Oh dear. All I know about him is he went to a fee-paying Grammar school . . . ?!
Oh dear. All I know about him is he went to a fee-paying Grammar school . . . ?!Grammar schools don't tend to be fee paying do they? The potential hypocrisy is that he is the product of a grammar school education who thinks grammar schools should be abolished. Mind you, I don't suppose he had much choice where he was sent to school when he was a kid so I'm not holding that against him.
Yer, but he's working class, innit. And Carl Marx had a beard. He can't be wasting too much Collective Time shaving when he will want to get down and dirty with The Workers at The Labour Exchange.Jeremy is NOT working class. He grew up in a seven bedroom manor house in the Cotswolds fercrissakes!!
Jeremy is NOT working class. He grew up in a seven bedroom manor house in the Cotswolds fercrissakes!!
Prime Ministers must, repeat MUST be clean-shaven, otherwise they look like dodgy introverts with something to hide!!! So Corbyn stands no chance (especially with women voters)... unless he invests in a supply of BIC razors before election time.
(https://i.imgur.com/BFfiUkj.jpg)
Has that blown the gaff for Yvette Cooper as well I wonder, or is there some tittle-tattle about her shaving habits we don't yet know . . . ?
Call me shallow or what, but...
I'm not keen on a woman with Balls 8(8-)) or one who's a lover of Dr Dre (c)rap music... yuck, ghastly! ?8)@)-)
... or, for that matter, a potential PM who speaks with a flat Lanky twang. %56&
So Jeremy Corbyn complete with Lenin cap, scruffy beard and silver spoon it has to be. 8(8-))
(http://i.imgur.com/kkz896X.jpg?1)
... although definitely more acceptable after an affable granddad makeover with facial and nasal hair nicely trimmed. 8((()*/
(http://i.imgur.com/1xD0Bak.jpg?1)
Following discussions with my friends* on the Madeleine McCann forum I thought it would be interesting to continue the discussion here. Anyone with an ounce of sense knows that pigs will sprout wings and fly before Corbyn gets his hands on the keys of Number 10, but putting that to one side - what do we think of his views, his ability to lead the Labour Party and the country, his beard and dress sense, etc?
* (friends in this instance is used in the same way as Corbyn claimed he used the word to describe the terrorist sympathisers he shared a platform with, ie: a bunch of people whose views I vehemently oppose but it's always good to talk!)
The fact that Tony Blair is having kittens at the idea of JC being Labour leader is enough for me to vote for him
8((()*/
hi Holly I know the economists have stuck the third finger up at the ones that seem to be having apoplectic fits and telling lies ps....I never voted for anyone who I thought was the best to snog, most politicians are dead ugly anyway
JC is the best of a bad bunch
cooper - boring, lies, so non inspirational
Kendall - boring, lies, talks to her audience as if they are five years old
Andy - sad little wimp
Tough sh it as they say Blair and David Milliband and Mandelson....ooer what a terrible trio!
how's Chilcot doing TB? And why has been sitting of his sad arse for so many years.....
790£ a day? That's 790 x 365 x 6 =
?
A fat load of dosh
A disgrace the time it has taken..how much longer does he need?
Jeremy Corbyn will never be PM, he will be almost 71 by the time the next election comes around assuming it to be 5 May 2020. All he will ever be is the interim leader.
The great British public have abandoned Labour and given their policy on immigration they did the right thing. Labour is now unelectable!!
... so he can keep that scruffy Albert Steptoe beard after all. Not that I'm bothered because whether red, blue or yellow they're all a bunch of scheisters anyway. I'm still waiting for Cameron's promised vote to get us out of Europe and its freeloading Parliament.
Jeremy Corbyn will never be PM, he will be almost 71 by the time the next election comes around assuming it to be 5 May 2020. All he will ever be is the interim leader.Correct. Labour RIP.
The great British public have abandoned Labour and given their policy on immigration they did the right thing. Labour is now unelectable!!
Correct. Labour RIP.
Cheer up Alfred. The party recovered from the stab in the back by the SDP, and they were political giants compared to the nonentities who might defect today. The party will survive whatever they and their media friends throw at it.It won't form a government for another 10years miniimum. How old will Jezzer be by then?
Fantastic result for Labour....time for a breath of fresh air and for a serious challenge to the horrible Tories and the spineless useless Cameron thingit can only be a fantastic result for Labour if today's result takes them closer to government than they might otherwise have been with one of the other candidates. In all honesty I wouldn't have fancied their chances with any of the candidates they put forward and at least this result will give us all plenty to talk about over the next few months. I would put a fiver on Jeremy not being the leader anymore in a year or so's time anyway..,
Also a kick up the backside for those pretending to be labour but pandering to the right, be honest or get lost if you want to have any credibility
bring it on!
8((()*/
It doesn't matter if JC is not the next PM, and you never know, he may be, he is 62 going on 52, what matters is at least one party has got a guy with the guts to say it like it is, and speak for a lot of people, instead of being a sound bite buffoon, surely even you would applaud this and everyone is fed up of stinking dishonest backtracking politicians, give the bloke a chance, he might ruck up politics to the level it should be once again
ps and FYI Im not some rabid red leftie..I have an enormous amount of respect for a lot of Tory MPs, and a healthy and informed contempt for quite a few labour ones, unfortunately the corrupt and incompetent idiotics for some reason seem to rule
Corbyn strikes me as an honest man of principle. He seems more likely to answer questions honestly, which will be a refreshing change.the thing is, if he continues to answer questions honestly and stick to his principles then he really doesn't have a cat in hell's chance of appealing to the majority of the electorate, so no Labour victory in sight while he heads the party.
It doesn't matter if JC is not the next PM, and you never know, he may be, he is 62 going on 52, what matters is at least one party has got a guy with the guts to say it like it is, and speak for a lot of people, instead of being a sound bite buffoon, surely even you would applaud this and everyone is fed up of stinking dishonest backtracking politicians, give the bloke a chance, he might ruck up politics to the level it should be once againJez is 66 I believe, not 62, meaning he will be 71 at the next election. It's all well and good him being a nice guy and all, with integrity and principles but we need an effective party of opposition not an anti-establishment protest group which is what Labour will become under Corbyn. Out of interest, where in the world has Corbyn's brand of politics ever been shown to work on a longterm basis and improve the standard of living and well being for all its inhabitants?
ps and FYI Im not some rabid red leftie..I have an enormous amount of respect for a lot of Tory MPs, and a healthy and informed contempt for quite a few labour ones, unfortunately the corrupt and incompetent idiotics for some reason seem to rule
Jez is 66 I believe, not 62, meaning he will be 71 at the next election. It's all well and good him being a nice guy and all, with integrity and principles but we need an effective party of opposition not an anti-establishment protest group which is what Labour will become under Corbyn. Out of interest, where in the world has Corbyn's brand of politics ever been shown to work on a longterm basis and improve the standard of living and well being for all its inhabitants?
You mean just like Capitalism. @)(++(* @)(++(*Name a system you would rather live under Stephen.
Jez is 66 I believe, not 62, meaning he will be 71 at the next election. It's all well and good him being a nice guy and all, with integrity and principles but we need an effective party of opposition not an anti-establishment protest group which is what Labour will become under Corbyn. Out of interest, where in the world has Corbyn's brand of politics ever been shown to work on a longterm basis and improve the standard of living and well being for all its inhabitants?
The last party leader with strong convictions, the courage to stick to them and act on them was Mrs Thatcher. She believed in 'Monetarism' and her hero was Adam Smith. She scared Labour so much they became 'New Labour' ditching their traditional beliefs and loyalties in order to get elected. Since then less and less people have been interested in voting or being involved in the political process. Was that due to apathy or was it due to the feeling that no-one was representing their interests?The one point alone highlighted above will be enough to ensure Labour won't win any election under Corbyn. IMO, his policies if they ever came into play would cause mass inflation, an upsurge in trade union activism, a dramatic downturn in the economy and an unprecedented exodus of business and wealth from this country. But if that's what the people of this country want then they must vote for him and his policies - we shall see how far he gets in five years time if he still leads the party then.
