This week the Guardian published a letter that was co-produced by Elleanne Green, founder of Palestine Live. The letter was a defence of Chris Williamson and a denial of the antisemitism in the Labour Party. That in itself is a disgrace. But the Guardian’s issue with Jewish people and Israel extends back much further than Corbyn. Anyone researching antisemitism today knows that Corbyn is a symptom of the problem, not the cause of it.

Better days at the Guardian

From the Guardian Newspaper, April 11 1950. ‘The Arab League is still in the wilderness. It made little headway at its recent meeting in Cairo. In its attitude towards Israel it has not yet advance beyond a sullen resentment at having been beaten‘.

Guardian 1

That was the Guardian seeing and telling the truth. Some of the Arab players never changed their stance. Never moved beyond the resentment of having been beaten. But somewhere along the line, the Guardian (along with many media outlets) either forgot or developed a serious case of blindness to the underlying truth of the conflict.

Antisemitism and anti-Zionism

The conspiracists will tell you that Jews started attacking the Labour Party only when Jeremy Corbyn took control, because of Corbyn’s sympathy for the Palestinians. Yet most Zionists have sympathy for the Palestinians, which makes the conspiracy a rather demonising straw man. If we step back again, this time to 1953, things become much clearer. It was the end of the Slánský trial. Fourteen leading Communist party members had been accused of a Zionist conspiracy and convicted. Eleven were hanged in Prague on December 3 1952. Most of the accused were Jewish. It was an antisemitic show-trial.

The Guardian never shirked from criticising this demonisation of Zionism. It recognised the anti-Jewish nature of the anti-Zionist accusations without reservation, and although the trials referenced ‘anti-Zionism’, the Guardian continually described the actions as ‘anti-Jewish’. This from a letter to the editor on January 19th 1953:

If we allow ourselves to be persuaded that the Soviet accusation is not antisemitism, but just anti-Zionist or anti-Israel, then we are helping to endanger two-and-a-half million Jews.”

Page two of that paper carried a major article describing the outrage of the Board of Deputies. The paper would talk about anti-Zionist policy as if it were antisemitism – without question. Representatives from the Board then made two interesting quotes. Firstly, the indivisibility of Jewish people and Zionism:

Zionism is essentially a Jewish movement which worked for the creation of a Jewish state in the ancient homeland of the Jewish people. Consequently, Zionism cannot be divorced from Jewry and in the public mind the two are identified

But then, they referenced a small group of Jewish people, who disagreed.

Jewish defenders

The whole world knows today, that those events were antisemitism trying to disguise itself as anti-Zionism. And yet a handful of Jewish people still defended the slaughter following this show-trial. How did they do it? By trying to legitimise the Soviet argument that it was anti-Zionism and not antisemitism. But consider this difference. The Guardian in 1953 gave oxygen only to the mainstream Jewish voice, and the dissenting minority were seen as little but apologists for murder, worthy only of disdain.

Today we can see all the old ‘anti-Zionist’ arguments of Soviet Communism being used again by the antisemites, as a means of disguising their dislike of Jews. Can you imagine in 1953 the Guardian ignoring the Board of Deputies and running apologist letters from a handful of dissenting communist Jews legitimising the antisemitic murders in Prague? Yet this is the type of action they take today. Thus we can see that the Guardian has changed. It now gives a voice to the extremists as a means of legitimising the things it once clearly saw as antisemitic. The Guardian has blatantly turned its back on the Jews.

The Guardian and the boycott

The Arabs have been boycotting the Jews for a hundred years. In the 1960s, some British firms readily cowed to Arab pressure. In 1963 Norwich Union forced the resignation of Lord Mancroft, because the Arabs had asked them to be rid of the Jewish Peer. The Guardian editorial on 4 Dec 1963 on the matter of the boycott was clear. It was bullying, no good for anyone and needed to be ignored:

Arab boycott

Here is a simple Guardian editorial headline; ‘How to beat the Arab boycott‘:

Zionism as racism

History shows us that since the defeat of Nazi Germany, the two most violent strains of antisemitism have been within the Islamic world and the Communist world. Both, often dressed up as anti-Zionism. During the cold war they formed an alliance, which often reared its head in international bodies such as the United Nations. Just look at this piece from the Guardian following the UN vote “Zionism is racism”:

Guardian zionism racism

There were numerous Guardian articles that referenced the vote throughout November and December 1975. All of them highly critical. An editorial titled ‘a wild swipe at Israel’ pointed out the racist, undemocratic nature and hypocrisy of the blocs voting in favour at the UN. And during this time they only carried one of the Guardian style letters they would later become so infamous for – a letter from around 150 British MPs clearly calling the anti-Zionist vote a form of antisemitism:

Guardian hostile

It is difficult to believe this is the same newspaper. The Guardian never had a problem identifying anti-Zionism for what it was. It recognised the Arab refusal to accept defeat as the underlying cause of the conflict, saw antisemitism in the anti-Zionist rhetoric of the Soviet Union and had no problem swiftly identifying the Arab boycott for what it was. The Guardian was often critical of Israeli government policy but easily saw through anti-Zionism as the antisemitic cause it so clearly is.

What changed at the Guardian?

This isn’t difficult. The ‘rational left’ lost its soul when it became infected by the very viruses it used to be able to identify. It saw Islamic antisemitism until it became infected with it. So too Soviet antisemitism. Today those people writing these letters to the Guardian support the same ideology as those the Guardian quickly dismissed back in 1953. They started to use these media outlets to push their obsession. This is a map of the increase in mentions of the word ‘Israel’ from 1947-2003:

Obsession1 guardian

1966-1967, which includes the six-day war and its aftermath, saw 960 articles. 2002-2003 was to reach 3,402. I can only imagine how bad things are today. To put this in perspective. Israel’s 3,402 came over 24 months. ‘Congo’ did not even make 1,500 articles over the whole five years of the Second Congo War that cost millions of lives. Adding Rwanda to the search terms didn’t make much difference. Israel has become a Guardian obsession.

It becomes even more interesting when we search for ‘anti-Zionism’. Beyond criticism, until the 1990s there were no references to the words in the Guardian archives and a whole year could pass without a single article using it. In 1998 there was one article. Another two in 1999 and 2000.  In 2001 that double to four and in 2003 it tripled to thirteen. Since then it has risen to a tsunami.

The only reference in 1998 was to a book from the 1930s. In 1999 the play ‘Perdition‘ was on the theatre pages as it enjoyed a short run at the Gate Theatre. January of 2000 saw David Ceserani used the term when he was critical of Norman Finkelstein. In June, John Fordham wrote a Jazz column about Gilad Atzmon. Then in August 2001, there was a mention in article about the Woodcraft folk, and the complexities of global politics. In September it was another Jazz advert for Gilad Atzmon.

Guardian and the new millennium

In 2001, the UN conference on Durban took place. Similar in tone to the ‘Zionism is Racism’ arguments from the 1970s, this was the UN at its very worst. And it is in 2001 we can draw comparisons. Where the Guardian had seen the hypocrisy of the UN in the 1970s, the Guardian of 2001 was now partially embedded into the same mindset. It ran several articles with some criticising the conference, but suggested in many, that Israel only had itself to blame. At the end of the year it allowed the UN’s Mary Robinson to write about the disgraceful event as a ‘remarkable coming together’. The NGOs had all fallen into the poisonous ditch at Durban and their long time ally, the Guardian, faithfully followed them.

