party. I did this in order to show that all political parties tolerate racism to some extent, not just the Conservatives.

Sabisky is no "to some extent"; he is way "off-the-scale". And Labour acted whereas Johnson (the person being discussed) refused to condemn such views which have a very obvious interpretation (particularly given his past views committed in writing).

Ian

[mercalia]

Sabisky sounds like a johnny foreigner name? I think he should have his (presumably) UK citizenship removed and deported to where johnny foreigners come from

[pete75]

This debate about Naz Shah appears to have been initiated solely to deflect argument away from criticism of the current Tory regime. If that's what some on this forum want, so be it. I find that deplorable.

Looking at the article in which Shah admits to, and apologises for, what she refers to as anti-semitism, I note two incidents. In one, she is said to have superimposed a map of Israel on the map of the USA, with the caption "Solution for Israel-Palestine conflict - relocate Israel into United States". In the other she is alleged to have likened Israeli policies to the Nazis.

Both of these actions are, I agree, highly insulting to Israel, and to Israelis: even those who don't support Netanyahu's expanionist policies. I think the insults are somewhat OTT, albeit understandable. But anti-semitic? Marginally so, in my view, since these are direct attacks on Israel rather than Jews in general. And the Israeli regime (which many Israelis don't support) has done its fair share of insults and ill-treatment - directed at the Palestinians.

Anyway, back to Naz Shah. I do not think she hates Jews. She may well hate Israelis - although perhaps she should look at the wide spread of public opinion - some of it humanitarian and sympathetic to Palestinians - amongst Israelis themselves.

None of us are perfect.

Incidentally, I don't need any lessons on what is anti-semitism, please - not from anyone on this forum! I admit to a fair knowledge of the subject. And yes there have been anti-semites within the Labour party - and other parties. There are always going to be some...

I wasn't giving you any lessons on anti-Semitism. Some others on the forum see eager to do that and I'll leave them to it. I have stated that Ms Shah made anti-Semitic comments, and has admitted doing so. I have also stated that she is now back in the Labour Party. I did this in order to show that all political parties tolerate racism to some extent, not just the Conservatives.

Antisemitism isn't racism, it's religious prejudice. The two are not the same.

In any case Shah criticised Israel. As Annefrank.org says "Criticism of Israel or of the policies of the Israeli government is not automatically antisemitic. For example, anyone is free to reject or criticise the Israeli government's policy regarding the Palestinian territories." and "Even taking action against Israel or in favour of the Palestinian cause is not automatically hateful towards all Jews and therefore not necessarily a form of antisemitism. In theory, it should be possible to disagree about everything that has to do with the State of Israel. Among Jews, too, opinion is often divided."

[mercalia]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/17/andrew-sabisky-boris-johnsons-ex-adviser-in-his-own-words

from the racists mouth

Jesus H Christ!

There are excellent reasons to think the very real racial differences in intelligence are significantly – even mostly – genetic in origin ... though whether the politicians will pay any attention is debatable.

It would be nice if they did from the standpoint of immigration control (in the UK, that is).

And this is the creep who BoJo is in bed with - resignation notwithstanding:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... ed-workers

It gets worse

“Theologically speaking, she is your wife and should submit to you as unto the Lord, so if you want doggy, then it is your place to command her to get onto her hands and knees and her place to obey,” the former aide wrote, according to the paper.
...
On another occasion, Mr Sabisky reportedly told a man who was looking to lose his virginity that they could “pay lots of money for a really good hooker”.

Ian

you have to be fair regarding marital advice he was advising a Mormon who are ultra conservative and hardly modern in outlook. On the other hand maybe he was recruited to give advice to Boris as it seems he needs it? Any one care to imagine what that advice would be?

[661-Pete]

I wasn't giving you any lessons on anti-Semitism.

You have done just that - by citing Naz Shah's 'confession' and implying its accuracy. Naz Shah doesn't have the right to tell me what anti-Semitism is, either. I think I would have excluded her - admittedly foolish - actions from that bracket.

As I said, anything to protect your beloved far-right Conservatives from justified criticism...

[reohn2]

Check my link to the BBC article. I suggest you contact Ms Shah for her reasons for her admission.

I did,there's not a lot to condemn her on there
By contrast Sabisky's palmares is division one in the racist,class ridden git stakes AFAICT.
YVMV mine won't.

[reohn2]

This debate about Naz Shah appears to have been initiated solely to deflect argument away from criticism of the current Tory regime. If that's what some on this forum want, so be it. I find that deplorable.

It's an open forum,but as I posted earlier it's a classic whataboutery tactic by Tory supporters in an effort to divert attention focus away from the subject in hand.

Looking at the article in which Shah admits to, and apologises for, what she refers to as anti-semitism, I note two incidents. In one, she is said to have superimposed a map of Israel on the map of the USA, with the caption "Solution for Israel-Palestine conflict - relocate Israel into United States". In the other she is alleged to have likened Israeli policies to the Nazis.
Both of these actions are, I agree, highly insulting to Israel/quote]
Nowt wrong in that then.

and to Israelis: even those who don't support Netanyahu's expanionist policies

Not necessarily,more about Israel's foreign policy to turf out the Palistinians frommtheir own country,does it remind you of another regeme that proliferated for a short time in the middle of part of the last century.

I think the insults are somewhat OTT, albeit understandable. But anti-semitic? Marginally so, in my view

I disagree

since these are direct attacks on Israel rather than Jews in general. And the Israeli regime (which many Israelis don't support) has done its fair share of insults and ill-treatment - directed at the Palestinians

That'll be about right IMO

Anyway, back to Naz Shah. I do not think she hates Jews. She may well hate Israelis - although perhaps she should look at the wide spread of public opinion - some of it humanitarian and sympathetic to Palestinians - amongst Israelis themselves

IMO it's the Israeli regeme she hates not individual Israelis.

None of us are perfect.

Incidentally, I don't need any lessons on what is anti-semitism, please - not from anyone on this forum! I admit to a fair knowledge of the subject

I think most people on the forum are fully aware the persecution of the Jews in WW2 and indeed before.

And yes there have been anti-semites within the Labour party - and other parties. There are always going to be some...

As there are within any section of society whatever party or club they belong to!

Perhaps it's better to draw a line under the antisemitism repetition by carpetcleaner and concentrate on BoJo and his diabolical government.

[reohn2]

Sabisky sounds like a johnny foreigner name? I think he should have his (presumably) UK citizenship removed and deported to where johnny foreigners come from

What's in a name?

[al_yrpal]

Sabisky sounds like a johnny foreigner name? I think he should have his (presumably) UK citizenship removed and deported to where johnny foreigners come from

What's in a name?

Nothing really, but some folk seem very sensitive about having foreign surnames in this day and age? I cant understand that? I have always thought that eventually the whole human race will become darker with slightly Asian eyes, its inevitable if the human race ever lasts that long.

Al

[reohn2]

Sabisky sounds like a johnny foreigner name? I think he should have his (presumably) UK citizenship removed and deported to where johnny foreigners come from

What's in a name?

Nothing really, but some folk seem very sensitive about having foreign surnames in this day and age? I cant understand that?

Agreed but for some people it maybe a sensitive issue,I used to work with a second generation Pole who's wife wouldn't accept his Polish name and had to change it.

I have always thought that eventually the whole human race will become darker with slightly Asian eyes, its inevitable if the human race ever lasts that long.

Al

Possibly,returning to it's roots so to speak,and I take your point about the species longevity,the way we're going it doesn't look good for this grand experiment of evolution