Lots of people joined the Labour Party recently in order to vote for Corbyn. It's been said they were Tory voters being sneaky, but they could be ordinary people who wanted a Labour leader who offered a true alternative to the other parties.
Corbyn seems to want a return to Keynesian economic policies. He doesn't believe in war. He believes in an NHS free at the point of use, a nationally owned Rail Network, nationally owned Energy Suppiers. He won't sell off our assets for others to make profit from. He prefers to tax the rich rather than oppressing the poor. He likes the idea of a right to buy your house from large private landlords and restricting how much rent these people can charge. He wants to allow local Councils to borrow to build houses. He cares about the poor and thinks this country is rich enough to take care of the less fortunate members of society. He would welcome immigrants and also provide for them. He likes the EU poiicies which have helped the poorer members of society; working time directives, minimum pay and holidays, all of which his opponents dislike.
Of course the rich and greedy will raise an enormous clamour against him because he threatens their interests.
None of his ideas are bad. None of them will impoverish the rich, and most of them will help the poor, the disabled and the less privileged.
Out of interest, where in the world have similar policies been fully implemented?
The one point alone highlighted above will be enough to ensure Labour won't win any election under Corbyn. IMO, his policies if they ever came into play would cause mass inflation, an upsurge in trade union activism, a dramatic downturn in the economy and an unprecedented exodus of business and wealth from this country. But if that's what the people of this country want then they must vote for him and his policies - we shall see how far he gets in five years time if he still leads the party then.
Margaret Thatcher encouraged me to start my own business, and I survived for eight years despite interest rates being very high at the time
I was providing excellence, but that ran it's course as other businesses were being squeezed. So I don't really know what the answer is.
I eventually ran out of steam and went into Burn Out as I struggled to do what would have taken at least two more employees to fulfil, if I could have afforded to pay them.
So I bogged off to France and put my energy to running a Gardening Business, and earned considerably more money, relying only on myself.
No, I don't mind. I learned a lot. Not least good book keeping. And I earned a few bob doing that for other people.
But Britain simply cannot afford to kill off people like me, because we will go. Or give up altogether.
And it isn't just Corbyn. It's the whole mindset.
I note you didn't answer my question. Where have similar policies been implemented?why should I answer your question when you ignored mine?
why should I answer your question when you ignored mine?
Was this your question?Why are you asking me basically the same question I asked you? Are you under the impression that Corbyn's policies are uniquely his and are untried and untested anywhere in the world?
Out of interest, where in the world has Corbyn's brand of politics ever been shown to work on a longterm basis and improve the standard of living and well being for all its inhabitants?
If you can tell me where Corbyn's 'brand of politics' has been implemented I would be able to assess whether it worked or not.
Why are you asking me basically the same question I asked you? Are you under the impression that Corbyn's policies are uniquely his and are untried and untested anywhere in the world?
Certain of his ideas exist in certain countries. I'm not sure if I know of a country where all of them exist? that's if I knew all of his policies, which I don't. Do you?Let's simplify this for you. which far left socialist governments worldwide do you feel have transformed their countries and the lives of their people for the better on a longterm basis?
Jez is 66 I believe, not 62, meaning he will be 71 at the next election. It's all well and good him being a nice guy and all, with integrity and principles but we need an effective party of opposition not an anti-establishment protest group which is what Labour will become under Corbyn. Out of interest, where in the world has Corbyn's brand of politics ever been shown to work on a longterm basis and improve the standard of living and well being for all its inhabitants?
And if you won't listen to me, listen to Peter Hain (or is he one of the rich and greedy raising a clamour against Corbyn you were referring to?)
"But the reason I won’t vote for Corbyn is that, underneath his appealing slogans and rousing values, there is no programmatic substance. Whatever their respective merits, proposals to scrap Trident, abolish tuition fees and renationalise the railways do not constitute a coherent platform.
His economic policy amounts to an unelectable platform of “tax and spend” – an anguished cry of protest, not a serious alternative for a Labour government seeking to reject the suffocating neoliberal orthodoxy of cuts, shrinking the state and privatising everything possible.
He demonstrates little understanding of the immensely arduous challenge of electing, let alone running, a social democratic or democratic socialist government, when neoliberalism is so destructively dominant globally and the British media mostly in hock to it".
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/30/jeremy-corbyn-policies-labour
Was this your question?
Out of interest, where in the world has Corbyn's brand of politics ever been shown to work on a longterm basis and improve the standard of living and well being for all its inhabitants?
If you can tell me where Corbyn's 'brand of politics' has been implemented I would be able to assess whether it worked or not.
Effective opposition isn't sitting around looking at the polls being too terrified to do anything for five years, which is exactly what Labour did in the last parliament, and it's what they'd also do in this one if any of the other candidates had won the election.I don't disagree.
I don't disagree.
Yes, Hain is a Blairrite. Enough said.Blair was the most successful Labour leader in my lifetime, so Hain (who also is a first rate economist) should have some idea what he's talking about.
He's actually proposing something similar to Germany's economy, and nobody could claim Germany's governments since 1945 have been 'loony left wing'.Would that be East Germany? 8(0(*
Blair was the most successful Labour leader in my lifetime, so Hain (who also is a first rate economist) should have some idea what he's talking about.
Would that be East Germany? 8(0(*
Let's simplify this for you. which far left socialist governments worldwide do you feel have transformed their countries and the lives of their people for the better on a longterm basis?
The problem is that I can't discuss politics in a simplistic manner. I have a degree in the subject which means that terms such as 'far left' and 'socialist' have to be defined before I can discuss them.OK you win. I don't have a degree in politics so as you have the top trump card I may as well bow out now before my lack of in-depth knowledge on the subject is cruelly exposed for all to see. @)(++(*
Some countries people describe as 'Communist' call themselves 'Socialist' - Cuba and China for eg. These are usually one-party states who follow Marxist-Leninist ideology. Other countries call themselves 'Socialist' - Guyana and India are examples of these. Others are clearly what we call 'Capitalist' but they have some similar policies to Corbyn's - Canada and Denmark are examples of these. The last two groups are multi-party systems.
which of the above would you prefer to discuss then?
The problem is that I can't discuss politics in a simplistic manner. I have a degree in the subject which means that terms such as 'far left' and 'socialist' have to be defined before I can discuss them.
Some countries people describe as 'Communist' call themselves 'Socialist' - Cuba and China for eg. These are usually one-party states who follow Marxist-Leninist ideology. Other countries call themselves 'Socialist' - Guyana and India are examples of these. Others are clearly what we call 'Capitalist' but they have some similar policies to Corbyn's - Canada and Denmark are examples of these. The last two groups are multi-party systems.
which of the above would you prefer to discuss then?
OK you win. I don't have a degree in politics so as you have the top trump card I may as well bow out now before my lack of in-depth knowledge on the subject is cruelly exposed for all to see. @)(++(*
Have you heard who the new Shadow Chancellor is yet, Alfred? @)(++(*Is it Peter Hain? *&*%£
Is it Peter Hain? *&*%£
8(>(( Nope.I know nothing about him. Why is it brave? I must admit I enjoyed Tom Watson publicly disagreeing with his leader already today... @)(++(*
John McDonnell. Very brave decision.
Not much Marxist-Leninist about China these days, G 8(8-))
I know nothing about him. Why is it brave? I must admit I enjoyed Tom Watson publicly disagreeing with his leader already today... @)(++(*
Karl Marx predicted that international trade would 'batter down the walls of China'. Quite an impressive prediction to make in the 1840's.
Who was in power when you bogged off then Eleanor? It couldn't have been a left-wing Labour government.