Almost simultaneously things got worse. The first proper article in the Guardian on anti-Zionism that would be recognisable today was published on 22 Dec 2001. It was an article by Faisal Bodi. According to Mike Gapes, Faisal Bodi was a ‘polemicist for extreme Islamic causes‘. He blogs for the pro-Hezbollah IHRC and has been referenced in a CST report on antisemitism. After a few years he was removed from the Guardian pages but not before he had pushed dozens of articles on their pages. Islamist antisemitism, which sees Zionism as some type of global plot, had infected the Guardians editorial vision.

The movement down the dark path was swift. By January 4 2002, the Neturei Karta had their first letter printed in the paper. Anti-Zionism was a new hot topic. Liberal Jews were sought who would downplay the issue and articles such as one written by Rabbi David Goldberg telling Jews not to overstate antisemitism were published. Michael Rosen appeared on the Guardian pages in January 2002 as well.

On Feb 25 2002, the Guardian ran an article about leftist antisemitism. The author makes some serious statistical mistakes when talking about Zionism within British Jewry. He does try to maintain a balance, but only between the Jews and those that would destroy them. At one point he suggests opposition to Israel, including opposition to its existence is a legitimate position. This is important because the author was Gary Younge, the current Editor-at-large for the Guardian.

We can end this section on 9th May 2002. An article slamming the accusation of antisemitism. All of the current arguments are inside. Antisemitism is mainly a right-wing problem – Anti-Arab racism is a bigger problem – Accusations of antisemitism are bogus and it is really all about Israel – and of course – If there is antisemitism, it is all Israel’s fault. The author? Seamus Milne, mastermind of the Jeremy Corbyn project.

guardian seamus milneBy this time the Guardian had switched sides. All the pieces were in place. The Guardian was lost.

Boycott, boycott, boycott

The Arab league had tried and failed to reinstate the famous Arab boycott in the late 1990s. All references in the Guardian to boycotts of Israel, prior to 2002 were in reference to that. Until in February 2002, when the Guardian reported on a proposed student vote taking place at Manchester University to support the Boycott of Israeli goods. Then on Saturday April 6 2002, the Guardian changed the game completely. Where it had previously seen the boycott of Israel as something to oppose, it now ran a letter, signed by 125 academics calling for an academic and cultural boycott of Israel:

It didn’t know it yet but BDS had just been born and the Guardian had placed itself as the UK’s central BDS publishing outlet. There was clearly an editorial decision and since then, every major BDS push has been given space on the Guardian’s page. On 7 May 2002 there was a report on a conference of the Association of University Teachers. It was all about the gender pay gap. Suddenly towards the end of the article, the writer squeezed in a reference to the Israeli boycott. The AUT were not even considering a vote on it, nor did it fit the context of the article – but for some reason, it got a mention. Journalists at the Guardian were actively trying to normalise the anti-Israel boycott.

The hard-left had spoken, but what about the Islamists? On the same day as the AUT article, 7th May, the Guardian ran an advert calling for a boycott of Israel. The signatories? The Muslim Council of Britain, the Friends of Al Aqsa, the Palestine Return Centre, The Palestine Solidarity Campaign, the IHRA and all the other organisations that have spent the last two decades demonising Israel and spreading antisemitism:

The letters never stopped

With the seeds planted, BDS launched in late 2004, evolving into the movement we know today in 2005. Over the last two decades, the Guardian have slipped further and further into the abyss. Pushing an endless stream of letters calling for a boycott of Israel. Always the same names, over and over again. Whenever Israel could be criticised or antisemitism needed to be downplayed, the Guardian would publish a letter with multiple signatures. Gaza, settlements, antisemitism. The same letter, written and signed by the same people. On Israel the Guardian promote a pro-Islamist, pro-Marxist world vision, and have relegated the Jewish mainstream to an annoying afterthought. Anti-Zionists like Jonathan Rosenhead return dozens of results on the Guardian search engine. Why? Who on earth is he?

We know these names off by heart. We see them time and time again. People like Tony Greenstein, Haim Bresheeth, Steven Rose, Miriam Margolyes, Deborah Fink, Leah Levane, Richard Kuper, Graham Bash, Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi and Mike Cushman. All those that have seen their name in print dozens, if not hundreds of times. And why? Just because they are Jewish opponents to Israel.

The Guardian had found the anti-Zionist Jewish fringe to use as cover, just as Jeremy Corbyn would do when he took power in 2015. Seamus Milne even left the Guardian to protect him, bringing with him no doubt the lessons that he had learned.

And today

The Guardian has been happily baiting British Jews for years. This week it ran yet another letter. This one co-organised from within the Palestine Live group by the Founder Elleanne Green.

At what point did the Guardian sell out the British Jewish community to the whims of the antisemitic haters of Palestine Live?

Over the past four years, I have been contacted by every single major newspaper in the UK, except one. This blog has been at the forefront of research of the slide of the Labour Party towards institutional antisemitism. I have lost count of the number of political figures I have helped to expose. Yet I have no recollection of any journalist from the Guardian ever contacting me.

In fact, those who write for the Guardian are actively telling people to block those like me and other anti-racist campaigners on Twitter.

David Hirsh wrote that ‘Antisemitic ways of thinking have seeped’ into what he called ‘the community of the good’ and says ‘most people in that community are not aware of them and don’t know how to defend against them‘. The Guardian is now indistinguishable from the very antisemitic organs that the newspaper itself used to hate. Unfortunately, like most of the ‘lost left’ if it had to undo the damage, it wouldn’t know where to start. It has swallowed far too much of the Islamist/Marxist ideological vision, to be able to distinguish the good from the bad. Baiting British Jews may as well be on the sports pages. The readers are left with nothing but a poisonous shadow of something that used to resemble a newspaper.



Help to support the fight against hate

This blog is unique and I engage in deep undercover research into antisemitism and the lies people tell about Israel. Your help does make this possible. The work is fully independent, and I have uncovered many key stories on antisemitism on this site. I was recently named as one of the J100 (‘top 100 people positively influencing Jewish life’) by The Algemeiner. If you can, please consider making a donation towards the ongoing research.

You can make PayPal donations using the donate button above or at my paypalme page. I have also opened a Patreon page that gives the opportunity of small monthly donations. If you can consider donating just a few pounds or dollars a month it would be a great way to help me to kick-start it.

Every contribution is truly appreciated.


300 thoughts on “The Guardian newspaper: Decades of baiting British Jews

  1. “That in itself is a disgrace.”

    What is a disgrace, David, defending Williamson?

  2. The main charge here seems to be that the Guardian has not contacted David Collier. Could it be that it is nervous about David’s criminal associations eg Hoffman.Simple Simon, Tony Den Fi Fi Sharpe.

    ps I hate The Guardian

      1. That’s David’s targetted audience for his propaganda, Richard -the mindless.

        1. Sharmuta, Your Taqiyya ain’t flying so well with the Laboor Party breaking up like 1945 Berlin.

        2. Mention ‘the mindless’ and on cue Edward turrns up. Love it.

          1. Mention Sharmutas and on cue, “Mike Farmer” crawls over.

            Happy Nakba!

