On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 21:48:35 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message
James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:30:26 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message
James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:48:01 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message
James Farrar wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:06:37 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message l
Chris Johns wrote:

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Graeme Wall wrote:

Wow, it's like having our very own automatic Daily Mail Talking
Point- bot.

[snip]

Neither of which statements are true.

I don't think the Daily Mail ever let something minor like the truth get
in the way.

Given you snipped the lie (oops I meant line, typo honest!) I was
referring to...

Though your lack of response to my response speaks volumes.

Actually says I haven't a clue what you are talking about now, which response
to what response?

I stated that the reference to "Labour's ballot rigging" by John
Rowland upthread was "because it is enabled by a measure brought in by
Labour and has predominantly been done by Labour".

You claimed: "Neither of which statements are true".

I then demonstrated in Message-ID:
that, in fact, both
statements are true.

And you had no comment. I wonder why.

Well you didn't actually demonstrate it and I didn't want to embarras you
further.

I think it's rather more embarrassing to claim that a measure
introduced in 2000 was not introduced by Labour.

So why claim it?

I don't know; you were the one claiming it[*], so you tell me.
[*] As shown by the following exchange:

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:52:27 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

In message
James Farrar wrote:

Because it [vote-rigging] is enabled by a measure [on-demand postal voting]
brought in by Labour and has predominantly been done by Labour.

Neither of which statements are true.