Another honest man in my opinion. The point isn't whether people agree on everything. Coalition governments with differing views manage to reach a consensus, so why can't a party containing people with different views do so?Hmmm, this article is worth a read IMO... http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/13/jeremy-corbyn-followers-disillusion-labour-party
Hmmm, this article is worth a read IMO... http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/13/jeremy-corbyn-followers-disillusion-labour-party
Hmmm, this article is worth a read IMO... http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/13/jeremy-corbyn-followers-disillusion-labour-party
Thanks, Alfred.
Joking aside, and I have done my fair share of that, only two things are possible. Corbyn is right or Corbyn is wrong. So it might be best to wait and watch for a while, and cast personal doubts aside.
Yes, I know this is a load of waffle, especially from me and where I have been sitting for the last twenty years, and paying little attention beyond my State Pension.
But let's face it, none of them seem up to much to me. So can it get any worse?
I do admire Hilary Ben as I did his father before him, neither of them being of my political persuasion, so the appointment of Hilary Ben to The Shadow Cabinet pulled me up short for a minute, although it shouldn't have been a surprise. It just reminded me that there are honest left wing politicians. So I am not going to assume that Left Wing Labour have got no chance.
Thanks, Alfred.
Joking aside, and I have done my fair share of that, only two things are possible. Corbyn is right or Corbyn is wrong. So it might be best to wait and watch for a while, and cast personal doubts aside.
Yes, I know this is a load of waffle, especially from me and where I have been sitting for the last twenty years, and paying little attention beyond my State Pension.
But let's face it, none of them seem up to much to me. So can it get any worse?
I do admire Hilary Ben as I did his father before him, neither of them being of my political persuasion, so the appointment of Hilary Ben to The Shadow Cabinet pulled me up short for a minute, although it shouldn't have been a surprise. It just reminded me that there are honest left wing politicians. So I am not going to assume that Left Wing Labour have got no chance.
If they get fair reporting from the media they might survive, but that's most unlikely. If the party unites behind them that would help, but that's also unlikely. The Tories will have to box clever because their tactics against Farage backfired significantly and made him more popular. My reading of that was that he seemed sincere and those attacking him didn't.
Corbyn, like all politicians, will be right about some things and wrong about others. What these people do have is honesty and integrity. We haven't seen much evidence of that in other politicians for a while, but will it be enough?
Hilary doesn't share most of his dad's politics, and he's not a new appointment (he was in Blair and Brown cabinets).
But he is an honest man. His expenses claims were one of the lowest on record. And I believe that he will bring some sense to this.
Sheesh, perhaps I should join The Party. I can just about manage the three quid.
His appointment of the new Shadow Chancellor could cause problems, as he has scores to settle with the Blair supporters.
Apparently, he is quite caustic.
Please tell me who is the new Shadow Chancellor. I have read so many names, and I am new to this political appraisement after twenty years of trying to ignore it all. I did think that I knew what was going on back before I left. But I am now beginning to wonder.
So not all bad at the moment. At least some of The Electorate are paying attention.
John McDonnell is the new shadow Chancellor. Both he and Corbyn - for very good reasons - detest mainstream media. There will be fireworks ahead.
I honestly don't know, G Unit. You almost certainly have a greater understanding than I, of politics in general, which is how it must be looked at.
Didn't someone famously say that any Party in power for long enough would ultimately get it right? I remember thinking at the time that this was probably correct on an ideological level.
I do actually agree with some of Corbyn's policies, sad I am to admit it. But printing millions of pounds of extra money is crazy.
So The Left could have five years. Five years of future voters growing up, who have no knowledge of previous left wing disasters, and I doubt that many of them will have any understanding of economics. I don't have all that much myself beyond your average housewife balancing a budget, which hardly anyone worries about these days. Just pull out the credit card and pay the interest at the end of the month. Something that my generation wasn't prone to.
I saved really seriously in my years of working here often foregoing luxuries, in the mistaken belief that the interest would help my State Pension, even if only by 10 or 15 Pounds a week. And we all know how that turned out.
No, I'm not really complaining because I manage okay. I have always been borderline broke, having put three children through Boarding School because The State System was so awful. But it all comes down to me in the end. What could Jeremy Corbyn do for me?
McDonnell, eh? Oh Dear. My Clan. Things have just got a bit more complicated.
@johnmcdonnellMP: "A call: 'I'm a journalist from The Sun'
'I said: "You can be one or the other but not both"
@)(++(*
I honestly don't know, G Unit. You almost certainly have a greater understanding than I, of politics in general, which is how it must be looked at.
Didn't someone famously say that any Party in power for long enough would ultimately get it right? I remember thinking at the time that this was probably correct on an ideological level.
I do actually agree with some of Corbyn's policies, sad I am to admit it. But printing millions of pounds of extra money is crazy.
So The Left could have five years. Five years of future voters growing up, who have no knowledge of previous left wing disasters, and I doubt that many of them will have any understanding of economics. I don't have all that much myself beyond your average housewife balancing a budget, which hardly anyone worries about these days. Just pull out the credit card and pay the interest at the end of the month. Something that my generation wasn't prone to.
I saved really seriously in my years of working here often foregoing luxuries, in the mistaken belief that the interest would help my State Pension, even if only by 10 or 15 Pounds a week. And we all know how that turned out.
No, I'm not really complaining because I manage okay. I have always been borderline broke, having put three children through Boarding School because The State System was so awful. But it all comes down to me in the end. What could Jeremy Corbyn do for me?
A man who shares my opinion of the Sun then. @)(++(*
But didn't we all, well, most of us, actually pay for our pensions?
All workers, (employees or self-employed) pay National Insurance contributions. In addition employers pay employer's NI. Your NI payments cease if you work beyond retirement age.
The NI money is supposed to be ring-fenced and used to pay for the NHS, unemployment benefit, sickness and disability allowances and state pensions. DWP also contribute to Housing Benefit via a subsidy paid to Local councils. The subsidy has been slowly decreasing over the years. The government can borrow from the NI 'pot' to pay for other things if it wishes to.
McDonnell, eh? Oh Dear. My Clan. Things have just got a bit more complicated.Yes, he publicly expressed a wish to have been able to go back in time to assassinate Thatcher and is an IRA supporter, both admirable qualities if you're a Corybnista I'm sure... @)(++(*
Jezza sitting on the front bench for the first time just now ?>)()<Is it true that he plans to be "elsewhere" for PMQ on Thurdsay, or is it just a vicious rumour?
Is it true that he plans to be "elsewhere" for PMQ on Thurdsay, or is it just a vicious rumour?
I've no idea. Does it matter? He's not the kind of leader who will be concentrating on PR opportunities.I'd say it does matter yes. If he's not prepared to make an effort with PR opportunities how is he ever going to sell himself to the public? Cycle to every home in the country and set out his policies on a one-to-one basis over a cup of tea?
The party has been asking people to send in questions though, so it's being taken seriously. But the face asking the questions is of secondary importance.
So why should a State Pension be means tested if we paid for it?
And yes indeed, The Government did "Borrow" from the pot to pay for other things, which is why there is a problem with paying Pension.
This John McDonnell's a classy bloke isn't he?
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/esther-mcvey-lynching-mp-john-8125900
Has this got anything at all to do with why he and his good pal Corbyn are so popular with so many McCann "sceptics"?
Some people may be so shallow, just as some people may be shallow enough to support Cameron because he referred to immigrants as a 'swarm'. This made me wonder why McVey is being attacked?And John McDonnell's solution is to lynch her!