    1. Not only mindless comments Stephen, they are totally irrelevant to the conversation

      1. Hello Richard. Yes, you are dealing with a wind-up merchant with Bellamy. However, what is encouraging is knowing that David C. and I agree that the course of history since 1948 is about the inability of the Arabs to accept that they were beaten by a better army…and always have been.

        1. Many Jews had been trained by the British during the war. Many kept their weapons, just saying.

          More recently US taxpayers are bled over $3,500,000,000 to supply Israel’s military with FREE weapnry welfare ….EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

  3. David, as it turns out my article in ToI today, “The siren-call if anti-semitism” deals with Guardians antisrmitism as well, tho nowhere with snything like the detail u have provided. Keep up the good work. Alan

  4. Such brilliant research. I admire and appreciate your invaluable work.

  5. Slánský trial, not “Slanksy”. Other than that, good 🙂

  6. Excellent article

    Your article highlights the origins of the current BDS which started as the anti-Jewish boycott which the Arab League started in 1946 (before the State if Israel was declared)
    That anti-Jewish boycott morphed seamlessly into the Anab League boycott of Israel after the war of 1948-49 between the Arabs v Jews/Israelis ( note: this was not the Palestinians v Israel which only became the terminology in the late 1960’s)

    The current BDS began in the 1980-90’s in the western world to replace the failed Arab League boycott
    BDS became formalised at the UN Durban Conference on Racism in 2001 where it deteriorated into an anti-Israel hate fest.
    BDS finally gained traction when its proponents successfully used the ploy of saying that BDS was instituted as a grass roots movement of Palestinian civil society in 2005

    And The Guardian was there, enthusiastically helping BDS on its way with its anti-Israel editorial bent
    A shame; but there you go

    One could go so far as to say the original Arab League boycott against the Jews had morphed seamlessly from the Nazi boycott of the Jews from 1932 to 1945 (but we will leave that for another day)

    1. So, BDS to have Israel change its racist behaviour is the “morphed” Nazi boycott of ‘the Jews”, Richard?

      See you managed to slip “Nazi” in there. The same Nazis who sought to expand their land by Occupation and Annexation?

      1. Not quite sure when this Guardian hatred of Israelis started but I think it’s possibly around the time of the first Lebanon War in which for the first time Israel was wrongly considered to be the aggressor. Then came Sabra & Shatila. Couple that with the fact that the great Menachem Begin was prime minister, the man that has deposed a left wing government in Israel & hey presto you’ve all of a sudden got an excuse for the left wing extremists to slate Israel and the Jews.

        1. Begin was a terrorist with blood on his hands. Bibi eulogises him. Strange.

          1. Mohammed Atta and the 18 other Sand Nazis of 9/11 were terrorists and have blood of 3,000+ (including First Responders who developed illnesses) have on their hands.

            The 4 terrorists of London’s 7/7 transport bombings have bood on their hands.

            The Islamofascists who placed a bomb on Pan Am 103 has blood on his hands.

            The terrorist who beheaded Lee Rigby on the streets showed off the blood on his hands.

            The terrorists who bombed a church on Easter Sunday in Sri Lanka have blood on their hands.

            The terrorists who massacred the staff at Charlie Hebdo had blood on their hands.

            The terrorists who bombed the Boston Marathon have blood on their hands.

            The terrorist who ran over and killed 87 people with a truck on Bastille Day 2016 has blood on his hands.

            The terrorist who massacred people in the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, FL has blood on his hands.

            Fascist Sharmuta, AKA “Mike Farmer” YOU have blood on your hands too.

      2. I don’t see an analogy in his comment, just a suggestion that there’s historic continuity. Do you concede his point in substance or were you about to argue that The Guardian hasn’t actually endorsed a rejectionist and revanchist campaign against (what is effectively) the Middle East’s only non-Muslim state?

  7. Hello David.

    Do you think that all Europeans are antisemite?

    Do you think that all Europeans should die?

  8. ‘Those put on trial confessed to all crimes (under duress or after torture) and were sentenced to punishment. Slánský attempted suicide while in prison. The people of Czechoslovakia signed petitions asking for death for the alleged traitors. Apropos of the conspiracy theories of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, prosecutors claimed that a “Zionist-Imperialist” summit had taken place in Washington DC in April 1947 with President Truman, undersecretary of state Dean Acheson, former treasury secretary Henry Morgenthau Jr, David Ben-Gurion and Moshe Sharret in attendance. The conspiracy charged that defendants were acting in accordance with a so called “Morgenthau Plan” to commit espionage and sabotage against Czechoslovakia for the US in exchange for American support for Israel. Ironically most of the defendants were known to be ardent ANTI-ZIONISTS. -Wiki.

    1. From the New York Times, Dec. 28, 1970.

      “Husak Gets Protest Letter

      In a related development, the sons of a party leader hanged with Mr. Slansky, Otto Sling, who was also a Jew, have sent a letter of protest to Gustav Husak, the party leader, condemning the current “anti Zionist” campaign. The sons, university students in Prague, are Jan Sling, 27, and Karel Sling, 25.

      In their strongly worded let ter, signed also by Vaclav and Jan Vlk, also sons of a late high party functionary, they criticize a recently published book and articles in periodicals, saying they distorted the records of the purge trials in order to make the Jewish victims appear more guilty than those who executed them.

      The four signers charged that in current propaganda the term “Zionist” is applied to all Jews. They continued, “The attacks on so‐called Zionists are not attacks on the Jews alone but on all humanity.”

      The signers urged Mr. Husak, himself a victim of a purge trial in the nineteen‐fifties, to halt the anti‐Semitic campaign lest it lead to results similar to those trials.”

      1. There is a sentence in the letter to Husak that sums up a disturbing number of those who proclaim that they are ‘not anti-Semitic but anti-Zionist’.

        It is this;
        “The attacks on so‐called Zionists are not attacks on the Jews alone but on all humanity.”

        Yes Farmer, I am looking straight at you.

        1. Firstly, every Jew is not a Zionist, and every Zionist is not a Jew.

          Gerald, are you equating Zionism with humanity? Seriously?

          My Slansky post above opines that the defendants were anti-Zionists. David views such as people whose views should be dismissed as they are a ‘fringe group’ and not part of the mainstream Jewish community, yet he includes them in his blog.


          1. No Farmer.

            I am stating, as does the sentence quoted from the letter, that there are those, like you Farmer, who claim to be attacking ‘Zionists’ when their attacks are on Jews and all humanity.

            1. But Zionist doesn’t mean Jew. Only in your mind.

              You seem to be whitewashing Zionism.

                  1. Farmer watching Wimbledon is the same as the content of your ‘posts’.

                    Very repetitive and a load of balls!

  9. Hey Bellers and Michael. Just saw all that Panorama stuff on the Beeb. What did you think of it?

    I can see why you’ve been working your arses off targeting David all this time. Your cunning plans haven’t really delivered for you though, have they? Bellers with your desperation to make the “all Dave’s bezzies are crims” approach stick and Michael with the auto-cue ” Bit like/see like Dave’s just a liar” have rather missed the mark.

    Still, as you keep telling me, “It’s the taking part that counts”. So keep it going lads. You’re changing the world.

    1. “targeting David all this time. ”

      Not David, but David’s contrived propaganda, which obviously does impact on his credibility.