Esther McVey is committed to and defends sanctioning benefit claimants. She defended the policy at a select committee inquiry into sanctions. The case of a diabetic who died after his electricity was cut off because he was sanctioned and had no money was raised. His sister said 'diabetics can't wait two weeks for a hardship payment to be authorised'
A Labour MP said;
Once again Esther McVey has shown a stunning disregard for the mountain of evidence provided during this inquiry from individuals, academics and organisations who have seen first-hand, or worse experienced, the effect of this government’s inhumane approach to sanctioning, especially against vulnerable people.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/grieving-relative-confronts-dwp-minister-esther-mcvey-after-benefit-sanctions
McVey seems to lack empathy for the disadvantaged of the UK.
And John McDonnell's solution is to lynch her!
Did you read the article you posted a link to? As I understood it he never suggested that. He commented about others suggesting it.
The Hayes and Harlington MP reportedly said: “I was up in Liverpool a fortnight ago where Alec McFadden, one of our (union) organisers, launched the Sack Esther McVey Day on her birthday.
“I spoke at a packed public meeting ... there was a whole group in the audience that completely kicked off quite critical of the whole concept, because they were arguing ‘Why we are sacking her. Why aren’t we lynching the b........?’”
I think it's fair to say he views Esther McVey as a "b........" and that he was paraphrasing the remarks at the public meeting, putting his own interpretation on what was being said - that's how it comes across to me anyway. In any case, if he was only repeating calls for her to be lynched why did he not take the opportunity to condemn such disgraceful behaviour?
This John McDonnell's a classy bloke isn't he?
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/esther-mcvey-lynching-mp-john-8125900
Has this got anything at all to do with why he and his good pal Corbyn are so popular with so many McCann "sceptics"?
Makes you wonder what the sceptic Corbynistas would make of a McCanns declaration of support for their hero, or even vice versa. Not that I can imagine either scenario very likely....
Makes you wonder what the sceptic Corbynistas would make of a McCanns declaration of support for their hero, or even vice versa. Not that I can imagine either scenario very likely....
Tittle tattle, Alfred. Whatever his view of the case is (assuming he has one) is cool.What happened? Was he lynched? I genuinely have no recollection of him expressing an opinion, can't have been that significant.
We saw what happened to John Redwood when he dared to express an opinion. And that's Redwood who wasn't a minister at the time. The Leader of the Opposition has responsibilities.
You love to speculate on unlikely scenarios, don't you Alfred? Particularly if you can mention the McCanns and do a bit of 'sceptic bashing' too.
I don't support any political party or politician myself. My scepticism extends to politics also. @)(++(*
However, as a human being I prefer politicians such as Frank Field who care about the poor and disadvantaged to those who attack them. A society is successful only insofar as it cares for it's weakest members in my opinion.
Very impressive JC speech at the TUC ?>)()<"We can win in 2020"?? Talk about speculating on unlikely scenarios..! @)(++(*
Very impressive JC speech at the TUC ?>)()<
Interesting. Journalists and political commentators don't quite know how to report on Corbyn. No clever spin, no soundbites, just that rare thing - honesty;So was Nick Griffin and look what happened to him.
it was authentic - and interesting. There was no guff about hardworking families, and none of the coded euphemisms or bland triangulations that litter conventional speeches. The words meant what they were intended to mean. And, idealistic though much of it was, much of what he had to say was refreshingly different.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/sep/15/jeremy-corbyn-speaks-to-the-tuc-conference-politics-live
So was Nick Griffin and look what happened to him.
Do you think Griffin was honest? I wonder.In fact there are some similarities in some of the policies Nick Griffin's BNP were offering in 2010 to Corbyn's policies but that wasn't really what I was referring to. I meant that Griffin was not your typical politician, he stood up for his beliefs which he seemed to believe in passionately and said things publicly which the media then used to turn him into a pariah and laughing stock. He also surrounded himself with a bunch of uneducated dimwits who managed to be even more crass and controversial and inept than he was. Not saying that all of the Shadow Cabinet matches that description but I can think of at least two that do (IMO). They also both despise(d) Israel (Jews) and fraternise(d) with terrorists. Apart from that completely different. Griffin wanted to expel all immigrants whilst Corbyn wants to welcome anyone in the world who wants to live here. Both completely crazy policies IMO.
There are certainly more differences than similarities. Here's a few for you;
Corbyn - Socialist Griffin - Fascist
Corbyn - Inclusive Griffin - Racist
Corbyn - Internationalist Griffin - Nationalist
In fact there are some similarities in some of the policies Nick Griffin's BNP were offering in 2010 to Corbyn's policies but that wasn't really what I was referring to. I meant that Griffin was not your typical politician, he stood up for his beliefs which he seemed to believe in passionately and said things publicly which the media then used to turn him into a pariah and laughing stock. He also surrounded himself with a bunch of uneducated dimwits who managed to be even more crass and controversial and inept than he was. Not saying that all of the Shadow Cabinet matches that description but I can think of at least two that do (IMO). They also both despise(d) Israel (Jews) and fraternise(d) with terrorists. Apart from that completely different. Griffin wanted to expel all immigrants whilst Corbyn wants to welcome anyone in the world who wants to live here. Both completely crazy policies IMO.
The media demonises anyone different who won't play their games. There are few journalists who are honest and have integrity that's for sure.As a politician you have to play the game, otherwise you'll get shafted, you'd have to be a fool or rather naïve to throw the gauntlet down at them.
In fact there are some similarities in some of the policies Nick Griffin's BNP were offering in 2010 to Corbyn's policies but that wasn't really what I was referring to. I meant that Griffin was not your typical politician, he stood up for his beliefs which he seemed to believe in passionately and said things publicly which the media then used to turn him into a pariah and laughing stock. He also surrounded himself with a bunch of uneducated dimwits who managed to be even more crass and controversial and inept than he was. Not saying that all of the Shadow Cabinet matches that description but I can think of at least two that do (IMO). They also both despise(d) Israel (Jews) and fraternise(d) with terrorists. Apart from that completely different. Griffin wanted to expel all immigrants whilst Corbyn wants to welcome anyone in the world who wants to live here. Both completely crazy policies IMO.
As a politician you have to play the game, otherwise you'll get shafted, you'd have to be a fool or rather naïve to throw the gauntlet down at them.
Interesting. Journalists and political commentators don't quite know how to report on Corbyn. No clever spin, no soundbites, just that rare thing - honesty;
it was authentic - and interesting. There was no guff about hardworking families, and none of the coded euphemisms or bland triangulations that litter conventional speeches. The words meant what they were intended to mean. And, idealistic though much of it was, much of what he had to say was refreshingly different.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2015/sep/15/jeremy-corbyn-speaks-to-the-tuc-conference-politics-live
%£&)**# Good words, G. He is impressing a lot of people, not least I think because there's no aggression when he speaks. That's very unusual in modern politics.
Actually he may personally want to leave the EU, which would end most of the immigration.what am I wrong about Lyall?
I don't agree with him, if that is his view, but you're wrong again, Alfred %£&)**#
what am I wrong about Lyall?
Politics has been dominated for years by professional politicians whose main aim has been developing their careers. To that end they have steered clear of controversy. Corbyn has held controversial opinions throughout his political career and suddenly people have voted him in as leader of one of the main parties. That landslide victory carries a message for all those who have spent years being mealy-mouthed and toeing the party line. People are sick of it. They want commitment and honesty.
Younger people today are different also. The left have traditionally been defeated by name-calling (loony left etc). Younger people are likely to call that bullying and they won't like it, just as they didn't like it when it was tried on Farage. Those wishing to defeat Corbyn are going to have to dust off their brains and defeat him by using factual debate rather than soundbites. They are going to have to justify their policies and beliefs sensibly. Do they have the brains after so long of letting them lie fallow? We shall see.
The Tories have declared war on the young, whether they're working, studying, or do something else instead. (New Labour did start the process though.)
In fact they've declared war on every group, except drivers and the retired (both groups being too powerful to take on).
You're right, the young are thinking differently to the rest of the country. They've have had enough of being made to pay for the mistakes/greed of the financial institutions. It was their votes that elected Corbyn.