      1. Michael, I think that in part, you and Bellers have contributed to the success of David’s work. You’ve trotted out the same slogans and insults, blog after blog for years now and kept them going even when there was clearly zero impact. You could have chosen cleverer tactics but you just plodded on with the same stuff. Bellers couldn’t make the discredit by association stick and your methods of insult and hollow accusation have got you nothing from any of this. Your political party still looks like a nasty bunch of antisemites and will certainly get battered by Boris at the ballot box and the obvious insincerity behind your posts always seems to strengthen rather than weaken the focus of the articles. I know we do the “just taking part” shtick but surely you guys hoped for more when you started all this. Isn’t it time to call it a day or at least attempt something more radical and effective?

        1. Shan’t burst into tears at your written assessment of my posts, Ian, have misplaced my tissues.

          Impact or no, David’s twisting of things should always be called out. Obviously not something imporrant to yourself.

          Same slogans? The truth will always be the truth. David declares “THE TRUTH MATTERS”. Good slogan … and there it ends.

          I know that you enjoy taking part, irrespective of the blog content, though you never comment it.

          1. Michael, this us the sort of stuff that you’ve been posting for ages now. Not only has it not helped you in any way it always seems to strengthen David’s position and his impact. That’s why I suggested that you were helping rather than hindering him. Look at it this way. Agree with him or not. He does the work. You just shout “Liar” and hurl vague insults. You see the disparity in effort? Surely you and your confederates had greater ambitions from all this.

            1. So, Ian thinks that pointing out untruths and mischevious that doesn’t pay in some way shouldn’t be undertaken?

              David’s ‘work’ has dual purpose. It puts food on his family’s table … AND may contribute in preventing a Labour government which would not continue to appease Israel’s racist endeavours.

              I’ll continue.

              1. “…contribute in preventing a Labour government..”
                Ok Farmer, so we know what you allege David is doing to prevent a Labour Government.

                But what, exactly, are you Farmer as an individual doing to bring about the election of a Labour Government?

                Before you ask me the same question Farmer. I resigned from the Labour Party, after being member for 30 years. It was increasingly obvious that the Party was spiralling towards disaster. I campaigned for the Labour Party during the 1983 General Election (when the manifesto was accurately described as ‘the longest suicide note in history’ )
                I will not repeat the same mistakes a couple of decades later, just because the Party’s ‘leadership’ has been captured by a sectarian cult.

                I will NOT support or vote Labour while Jeremy Corbyn is Leader.

                That is my answer Farmer, what is yours?

                1. I campaign for an end to the austerity, but that wouldn’t interest yourself, Gerald. It’s a policy.

                  1. Farmer are you incapable of asking the question put to you?

                    It is. “But what, exactly, are you Farmer as an individual doing to bring about the election of a Labour Government?”

                    Farmer, ‘I campaign for an end to the austerity’
                    Is not a policy. It is an aspiration.
                    Your aspirations are not an answer to the question I put to you.

                    Now answer the question I put to you.

                    1. First sentence, it should be answering the question put to you.

    2. Balen Report

      Funny that an “impartial” news organization, AKA BBC, works so furiously to SUPPRESS news that reveals the ugly underbelly of the BBC..

      Why don’t people refuse to pay the BBC tax? Make it OPTIONAL. Those tools who love being lied to can pay, and others spend it at their favorite pub..

      1. BBC is the world’s best Broadcaster. Why refuse to watch its wonderful range of programs. The best entertainment channel by far.

        1. > BBC is the world’s best Broadcaster.

          Joseph Goebbles, Der Guardian, ISIS, Al Qada, Taliban, Muslim Brotherhood, Boko Haram, Al Shabab, Fascist Iran

          all agree with you.

    1. Richard you have to understand that Stephen is a self-made man, who is greatly infatuated with his own creator.

  10. Michael, I think you missed my point. By all means continue to do the same things the same way and achieve the same results. I’m sure David would also actively encourage it too. From your perspective it must just feel so frustrating. I mean just continually trying to play the “David asks for money” hand is as pointless as Bellers’s “Look at Dave’s dodgy bezzies” as a tactic. Neither have troubled the scorers in years and even blokes like you two that must not make the tiniest concession, must be ready for a pivot. Surely you both still want to achieve something from all of this.

    1. I am not wanting to achieve anything from all of this. It’s the taking part that counts

      1. Played Bellers. That’s one slogan that has really stuck. Hat tip to your mate down the pub.

    2. Don’t knock “dodgy bezzies”, Ian.

      ‘Corbyn’s Dodgy Bezzies’ farce has been David’s bread and butter for years now.

      1. Bang on Michael. Thing is when David writes about them, the articles are picked up by loads of National newspapers and are then featured on shows produced by Britain’s finest broadcaster. When you and Bellers try the same thing……..well, not quite the same uptake, is it?

        Lucky for you guys it’s just the taking part that counts. Keep it up lads. Summat to tell your grandkids.

        1. Well scurrilous lies are always more interesting than real life. David’s Palestine Live report falsely claiming that Corbyn was ‘part of ‘ a vile facebook group that was deeply antisemitic was seized on by the Tory press and the Zionist tabloids to portray him as deeply antisemitic. In fact the antisemitic posts on that sight were trace..

          But as they say, a lie is half-way round the world before truth has got its boots on. David was the useful deceiver in that farce.

          That you’re proud of him tells all about your character.

          1. “Well scurrilous lies are always more interesting than real life.”

            You, might think so Farmer. That one sentence confirms your attitude to the truth.

            1. You trust David to blog the “TRUTH”?

              Shows how little aware you are.

              1. Farmer, why do you feel a compulsion to attack David?
                I quoted, word for word, from your post above.

                Yet in a pathetic attempt to divert attention away from the fact that you prefer ‘scurrilous lies’ to ‘real life’, you attempt to divert, then waffle, then attempt to change the subject.

                No Farmer, it hasn’t worked.
                You are condemned by your own words.

                What a brainless schmuck you truly are.

      1. Is that form lying … or just saying things the JC doesn’t like?

            1. Farmer, now you are just being very silly.

              Still waiting for an answer to my question, “But what, exactly, are you Farmer as an individual doing to bring about the election of a Labour Government?”

              Is there a reason for your reluctance to answer?

              If you continue to fail to answer, then we can let everyone draw their own conclusions about why you will not answer the question.

              1. Don’t you always draw your own conclusions, twist that which is posted and misrepresent my posts?

                1. “Don’t you always draw your own conclusions, twist that which is posted and misrepresent my posts?”


        1. “Its all recorded Gerald.”

          Flights by UFOs, and landings by alien beings are all ‘recorded’ as well Stephen.

          Are you really that gullible that you believe if something is ‘recorded’ it must be true?
          Or, more likely, is it that you want it to be true because it fits in with your own twisted viewpoint?

            1. Really Stephen.
              “Its on tape”
              Of course, nobody ever edits, or splices tape, do they Stephen?

          1. I mean if there was an audio tape of me saying ” Gerald is a half witted cunt” most people would conclude that I had said that Gerald was a half witted cunt.

  11. Michael, I think you have a decent enough grasp of activism to have understood that David employs one approach and you and Bellers use another. David’s is widely read, quoted and re-circulated amongst national newspapers and online channels. One of these was described by you as Britain’s best only half a dozen posts ago. On the other hand you and Bellers have adopted tactics that have achieved nothing in years. Moreover the juxtaposition here alongside proper articles has assisted David in making his case time after time.

    Whatever your view of the subject matter, the persistence with the same tactics of opposition that you see failing year after year is noteworthy to say the least. Is this a lack of imagination on your part or simply a lack of source material to mount a serious rebuttal? Weird when Bellers has spent 4 years or more telling everyone how clever he is and now concedes he has no objectives here at all !

    1. ” Is this a lack of imagination on your part or simply a lack of source material to mount a serious rebuttal?”

      How many of David’s antisemitism examples did YOU agree with in his recent 56, Ian?

      1. Michael, the focus of our recent exchange has been the question,” why continue with a failed approach?” Its quite hard for you to switch that into a question or an accusation aimed at David. We have seen in our time here that his approach has brought loads more followers, quotes in many of the news channels, adverse attention drawn on the nastier elements of your political party and lots of support and sympathy for Jews. You and Bellers have tapped out the same half dozen slogans and tepid insults for years and have got nothing from it. Surely it’s time for a change of approach. Perhaps a start would be to at least put in 50-60% of David’s effort to show people that you were a serious poster.

        1. As I said previously, lies are far more interesting. The more anti-Corbyn fabrications the more a certain community feasts.

          You appear pleased that they’re swallowing the fiction, I pity their gullibility … and yours.

          1. “As I said previously,…..”

            No Farmer, as you wrote previously.

            If you are talking to your keyboard, or hearing voices, then it is time to increase your medication.

    2. Hey Michael. I’m a nice fella so I’m going to let you off the hook with this thread of questions about your failed approach. I was getting bored anyway and found this film.

      You know how you like to go on about Jews sniping innocent Arab babies and genocidal oppression and all. This is Arabs pretending to be shot and wounded. What do you think?

      1. No, Stephen.
        ‘Not having objectives’ is evidence of you being a lazy gobshite. Nothing more, and nothing less.

          1. Stephen to quote you, in your post above of July 12.
            “Pleased to have been of helo”

              1. It is a direct quote from YOUR post above genius.

                Why don’t you explain what it means you used the word.

    1. To be charitable to Bellers I used the same argument when I was awarded an F in my chemistry O Level suggesting it was evidence of my cleverness. Unhappily for me and Bellers it was simply confirmed as evidence of our respective failures.

      Good thread this.

      1. “To be charitable to Bellers … “?

        Why would you be, Ian? He’s not Jewish.

        1. Sure Michael, but what did you think of the film of all the Arabs pretending to be shot and rehearsing their reactions ?

          1. Less lucrative than David falsely claiming 56 examples of antisemitism, Ian.

            Perhaps you can show me that all 56 actually were.

              1. If you are rejecting my claim that David is ‘economical with the truth’ step through the 56 examples he claimed were antisemitism and give us how many of them actually are.

                Off you go, Ian.

          1. I have got Mossad onto the case. They are trying to find someone for whom the cap fits. It’s like Cinderella and the glass slipper. Oh no it doesn’t. Oh yes it does.

            Ian you are much too excitable and too heavily into immediate gratification to be an effective liar.

            1. Got me bang to rights Bellers. I’m like next doors puppy; not yours to control but will always come to the fence when I smell some shite. No shortage of that in Activist Land.

              1. Guaranteed supply with these blogs, before the posts arrive, Ian.

              2. I am always mindful of Gnasher’s sage advice. ” If you don’t have all the bases securely covered, telling the truth is the best policy”.

                Or as David’s bestest Scoffie famously told us ” When I lie I apologise”

    1. I don’t recall saying Arab ” Terror ” was less lucrative than blogging. You just made that up. You are a very naughty boy.

      1. I hold you responsible for all of Michael’s posts Bellers. You’re his gaffer.

    2. Given that Israel, against intternational humanitarian law committed the war-crime of destroying the Qawasmeh family home making his relatives homeless besides fining him $63,000 I’m sure we can all look on the PA money as some compensation for Israel crime.

    1. Michael, you’re Bellers’s bezzie so you bear collective responsibility. Bit like the Arabs eh?

    1. Calm down Michael. It’s only banter. Anyway I knew I’d be able to make you defend the murderer of teenage students. Eazi-peazi.

      Every time you post you’re promoting more sympathy for Jews and Israel. Are you an undercover Zio?

      1. Ian, congratulations.

        I take a day off to watch the Cricket World Cup Final, and come back to see you have had the two of them dancing to your tune like a couple of puppets on strings.

        We’ll have to see if we can’t raise your monthly stipend in recognition of your successful efforts in keeping Stephen, and the village idiot Farmer, under control.

          1. No Stephen.
            If it was my ‘day job’ my first task would be to throw out the rubbish.
            Would you like to hazard a guess who would be the first one I’d throw out.

              1. Stephen as I like you (sarcasm intended).
                You are not top of the list.

      2. Your view of reality seems as skewed as David’s view ….. unless of course those are not really yours, David’s and Gerald’s views but there’s something about you three that compels you to twist, and deceive. What might that be I wonder? Zionism?

        1. To be lectured on ‘reality’ by Farmer, the Village Idiot, who posted above “Well scurrilous lies are always more interesting than real life.”, is just another example of Farmer’s hypocrisy, as well as his detached relationship with reality and the truth.

      3. Any sympathy for Israeli Jews ( not Jews elsewhere, the majority) that I ‘promote’ soon disappears when folk remember the number of civilians shot dead at the fence by Israeli firing-squads … considerably more than a mere three.

        p.s. remember that the three were killed in retaliation for the shooting dead of two palestinian youths by a border policemen, Nakba day.

        1. Sharmuta, 500,000 Arabs have died in the Syrian Civil War.

          How many of the 500,000 were children?

          1,000,000 Arabs/Muslims died in the 8 year Iraq/Fascist Iran War.

          How many of the 1,000,000 were children?

          When Arabs run over people on Bastille Day in Nice France, how many of the dead were children?

          Your Pal-e-STINIANS don’t value the lives of children as civilized cultures do.

          1. Didn’t the US fund the rebels against Assad which has become the Syrian war?

    1. Do many things remind you of Jonathan Hoffman, Stephen?

      This fixation you have for Jonathan, is it fuelled by your unrequited passion for him?
      Or, do you just hate him because he is Jewish?

    2. Where’s your bezzie this morning Bellers? I was going to post him the clip of the Arab telling his mates to go and kill Diaspora Jews.I love it when he ties himself up like a pretzel trying to justify it.

      Been a top thread this.

  12. Hey Michael and Bellers. What do you think of the request by HM Opposition that Britain’s best broadcaster removes its Panorama programme about them from the iplayer ?

    Do you still think that they are Britain’s best broadcasters?

    1. Farmer, what do mean by “David, what do mean by “Jew Baiting”, used by posters too?” ?

      Me from Planet Earth, me speak English.
      What planet Farmer from?

      1. Farmer from Earth, like Gerald. Notice Gerald speak like Farmer. 🙂

        1. It’s loony Edward …. from Loony Land.

          Trump gone back to where he came from yet? Scotland?

          1. Farmer Scotland is guilty of many things.
            The Bagpipes,
            White Heather Club,
            Andy Stewart,
            Bay City Rollers,
            and the most disgusting pint of Guinness I ever had.

            But, they do not deserve to have Trump foisted onto them.