You're reading what people say are his policies, not the actual policies.which bit, specifically, did I get wrong then?
People used to copy their parent's voting patterns. There was some measure of respect for one's 'betters'. They chose their party and stuck with it. Today's young people will vote differently in different elections. They expect to be informed. They have better BS detection capabilities. Most of them are not nationalistic and definitely not racist.A huge number of gross generalisations there then!
They suffer most from unemployment and zero hours contracts. They are the ones leaving university and having to work in Greggs or in a call centre. They're the force to be reckoned with, they're the ones that count, they're the future.
Do you think Griffin was honest? I wonder.
There are certainly more differences than similarities. Here's a few for you;
Corbyn - Socialist Griffin - Fascist
Corbyn - Inclusive Griffin - Racist
Corbyn - Internationalist Griffin - Nationalist
Not much Marxist-Leninist about China these days, G 8(8-))
Wow quite a lively debate going on here ?>)()< and I get to mingle with some of the McCann debaters 8(>((
I'm not sure what your definition of "Internationalist" is G-Unit but doesn't JC want to leave NATO?
NATO is a military alliance and Corbyn is anti-war. I was thinking more along the lines of internationalism in a socialist sense.
Ok thanks but he is a Eurosceptic?Personally I'd like to see Corbyn volunteer to have face to face peace talks with ISIS - let's see how he gets on there.
Yes he's anti-war and I guess most are? I can see it might be possible to negotiate peaceful solutions with the likes of Hamas and the IRA who have clear objectives ie state of Palestine and a united Ireland. But is it ever possible to enter into negotiations with the likes of the Nazis and Isis when it involves political and religious ideologies?
If JC removes Little Britain from NATO and scraps Trident will UK citizens sleep easier?
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ira-apartheid-iraq-war-hamas-jeremy-corbyn-has-been-right-side-history-1519816
Could I find myself forced to don a burqa, pray 5 times a day and having to give up my Pinot Grigio?
Personally I'd like to see Corbyn volunteer to have face to face peace talks with ISIS - let's see how he gets on there.
Think you might mean beard to beard 8)-)))@)(++(*
Ok thanks but he is a Eurosceptic?
Yes he's anti-war and I guess most are? I can see it might be possible to negotiate peaceful solutions with the likes of Hamas and the IRA who have clear objectives ie state of Palestine and a united Ireland. But is it ever possible to enter into negotiations with the likes of the Nazis and Isis when it involves political and religious ideologies?
If JC removes Little Britain from NATO and scraps Trident will UK citizens sleep easier?
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ira-apartheid-iraq-war-hamas-jeremy-corbyn-has-been-right-side-history-1519816
Could I find myself forced to don a burqa, pray 5 times a day and having to give up my Pinot Grigio?
All political and religious beliefs are 'ideologies'. The Nazi's objective was expansion. ISIS's objective is to fulfill the will of god as they interpret it. They believe they are the engine of the apocalypse. I have no idea if negotiation is possible as they are uncompromising in their beliefs and aims. Not sure if they want to come here, though.ISIS want Islam to dominate the world, of course they want to come here!!!
Well, I am a teensy bit pissed off by the fact that he refused to sing The National Anthem. Okay, I am a Royalist, but this was simply respect for those who died to give him the right to be who he is.It was beyond childish of him, like a petulant teenager in church refusing to sing hymns. Oh well, roll on PMQs, not long now...
It was beyond childish of him, like a petulant teenager in church refusing to sing hymns. Oh well, roll on PMQs, not long now...
Well, I am a teensy bit pissed off by the fact that he refused to sing The National Anthem. Okay, I am a Royalist, but this was simply respect for those who died to give him the right to be who he is.
The perfect opportunity for him to stay away. Why didn't he?That would have been even more controversial tbh. He's already having to swallow his principles and agree to wearing a poppy for Remembrance Sunday, however it remains to be seen what colour poppy he will wear. He needs to understand that things like this matter to the average man and woman in the street, and that not all the electorate hate British traditions and history as he seems to.
How does singing the National Anthem demonstrate respect for those who died? I thought it demonstrated support for the Monarchy?Why don't you ask that question of the 90+ year old ex-servicemen who were there? One or two of them seemed to have firm views on the matter.
How does singing the National Anthem demonstrate respect for those who died? I thought it demonstrated support for the Monarchy?
Why don't you ask that question of the 90+ year old ex-servicemen who were there? One or two of them seemed to have firm views on the matter.
The firmness of an opinion has no bearing whatsoever on the correctness of it. If Corbyn, as a republican, had sung the anthem he would have been castigated by the press for being a hypocrite. We have enough hypocrites already, thanks.
Then you don't understand The National Anthem. The operative word is "National."
Well, I am a teensy bit pissed off by the fact that he refused to sing The National Anthem. Okay, I am a Royalist, but this was simply respect for those who died to give him the right to be who he is.
&%&£(+ And also the right not to sing the anthem.
Especially those killed or maimed in our many wars who were republicans. They are respected by not singing that dreadful anthem.
Indeed.
I totally agree.
As to the monarchy, someone once said to the effect, though I can't recall who, 'they are the largest monetary recipients of the benefits system'.
The actual words were stronger than that, but would have been deleted.
The firmness of an opinion has no bearing whatsoever on the correctness of it. If Corbyn, as a republican, had sung the anthem he would have been castigated by the press for being a hypocrite. We have enough hypocrites already, thanks.He may like to think he made a principled stand, but I'm afraid (read - glad) it won't be a vote winner, this anti-monarchist stance of his. Most people (IMO) want a leader of Britain who has some pride in their country, and who respects British tradition and customs, and he clearly isn't and doesn't.
The rights enjoyed by British citizens exist because people fought for them against an absolute Monarchy and an entrenched upper class. They were not granted to them from the goodness of the Monarch's heart.
He may like to think he made a principled stand, but I'm afraid (read - glad) it won't be a vote winner, this anti-monarchist stance of his. Most people (IMO) want a leader of Britain who has some pride in their country, and who respects British tradition and customs, and he clearly isn't and doesn't.
I despair. Have your Republic for all I care. Elect Blair or Corbyn and then see.
Anyway, PMQs anyone? I thought Jezzer rather handed it to the PM on a plate but no doubt the Corbynistas viewed it as a marvellous victory for their man.
The Monarchy, many moons ago, handed over vast amounts of Crown Property to The Government in exchange for The Civil List. This was a Contract which cannot be abnegated. The Government receives far more income from these Crown Properties than are spent on The Civil List.
So let's get some facts right here.
&%+((£ There's no chance right now of getting rid of the royals. But isn't it high time republicans didn't have to hide their opinions? Politicians, governments and people have been wrapping themselves in the flag and appealing to ill-informed 'patriots' for far too long.
I wonder how they came to own all that property? Did they work for it? Did they buy it? I think mostly they just grabbed it, didn't they?
We do have pride in the country, but that pride is looking to it's future, not in constantly celebrating a heavily censored view of the past.Who is "we"? There is no future for a Britain that won't defend itself either ideologically, culturally or physically. Corbyn gives the impression that Britain won't be safe in his hands and people won't like that.
Cameron fetishes the military, just like Blair did, and they do it to assist them in avoiding responsibility for their disastrous actions in Iraq, Libya and other places.
Who is "we"? There is no future for a Britain that won't defend itself either ideologically, culturally or physically. Corbyn gives the impression that Britain won't be safe in his hands and people won't like that.
What is a Patriot?
"We" is all those you're saying have no pride in the country, including JC. But it is true to say we have no pride in a country that's being run to make the wealthy wealthier, and the poor poorer, as it is currently.Pride in one's country supersedes politics, or it should do. It is about the people, the countryside, the culture, the customs, the history, the achievements across many fields of endeavour. It's a complex alchemy of all of these things. People who turn their back on important British symbols come across as a bit suspect in the eyes of the GBP, and that's a fact that Jeremy really needs to understand if he wants to be PM.