  13. Hey Bellers and Michael. What do you think of the callers on that former Islamists radio show today? Ex-members of your party saying that in private they never differentiate between Jews and Zios when doing all their prejudice.

    Not great is it ?

      1. “My party ? Which one is that then ?”

        Stephen, based on the content of your posts and your website ‘BumBitersRuS’,
        the Monster Raving Looney Party.

        1. Ian I don’t think that is the party you had in mind. I am betting you meant the Labour Party which is of course not my party but David’s party. See his video above. I wouldn’t be a member of any party that would have me

  14. Hey Bellers and Michael. What do you think of the Arab leader that has asked people to break through our border fence strapped into explosive belts? He reckons they’ve made loads of them.

    If they only murder “a mere three” innocent teenager students would that be okay by you Michael?

    1. If each loss of life is a tragedy aren’t 190 deaths at the fence by Israeli firing-squads much more to be regretted, Ian? Each life as valuable as an Israeli life?

      1. Just as Ham-Ass executes uncooperative Pal-e-STINIANS and drags their bodies behind motorcycles through the streets of Gaza, Ham-Ass shoots uncooperative Pal-e-STINIANS as a warning to other less enthusiastic Pal-e-STINIANS.

        Never let a Dead Pal go unutilized to further “The Cause” of Terrorist Pal-e-STINE.

    2. Sure Michael but what do you think about the value of life when Arabs use suicide belts? Do you understand the exchange rate they use?

        1. Correct Michael. You are right in saying that for every 3 innocent Jewish teenagers killed by Arab terrorists, they expect to lose 190. They don’t place the same value on life do they?

          Do you think that this is why they want their people to strap on explosive belts and attack our border fence?

          1. Not good at comprehension these Zionists … knuckles drag too?

            1. Not good at Math these Pal’s and their pals … drooling, Low-IQ Morlock members of Laboor.

      1. “I rarely, as close to never as makes little difference, think about Arab leaders”

        I don’t doubt you Stephen.
        You are far too busy slavering about the Jewish people you hate to have any time spare.

          1. “But thank you for your response”

            My pleasure Shit-head.
            As our great and wise prophet Stephen Bellamy wrote, above on July 12, in his own inscrutable way, “Pleased to have been of helo”

            All praise the wise and wonderful Stephen, truly a legend in his own lunchtime.

            All praise Stephen’s wise and wonderful cat Gnasher.
            Don’t forget Gnasher the wise words of the ancient Korean proverb,
            “So many cats, so few recipes.”

            1. “Pleased to have been of helo”

              Been pondering over the sentence that has so perplexed you, Gerald. Simple really. It’s just a TYPO.

              The ‘helo’ should be read as ‘help’. Surprised it diidn’t click with you.


              1. Farmer are you suggesting that a, self-proclaimed, genius and wit such as Stephen makes ‘typos’, or any mistakes?

                Wash your mouth out with soap and water, You vile blasphemer!

  15. Hey Bellers and Michael. I asked you why you kept on posting the same crap year after year and whether you just lacked imagination or source material. You replied with a link from 2010!!

    Is that British irony?

  16. Hey Michael and Bellers. You said above that if each loss of life is a tragedy aren’t 190 deaths at the fence by Israeli firing-squads much more to be regretted than a mere three ( referring to the kidnap and murder of 3 teenage Jewish students by Arab terrorists) .

    But you also said that the industrial genocide of six million Jews was ” still far less heinous” than when Jews kill Arabs attacking their border.

    That was you on both counts wasn’t it? (Hint. It was.)

    You are a very naughty antisemite Michael.

      1. Michael, a PLEASE would be nice. Just because you’re a nasty antisemite doesn’t mean you can forget your manners now.

              1. Still no PLEASE from you Michael?

                Poor form. Probably the sort if chap that leaves the band on his cigars.

      1. Stephen just because you “don’t recall saying any of that stuff”, does not mean you did not say it.
        As we are all well aware Stephen, you are not ‘playing with a full box of toys’.

          1. Stephen now you are just trying to excuse your laziness by pretending you have a superior intellect.

            If it makes you happy to dream such things, dream on. Reality will dawn on you one day, and you will realise that as well as being a lazy gobshite, you are a dumb, lazy gobshite.
            Keep your excuses for the Job Centre, for the next time you go to claim benefit.

  17. Hey Bellers and Michael. What did you think of the comments from Zevel, the UK Pro-Israel lobby group today about Hamas ‘representatives’ beating up members of Amnesty International based in Gaza?

    It quoted Saleh Higazi, Deputy Middle East and North Africa Director at Amnesty International who reports on the systemic brutalisation of the civilian population of Gaza by Hamas and specifically it’s use of civilians as forced human shields at the Israeli border fence.

    Apparently the Arabs take a dim view of Amnesty reporting on these things. Are they right Michael?

    1. Shouldn’t you be justifying your accusations of me by quoting my post re. “less heinous”, Ian, and the date that I posted it?

      Unless you’re lying, in the spirit of this blog.

      1. Farmer, how is your reply a reply to Ian’s post directly above yours?

        You make accusations about Ian making accusations about you, but where in his post directly above your post is he making accusations against you?

        Unless, of course, you are one of these Hamas thugs beating people up, are you?

      2. Sure Michael. But what did you think of Amnesty International saying Hamas uses human shields to attack a sovereign border? Is it just more hasbara from a Jew-controlled NGO?

          1. Sure Michael. But what did you think of Amnesty International saying Hamas uses human shields to attack a sovereign border?

    1. “Maybe I will get around to thinking..”

      Yes Stephen, maybe one day you will.

      There is no evidence of you ever thinking in the past, so what will bring about this Damascene conversion?

    2. Too right Bellers. We’ve had decades to accept punishment beatings down that Ireland. Fookin’ softies.

        1. Wow Stephen, you have never made that quip before. (British Irony)

          Originality and sparkling wit, really are your trademarks. (British Irony)

          1. Lacking the inventiveness that yourself, David and Ian are infamous for, Gerald?

            1. Farmer, in your opinion, why does being inventive make you infamous?

              Is it because it is in direct contradiction to the kind of Stalinist Orthodox society, that you and Corbyn want to create in the U.K.?

              Do you already have your application in to join Milne’s Thought Police?

              1. When you’re INVENTING your own ‘truths’, ie LYING that kinda makes you infamous.

                1. You cannot invent truth Farmer.
                  It is either true, or it is a lie.

                  Let us not forget that you Farmer are the one with the predilection for lies.
                  Your post of July 13,
                  “Well scurrilous lies are always more interesting than real life”

                  1. Not competent with English are you, Gerald?

                    Meanwhile Ian’s too chicken to present my ‘post’ and the date it was posted.

                    1. “Not competent with English are you, Gerald?”

                      Really Farmer.
                      You might want to read through your ‘posts’ before you make such a silly remark.
                      For example, “David, what do mean by “Jew Baiting”, used by posters too?”

                      Hypocrisy, thy name is Farmer.

                    2. Never got an answer from David, prob. already banked the money for his blog.

                    3. “Goodbye, goodbye. Parting is such sweet sorrow”

                      Time for me to roll up my tent and move on to pastures new.

            1. What again?
              Another sample of original wit from the genius mind of Stephen. We are all doubly blessed today.