If you want to go back to Henry the Eight and what he nicked from the Monasteries, or Elizabeth the First and The Spanish Armada, among other things, then we could be in for a very long discussion.
If you want to go back to Henry the Eight and what he nicked from the Monasteries, or Elizabeth the First and The Spanish Armada, among other things, then we could be in for a very long discussion.
Pride in one's country supersedes politics, or it should do. It is about the people, the countryside, the culture, the customs, the history, the achievements across many fields of endeavour. It's a complex alchemy of all of these things. People who turn their back on important British symbols come across as a bit suspect in the eyes of the GBP, and that's a fact that Jeremy really needs to understand if he wants to be PM.
And David Starkey might turn up 8)-))) Richard III's biggest fan.
Would you and I be talking about the same David Starky?
You started it. I see it more as a case of giving back, not donating.
%£&)**# I was being ironic.
What else could anyone do with David Starky? Or perhaps you thought I didn't know what he stands for. But then even his opinions are only opinions.
Symbols? What symbols? The anthem and the royals? You really think they're that important to most British people? I don't.Yes, I do think that, I'm amazed you don't - the Queen is a symbol as well as a human being and the majority of British support the monarchy - look at any opinion poll for proof. Attend any sporting event where the national anthem is sung and the majority of the crowd will be singing it, and with gusto and sometimes tears in their eyes. The poppy is another symbol that people wear with pride and expect their leaders to wear when out in public. Now tell me I'm wrong again. *&*%£
So, all those who applaud Corbyn for not being a hypocrite and standing by his principles in not singing the national anthem, what will your opinion be of your man when he's next put on the spot and finds himself joining in with the singing as seems very likely?
I merely pointed out The Facts. And it wasn't a donation. It was an exchange of a contract. The Crown does not receive Benefits.
Personally, if I were The Queen I would ask for it to be given back and then bog off somewhere a jolly sight warmer. Perhaps you should read "In the Wet" by Neville Shute.
If you say so Eleanor. We'll just forget the overspending and debts which led to it..
Have you read 'The Queen and I' by Sue Townsend? That was a good read.
You're more right about the poppies than the anthem. Tears in their eyes? Oh dear %56&That is a poor response. Are you not aware of the British public's (growing) support for and confidence in the monarchy?
We understand he has the entire media against him, and they're determined to get rid of the man. The drip, drip, drip effect of their constant negative campaigning is not a million miles away from brainwashing.If he had any principles he would.
Of course Corbyn can't just ignore that.
Pride in one's country supersedes politics, or it should do. It is about the people, the countryside, the culture, the customs, the history, the achievements across many fields of endeavour. It's a complex alchemy of all of these things. People who turn their back on important British symbols come across as a bit suspect in the eyes of the GBP, and that's a fact that Jeremy really needs to understand if he wants to be PM.
A lot of which were shaped by political decisions.
There are a wide variety of ways of being proud of your country and a wide variety of reasons for it. There is always room for improvement, and people's views on how to do that are also very different. Symbols change - Britannia was a very popular symbol in Victorian times, but not so much now. How many younger people know how to hang the Union flag correctly? How many younger people remember the beautiful wild flowers and scents that I remember from my childhood?
Yes, I do think that, I'm amazed you don't - the Queen is a symbol as well as a human being and the majority of British support the monarchy - look at any opinion poll for proof. Attend any sporting event where the national anthem is sung and the majority of the crowd will be singing it, and with gusto and sometimes tears in their eyes. The poppy is another symbol that people wear with pride and expect their leaders to wear when out in public. Now tell me I'm wrong again. *&*%£
You're more right about the poppies than the anthem. Tears in their eyes? Oh dear %56&
My son does, for one.
The Queen is much respected and admired, but even she got it wrong when Diana died. Opinions can change very quickly.And just as quickly they can change back again. Don't expect anything less than an unprecedented national outpouring of grief on her death which will no doubt leave all Republicans sick to their stomach.
That's one then.I doubt he's the only one. Out of interest do you think it matters which way up the Union Jack is hung? Wouldn't a red flag be far easier? 8(0(*
I doubt he's the only one. Out of interest do you think it matters which way up the Union Jack is hung? Wouldn't a red flag be far easier? 8(0(*
To get back to the thread, the general consensus seems to be that Corbyn did OK at PMQ's. Using questions from the public was a smart move.Good for him, he must be mighty relieved he didn't give the media any ammunition on this occasion.
The Queen is much respected and admired, but even she got it wrong when Diana died. Opinions can change very quickly.
I don't think she did get it wrong about Diana, and I am not alone. And who knows what she decided to do, or what she was bullied into. She had two grieving grandsons on her hands who were far more important at the time.
Then you, Queen and David Starkey were united on that occasion.No need to be nasty.
All of you living in denial together.
Then you, Queen and David Starkey were united on that occasion.
All of you living in denial together.
No need to be nasty.
Denial of what?
The nation's (or most of it) regard for Diana. I was no fan but at least she communicated with ordinary folk and didn't behave like we were still in the 19th century.The Queen was 'monstered' by the mawkish media at the time, just as Corbyn is now, I thought you'd have more sympathy with her position tbh.
If you say the 'Monarchy' is more popular now than ever, it's her sons (and their partners) responsible for it, not the rest of that family.
The Queen was 'monstered' by the mawkish media at the time, just as Corbyn is now, I thought you'd have more sympathy with her position tbh.
Nah. All they wanted her to do was fly the flag at half-mast, but the royalists kept bleating "Tradition! Tradition!". Say no more.She was bullied into it, in much the same way as Corbyn has been bullied into singing the NA. Amazed you refuse to see the parallels.
She was bullied into it, in much the same way as Corbyn has been bullied into singing the NA. Amazed you refuse to see the parallels.
Bullied into flying a flag at half-mast? If that was some huge trauma then that says it all. They must have been as detached as the Romanovs.
The media would done as privately briefed, as they usually do, but couldn't ignore the people on the streets. Sometimes you just can't ignore the people! Unless you're the Windsors that is.
You can't fly a flag at half mast if there is no flag.
Bullied into flying a flag at half-mast? If that was some huge trauma then that says it all. They must have been as detached as the Romanovs.So, the flying of the flag at half-mast was a trivial matter, then - much as Corbyn not singing the NA, but blown out of all proportion by the media who spurred on the baying mob, or was it vice versa? Either way it would not have been an issue for national discussion if the media hadn't picked it up and run with it. Methinks it is you in denial here Lyall, or expressing some double standards...
The media would done as privately briefed, as they usually do, but couldn't ignore the people on the streets. Sometimes you just can't ignore the people! Unless you're the Windsors that is.
So, the flying of the flag at half-mast was a trivial matter, then - much as Corbyn not singing the NA, but blown out of all proportion by the media who spurred on the baying mob, or was it vice versa? Either way it would not have been an issue for national discussion if the media hadn't picked it up and run with it. Methinks it is you in denial here Lyall, or expressing some double standards...
Yes the Monarchy IS detached, but that's hardly surprising, it's how they are, like it or loathe it. We know you loathe it and would rather President Prescott be greeting heads of state in his Jaguar, but most people wouldn't!
So, the flying of the flag at half-mast was a trivial matter, then - much as Corbyn not singing the NA, but blown out of all proportion by the media who spurred on the baying mob, or was it vice versa? Either way it would not have been an issue for national discussion if the media hadn't picked it up and run with it. Methinks it is you in denial here Lyall, or expressing some double standards...
Yes the Monarchy IS detached, but that's hardly surprising, it's how they are, like it or loathe it. We know you loathe it and would rather President Prescott be greeting heads of state in his Jaguar, but most people wouldn't!