      1. 200 comments on this one. 96 from Bellers and Michael. Good effort lads.

        Are we keeping this one going or starting up again on the next one?

        1. You haven’t provided the quote and date yet that you have misrepresented over, Ian.

          Don’t slink away yet.

          1. You want to keep this one going for a while Michael? Excellent.

            Sadly, my slinking days are behind me now. Nonetheless I am happy to say that my civilities remain. So if you include some basic courtesies of your own and ask me nicely rather than barking your orders like a camp guard, we’ll get much further with this.

            Challenge accepted?

              1. Or alternatively afford another person a common courtesy. If you are prioritising rudeness over getting an answer to your request there’s not much I can do about that is there?

          1. At the risk of inflaming your rosacea again Bellers…I love it!!!

            Also worth gathering analytics on repetition of key phrases, copy/pastes etc. over say 4 years and attribution.

            Pity that old booby Chris gave up on all this. He was only a biscuit short of your solid 10 on the Sloganator.

  18. Some weeks ago David published a youtube video asking “Is it Mosley .. or is it Jeremy Corbyn” hoping to tar Jeremy Corbyn.

    Seems that Mosley’s descendant, guilty of publishing racist leaflets in the 50s, has been funding ‘Friend of Israel’ MP Tom ‘Brutus’ Watson.

    “Max Mosley was also quizzed about whether he was a “fit and proper person” to be funding the office of Labour’s Deputy Leader, Tom Watson, which has received £500,000 from Mr Mosley.”

    Wonder if David’s guilt by association accusation tic applies here. Mmm.

      1. Farmer, you make comment about a YouTube video David posted, “Some weeks ago..”
        Your response is to dredge up a report from 28th February 2018, that is right 72 weeks ago.

        So lets think about Today’s News.
        “Staff working for Labour have voted to condemn the party’s official response to the Panorama on claims of anti-Semitism.

        The GMB union’s branch of party workers voted 124-to-four to call on the leadership to issue an apology for attacks on whistleblowers.”

        Better to be a ‘Brutus’ like Tom Watson, than a ‘Caligula’ like Corbyn.

    1. “Wonder if David’s guilt by association accusation tic applies here. Mmm.”

      As I’m in a generous mood Farmer, I’ll correct your sentence for you.

      “I wonder if David’s guilt by association accusation applies here. A Tic-Tac would be nice Mmm”

  19. Hey Michael and Bellers. What did you think of Zevel hitting the news again? The influential Pro-Israel lobby group reports that UK PM-elect Boris has agreed to visit Israel as a priority for post Brexit trade talks. When reporters asked whether he’d be visiting ‘Palestine’ also, the blonde bombshell is said to have replied ” I want to leave ill-conceived and wholly fictional state projects, not enter them !” However this may have been mistranslated.

    We love The Boris over here.

    1. “We love The Boris over here.”

      I would love ‘The Boris’ to be over there. In fact anywhere but, here!
      Perhaps we should, to quote the Leader of the Free World President Doofus, “Send Him Back” to New York where he was born and festered.

      1. You surprise me Gerald. I can see why Bellers and Michael wouldn’t be Blondists but thought you chaps would want a guy that will certainly obliterate the Marxists at the polls. That would seem to be the main priority for the Brit-right, right?

        1. Boris will only succeed in obliterating the British economy. The damage and suffering he will cause to British Industry and the British people is beyond measure. If you want to see Corbyn as Prime Minister, put Boris in No. 10 first.
          Corbyn will suddenly become electable.

          I have no time for Corbyn.
          But if I was in a lift with Boris and Corbyn, with a gun but only one bullet.
          I’d shoot myself!.

            1. Stephen I very much doubt a lazy gobshite, such as yourself, could organise a piss-up in a brewery.

  20. David, the jargon you’ve used; “Jew-baiting” …. is that just another invented slight?

    What do you mean by “Jew-baiting”?

  21. All legitimate points Gerald. I think we’ll have to agree to disagree here. I still get a vote as a party member and would certainly vote for La Boris if I was a UK resident. I think he’s probably the best candidate to make Brexit happen and also the best candidate to win an election with a functional majority, enabling him to get things done. There are probably only a dozen people that have a real understanding of the economic realities of Brexit and I am not one of them so I’ll leave the speculation to others. In practical terms Israel is better off because El Al has been able to negotiate much more favourable terms with Rolls Royce for future supply of engines, parts and maintenance now that the UK is able to negotiate independently from the EU. Incidentally this generated advanced orders for £5bn for the UK securing the futures of loads of jobs at their main production line in Derby; close to the North Derby constituency of one C. Williamson Esq.

    1. Ian if you want to use ‘banter’, or bullshit, when you are dealing with Farmer and Stephen, that is your choice.
      Please don’t insult my intelligence by thinking you will get away with the same tactics with me.

      For example the contracts to supply and maintain the Trent engines from Rolls Royce for El Al dates back to October 2015. Ian that is before the Referendum in 2016. The U.K. is still an EU member so your line ” that the UK is able to negotiate independently from the EU.” is also incorrect.

      Incidentally if you are concerned about jobs at Rolls Royce, then you will campaign against the illegal sanctions against Iran by the Trump regime. A contract that could well be adversely affected by Trump’s sanctions, and is a much larger contract than the one for El Al.

      1. So sorry to have caused offence Gerald. Admittedly I took the unusual step for this place of attempting to speak normally. Clearly I am on safer ground remaining in character and talking bollox like everyone else here. Lesson learnt.

        1. Ian you should know better than to think you could out Google Geraldine

            1. It was a schoolboy error Bellers. I should have stuck with auto-fill responses like you suggest and avoid all of this unpleasantness. At least we have seen that Gerald sits closer to you than me on the Zio-tron.

              As they say “Every Kimmie needs a crank.”

              1. “Gerald sits closer to you than me”

                Ian have you ever thought that the reason nobody sits close to you could be caused by a personal hygiene problem?

                Or to put it, slightly, less diplomatically.
                Oi Dogbreath! You stink!

                1. You know Gerald, I re-read my earlier post that caused you to react in this way to see where the offence lay. I was civil and courteous. I indicated my own position and whilst conceding that we may not agree on things, did nothing to demean or insult your own views on things. Nonetheless you seemed to take my remarks very personally and this prompted a very extreme reaction. I wonder whether this is a sincere response or you’re simply compelled to behave to type like Michael and Bellers. Either way I will not be resorting to insults and name calling and bear no I’ll will towards you if you choose this course of action as you are perfectly entitled to do.

                  As I said “Every Kimmie needs a crank”.

                  1. “I was civil and courteous”
                    Ian, being civil and courteous means not spreading bullshit and attempting to pass it off as fact.

                    “I wonder whether this is a sincere response or you’re simply compelled to behave to type like Michael and Bellers”
                    You mean pointing out your egregious errors may not be a sincere response.

                    But, you then carry on “Either way I will not be resorting to insults and name calling”.
                    So calling into doubt the sincerity of my response, and making an allegation that I am ‘compelled’ to behave to type like Michael and Bellers, could not be considered an insult?

                    Most amusing of all has got to be, “if you choose this course of action as you are perfectly entitled to do.”
                    When I need your permission to carry out any course of action, I’ll let you know, but, don’t hold your breath waiting.

                    I need permission from no man, or you, to point out the truth.