There was one in the cupboard though 8(0(*
Years ago whole towns turned out if the Queen visited. Schoolchildren lined the streets with flags to wave. A few years ago she visited my town and we left work to see her pass. There was no-one else waiting on the street except the three of us. Only a couple of schools bothered to take the children to see her. I think they move the (small) crowd around nowadays so they're on camera, like they used to do on 'Top pf the Pops'.@)(++(* So, you're point is...? The Queen is no longer popular with the people? Really?? Because that's not the impression one gets from recent royal events. Must be quite a large rent-a-mob they've got going on then.
You're really equating one non-singing of the anthem with the death of a woman that brought millions out onto the streets? One event is trivial. The other clearly wasn't.
Part of the problem is that royalists are out of touch too. It was just a flag!
Truth is though they knew it was just a flag, and didn't even want to do that much. And people knew it.
Just read the BBC are putting on repeats of Citizen Smith to reflect JC's leadership win 8)--))
Just read the BBC are putting on repeats of Citizen Smith to reflect JC's leadership win 8)--))
You're really equating one non-singing of the anthem with the death of a woman that brought millions out onto the streets? One event is trivial. The other clearly wasn't.Errr...no, it was you that intimated it was no big deal to fly the flag, not me. You wrote: "Bullied into flying a flag at half-mast? If that was some huge trauma then that says it all" - either it was a big deal or it wasn't a big deal, you can't have it both ways. And how the hell you got the idea that I was equating the non-singing of the NA with the death of Diana from that is beyond me!! Incidentally, I am not a rah rah royalist, they bore me to tears as individuals truth be told, but just like old auntie Vera, I have a soft spot for (some of) them, and great respect for the Queen's service to her country over the years.
Part of the problem is that royalists are out of touch too. It was just a flag!
Truth is though they knew it was just a flag, and didn't even want to do that much. And people knew it.
My town was empty the day of Diana's funeral. We walked to a local pub which was empty, just two bar staff hunched over a small radio. Everyone was watching the funeral on TV unless they went to London or Althorp. My daughter went there and there were hundreds lining the motorway. It was quite clear that day and in the preceding days where the nation's sympathy lay, and it was with Diana and her sons, no-one else.Equally, I remember the antipathy many of my acquaintances and friends had for the funeral, and for the general public outpouring of grief, and most of them were ardent republicans.
Just read the BBC are putting on repeats of Citizen Smith to reflect JC's leadership win 8)--))How apt, if Jezzer gets in he'll be bringing back repeats of the three day week and the Winter of Discontent too, it'll be like the 70s all over again!
Errr...no, it was you that intimated it was no big deal to fly the flag, not me. You wrote: "Bullied into flying a flag at half-mast? If that was some huge trauma then that says it all" - either it was a big deal or it wasn't a big deal, you can't have it both ways. And how the hell you got the idea that I was equating the non-singing of the NA with the death of Diana from that is beyond me!! Incidentally, I am not a rah rah royalist, they bore me to tears as individuals truth be told, but just like old auntie Vera, I have a soft spot for (some of) them, and great respect for the Queen's service to her country over the years.
@)(++(* So, you're point is...? The Queen is no longer popular with the people? Really?? Because that's not the impression one gets from recent royal events. Must be quite a large rent-a-mob they've got going on then.
It wouldn't have been a big deal to fly the flag. But they didn't. Then it became a very big deal.Obviously it was a big deal to the Monarchy, otherwise they wouldn't have held off as long as they did. I was critical of the decision not to fly the flag at the time, but distance from the event and a bit of maturity has made me see things slightly differently now. You can see me however you want to see me, but I can assure you as with many things your vision is somewhat askew.
If you can't see the point then I still think you must indeed be a big royalist. Either that or you're one of those who sees revolution happening if Tradition isn't followed. I'm beginning to see you as a bit like Geoffrey Palmer in Fairly Secret Army.
My town was empty the day of Diana's funeral. We walked to a local pub which was empty, just two bar staff hunched over a small radio. Everyone was watching the funeral on TV unless they went to London or Althorp. My daughter went there and there were hundreds lining the motorway. It was quite clear that day and in the preceding days where the nation's sympathy lay, and it was with Diana and her sons, no-one else.
Obviously it was a big deal to the Monarchy, otherwise they wouldn't have held off as long as they did. I was critical of the decision not to fly the flag at the time, but distance from the event and a bit of maturity has made me see things slightly differently now. You can see me however you want to see me, but I can assure you as with many things your vision is somewhat askew.
Yes, it was a big deal to the royals because they were still living in the 19th century (or earlier). Do you agree with that?Sure, but then they're not like you or I - that's what makes them "the Monarchy". You do know that underneath they're like these giant lizards don't you?
To them Tradition was more important than the death, and more important than the people.
I have no strong views either way? If anything slightly pro royalty. Watched a prog last night featuring Prince Harry and as far as I am concerned he is a good ambassador for the country as far as these things go:
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/battle-of-britain/on-demand/62038-002
Sure, but then they're not like you or I - that's what makes them "the Monarchy". You do know that underneath they're like these giant lizards don't you?
8((()*/ I think so too. Maybe people weren't so involved at the beginning of the week, but by the end it was obvious something immense was going on. Who will ever forget the applause from outside the church being heard after her brother had spoken. The royals didn't like that did they &%&£(+
Here's the thing - I would actually prefer the Royal Family to be completely distant, unapproachable and mysterious, to wear crowns and ermine robes at all times and be able to pass laws and start wars just as in olden times, not riding about on bicycles and calling me "mate" and having Snoop Dog on speed dial. If you've got to have royalty they should be the real deal. Let them rule, like totally. 8((()*/
They still do to some extent. We're still in 1688. The City is still a state within a state.What's the City got to do with it??
8((()*/ I think so too. Maybe people weren't so involved at the beginning of the week, but by the end it was obvious something immense was going on. Who will ever forget the applause from outside the church being heard after her brother had spoken. The royals didn't like that did they &%&£(+
What's the City got to do with it??
It's actually running the country to some extent.I meant what has it got to do with the Monarchy?
I'd forgotten about that, I got goose bumps.They were not comfortable that day at all, and no wonder. Do you think people will accept Queen Camilla if the day ever comes, or has it all been forgotten?
I meant what has it got to do with the Monarchy?
Here's the thing - I would actually prefer the Royal Family to be completely distant, unapproachable and mysterious, to wear crowns and ermine robes at all times and be able to pass laws and start wars just as in olden times, not riding about on bicycles and calling me "mate" and having Snoop Dog on speed dial. If you've got to have royalty they should be the real deal. Let them rule, like totally. 8((()*/
And Diana's brother is such a fine example of Noblesse Oblige. I don't think. I would happily see him stripped of his lands and title.
Perhaps we could have a Referendum on who should go and who should stay.
They're intertwined.tell me more.
I also have no strong views either way. Sometimes I seem to end up supporting a position in a debate due to the strong views of others. I was trying to work out if Harry's going bald yet. 8(>((
How quaint. We could let the aristocracy have free rein too - like Lord Glasgow and the waiter!I had to google that.
I'm all for guillotines. If there was a referendum I think there's one man who might top the list.You should run away and join ISIS, maybe teach them a thing or two about the latest head-removing technology. 8)--))
Goodbye, Tony ?>)()<
tell me more.
&%+((£ I'm no constitutional expert, and there's more secrets there than in Richard Nixon's Oval office. It's a huge topic.hang on - you can't claim that the Monarchy rules us via the City and not at least shed some light on what you're talking about!!
hang on - you can't claim that the Monarchy rules us via the City and not at least shed some light on what you're talking about!!