                    Ian you have my permission to go and F*ck your self!

                    1. What an extraordinarily disproportionate response Gerald. In sum, I indicated that my politics are different to your own and your response was to suggest I have halitosis. I then attempt to clarify whether these are sincere responses or an activist tactic and you suggest that I go fuck myself.

                      It would seem that the dye is cast here and I suppose it should come as no surprise to me really. The style of activism here is entirely thematic; Bellers with his revolving carousel of slogans, Michael with his panto insults and now you with your self conscious defensiveness when you sense a slur. At least it makes things 33.33% more interesting for me. I was getting bored rigid with Michael and Bellers.

                    2. “In sum, I indicated that my politics are different to your own”

                      No Ian, you tried to pass off a story as fact when clearly it was not.
                      You lied.
                      Now whether that was a deliberate lie or your own ignorance, I don’t know and frankly don’t care.
                      Then in an attempt to cover up your stupidity you attempt the well known ‘Holier than thou’ gambit.

                      Not only are your politics different to mine, your lackadaisical attitude to facts is also different to mine.
                      I will continue to point out when you make a colourful interpretation of reality, although with your woeful level of ignorance that will probably take up a lot of time.

                      To paraphrase Macbeth, “Lay on Ian, and damned be he that first cries hold!”

    2. Ian, before you or one of the usual suspects asks me the inevitable next question. ‘Do I think the EU should stand by the JCPOA, and continue to trade with Iran.’
      Yes, I do.

      I also believe that the EEAS should have written on their walls, this quote from 1st March 1848 by Lord Palmerston. ” We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.”

        1. Stephen is “whistling nonchalently” a euphemism of yours for wanking?

        1. “A tiff?”

          A tiff who? A tiff who?
          We all fall down.

          Sorry, I couldn’t resist that.
          I’ll go and sit on the naughty step, for the rest of the evening.

          1. No need. I’m impressed at how you explained Ian’s error. Forgiven.

      1. What a day. Things have certainly livened up here. I was more than happy to throw Zevel at Bellers and Michael to pass the time. Now I’ve got a whole new alley up which to insert my crank. Fair warning Gerald.My inverted commas are as long and sharp as yours.

        Final clarification question. Are you really one of Bellers’s ultra personae?

        1. Ian are you really ‘Edward’ with a slightly improved vocabulary?

    1. Stephen I had not heard that song before, and I enjoyed it.
      So thank you for posting it.

      This is one of my favourites, I wander around the garden singing it.
      No doubt Stephen you have heard it before.

      1. In “honour” of the 50th Anniversary of the First Men Landing and Walking on the Moon …

        When the MOON hits your eye, Like a big Pizza pie, That’s a Nakba!

  22. Hey Bellers and Jellers, you guys are so cute; love-bites and everyfink.

    Do you let Michael watch?

    1. “Do you let Michael watch?”

      Of course. He is holding the video camera.

        1. Farmer, I have not watched the Panorama programme in question.
          I do know that John Ware has a long and distinguished record in investigative journalism, but I can’t comment further as I did not see the programme.

          I’m very wary of ‘independent media’. The anti-Muslim bigot, Yaxley-Lennon aka ‘Tommy Robinson’ describes himself as an independent media journalist. If he’s a journalist, I’m a Fighter Pilot for the Provisional Wing of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

          The report of the EHRC investigation into he Labour Party will be published and should be interesting reading.

          1. We ALL await the findings …and the subsequent investigation of racism in the Conservative Party.

            1. Farmer I hope that the Labour Party will call a Delegate Conference to discuss the Report, its findings, and to decide any future action.

              As far as racism in the Conservative Party, and their ingrained anti-Muslim bigotry. That will be rather a large report, about the size of the Encyclopedia Britannica.

              1. That won’t be necessary. I am thinking the Zios are going to be very dissapointed By way of a little side bet I am betting the agency gets called antisemitic

                1. Stephen, the main reason that I believe a Delegate Conference is necessary, is that irrespective of the findings of the EHRC report, the Labour Party needs to fully discuss what has happened and why it wasn’t dealt with effectively earlier.

                  No matter what conclusions are in the Report, someone or some group will be unhappy. You will probably win your bet that the EHRC will be called anti-Semitic. It is also a safe bet that someone at EHRC will be found to be a “father to two Jewish children. Just saying.” ( father is a title Farmer so should be Father. Just saying)

                    1. Why not?

                      There was anti-Semitism in the Labour Party and Trades Unions before Corbyn became Leader. It has got worse in the last couple of years. But if you want to root something out, you have to find where its roots are.

                    2. Are we talking of antisemitism or the accusations of?

                    3. Suppose you also have to recognise it by not being distracted with new fangled and invented descriptions of it too

                    4. Nice attempt to work in your ‘hobby horse’ about the definition of anti-Semitism.

          2. In one Panorama episode(2016), Ware had accused a pro-Palestinian charity of being a front for terrorism. The following year, the BBC was forced to pay undisclosed damages to the charity’s former general manager for libel and to issue a public apology.

          3. John Ware is father to two Jewish children. Just saying.

            Ware has also written for the Sunday Telegraph, Sunday Times, Guardian, JJEWISH CHRONICLE and Standpoint magazine.

          4. “The anti-Muslim bigot, Yaxley-Lennon aka ‘Tommy Robinson’ describes himself as an independent media journalist.”

            Couldn’t David fit that bill, Gerald? … not that I’m a fan of either.

            1. “Couldn’t David fit that bill, Gerald?”

              No, I don’t think he does.

      1. Hope your spare hand is steady Michael. These lads are real activists.

        1. Also Michael, did you use your Farmer commas around Panorana because it is only an alleged thing to you. Its produced by Britains best broadcaster isn’t it?

          1. I’m looking forward to the Panorama Oscars. Have you decided who you are voting for as best actor and actress Ian ? Think I’m going for Sam and Izzy.

    1. Stephen I am happy frolicking and listening to the music on this thread.
      Apart from the one you posted of The Bay City Rollers strangling ‘Bella Ciao’.

        1. By the way Stephen.
          There are only two good things to come out of Modena.

          1) Luciano Pavarotti,
          2) Aceto Balsamico di Modena.

            1. Not a matter of using Google, Stephen.
              I always use Balsamic Vinegar from Modena for salad dressing.
              Been a fan of Pavarotti for more than three decades, before there was such a thing as Google.

                    1. Oh dear Farmer.
                      Is that because of high-blood pressure, or a heart problem?

                    2. Farmer, if it is a heart problem there is only one thing I can say.


                    3. What have you just done to my husband ? He’s gone a funny colour …… and he’s not moving ..

                    4. Farmer if you have died, could you confirm it by falling over.
                      Otherwise it will be hard to tell the difference between now and your usual vegetative state.

                    5. Thank goodness for the NHS, they’ve saved him. You’re a wicked person, Gerald. He’s a wonderful man.

                      He’ll be out of hospital tomorrow. We’re throwing a street party on his release from hospital.

  23. 300 more posts – Boom! Well played lads. The recipe shares and Rom-com shtick tipped it over.

    Fitting that it coincides with the impending coronation of La Boris and the launch of the campaign of the lovely Ayelet Shaked; proper right winger rather than some centrist softie like Bibi. Even the Hitler-moustache graffito can’t diminish her Genghis Khanian gorgeousness.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.