I don't think anyone in the UK should be expected to work for less than an hourly rate equivalent to a 'living wage'. Just looked it up and was surprised how low it is. The average income is circa 26k per annum.
http://www.livingwage.org.uk/news/new-2015-living-wage-rates-announced
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/a-jeremy-corbynled-government-would-introduce-a-10-minimum-wage-john-mcdonnell-has-announced-10501923.html
They're intertwined I said, and they are. There's a multitude of relics of absolute monarchy still around, and people say 'oh, it's just ceremonial' or 'oh, it's just a formality', but in some cases it isn't.No idea what you're on about, sorry.
I had to google that.
I do hope you know my previous comment was a little tongue in cheek....? That said, I do find the idea of a progressive "down-with-the-people" monarchy less appealing than one that sits in its lofty castle, wearing a crown whilst soldiers in scarlet tunics march about "changing the guard" importantly.
My favourites;
https://youtu.be/fnA7XrBYpvw
Ah, it was said in a different context. Phew! ?{)(**
He can't go yet we're having too much fun. 8**8:/:
Here's some even better changing of the guard for you;
https://youtu.be/NC9NeJh1NhI
He can't go yet we're having too much fun. 8**8:/:
Here's some even better changing of the guard for you;
https://youtu.be/NC9NeJh1NhI
He can't go yet we're having too much fun. 8**8:/:were they influenced by Monty Python or vice versa?
Here's some even better changing of the guard for you;
https://youtu.be/NC9NeJh1NhI
8@??)( You won the prize with that one, G. Brilliant ceremony. Some prize-winning moustaches there too.
On the republic thread Puglove mentioned that Corbyn "scares the crap out of me" and G-Unit replied "good".
What actually is good about a politician who scares people? Is a scary leader one likely to win votes at the election?
Who here can honestly believe that if there was an election tomorrow and Corbyn's Labour Party won that Britain would be a safer, better place in 5 years time?
On the republic thread Puglove mentioned that Corbyn "scares the crap out of me" and G-Unit replied "good".
What actually is good about a politician who scares people? Is a scary leader one likely to win votes at the election?
Who here can honestly believe that if there was an election tomorrow and Corbyn's Labour Party won that Britain would be a safer, better place in 5 years time?
On the republic thread Puglove mentioned that Corbyn "scares the crap out of me" and G-Unit replied "good".
What actually is good about a politician who scares people? Is a scary leader one likely to win votes at the election?
Who here can honestly believe that if there was an election tomorrow and Corbyn's Labour Party won that Britain would be a safer, better place in 5 years time?
Safer? You think our 'defence' strategies now have made us safer? We've been bombing Iraq for almost 25 years, and Cameron's one and only idea is: Ok, we know that strategy didn't work, but, hey, let's bomb it some more. And Syria. And Libya.Could you please answer my question and stop being so damned patronizing.
Do you really think we're safer now than we were 25 years ago?
If you don't feel safe now it's because of the policies of the Major, Blair, Brown and Cameron governments. 25 years of punishing the civilian population with sanctions, bombing, invasion and more bombing. Watch Pilger's films Alfred and educate yourself.
Taking my quote out of context Alfred? Puglove didn't say why Corbyn was scary, unless it was his 'scruffiness and sulkiness' that was scary. It's good because people are taking notice and debating the issues. He's chased the apathy away.Funnily enough is seems you have chosen to ignore the key reason for Puglove's fear of Corbyn - here is their post again:
Well, you can certainly rely on the scruffy, sulky Corbyn to send us spiralling into the past.
He scares the crap out of me.
A fairly reasoned report about today's shock horror story about Privy council membership. Interesting comments also;Did you see Corbyn on Newsnight being asked if he would kneel before the Queen? Claimed he didn't know that this was a requirement of the leader of the opposition (how disingenuous, even I knew about this) and looked extremely shifty and un-forthright. A bit like a politician in fact!
http://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/the-suns-front-page-about-jeremy-corbyn-is-wrong-says-its-ow
Did you see Corbyn on Newsnight being asked if he would kneel before the Queen? Claimed he didn't know that this was a requirement of the leader of the opposition (how disingenuous, even I knew about this) and looked extremely shifty and un-forthright. A bit like a politician in fact!
I thought he claimed he didn't know it was a requirement for a Privy Council member?Whatever. You think an MP of 30+ years standing doesn't know about this stuff? I suppose Jeremy's always had his mind on far more serious matters and that's his excuse and he's sticking by it. Shame he couldn't give a straight answer when challenged though - I thought that straight talking was his USP??
Interesting interview with JC:Hmmm, maybe. I don't remember much of the media saying that Nelson Mandela should be hanged though. Maybe that was before my time.
http://www.thirdwaymagazine.co.uk/editions/july-2015/high-profile/far-sighted.aspx
Interviewer: "You advocated talking to Sinn Féin long before it emerged that the Government was actually doing so. You admired Nelson Mandela when much of the media was still saying he should have been hanged. You campaigned for justice for the Palestinians long before that became respectable. You opposed the 'war on terror' long before many other MPs saw the dangers. Do you ever get credit for being ahead of the political curve"?
JC: "No - but I don't mind. It's not important. The cause is what's important".
Maybe JC will dumfound his critics and show how ahead of the political curve he is? &%+((£
Jeremy is 66 at the moment and by the time of the next scheduled election in May 2020 he will be almost 71. I don't know about you but a pensioner running the country is a bit of a long shot. He should make for an interesting interim leader of the opposition though.
I'm not making comparisons, but Churchill was PM from 1951=1955 and his age in 1951 was 77.Different times, different demands.
Different times, different demands.
Well worth a read, many points I agree with from the Times)
The left will never really love this country
Philip Collins
Post a comment
Share via
Google+
Published 1 minute ago
Jeremy Corbyn’s petulant refusal to sing the national anthem tells you all you need to know about his true sympathies
How strange that silence should reveal so much more about a man than anything he says. At the Battle of Britain commemoration in St Paul’s cathedral, Jeremy Corbyn stood in silence as the national anthem played. Without uttering a word, he showed that the left has a fond idea of authenticity but is not fond of Britain. Which is something of a problem for a man auditioning to be prime minister.
To observe Mr Corbyn is an encounter with my adolescent self. I remember bucking the system by ignoring the headmaster’s orders to do up the top button of my shirt. I once stood in silence while all the losers sang lustily a song that celebrates monarchy rather than the nation. When I was ignorant of all history, I snottily declared that poppies simply celebrated war rather than peace. As a fledgeling radical, I declared loftily that, when the Queen inducted me into the privy council, I would not bend my knee.
A small part of me that is for ever radical still believes some of this. I am much closer to Mr Corbyn on these issues than most people. But since I first had these thoughts I have gone through a process I recommend. It is called growing up. It involves understanding that the etiquette of a public occasion demands respect and good manners. Mr Corbyn is absolutely at liberty, of course, not to sing the national anthem. Everyone else is at an equal liberty to draw their own conclusions.
It was a moment that spoke to the nation. It was, first, a reminder of a brutal political lesson that the Corbyn supporters are learning in public, at the expense of the Labour party. If you have spent your political life moving from a rally of the persuaded to a march of the already aggrieved, there is no need to persuade. An act of assertion, even if it is conducted in silence, is all that is ever required. However, as soon as you enter democratic politics you suddenly find that authenticity comes at a price.
The best illustration is another one of the surprising number of questions on which I agree with Mr Corbyn. I’m going to have to be careful about this — before long I’ll be wearing my fountain pen in my top pocket. I do, however, broadly approve of Mr Corbyn’s liberal position on immigration. However I weigh that authentic liberalism against the clear view of the people, especially the English, that immigration is imperilling a sense of nationhood. My authenticity and granite integrity might land me in trouble with people attracted to Ukip in the north of England. There are consequences I will not like. There is a choice here, which takes you into the realm of politics, a land Mr Corbyn has never before visited.
The country he lives in is not the same as the rest of us. These gestures, or absence of gestures, are not as trivial as Mr Corbyn’s supporters suggest. On the contrary, they are an eloquent reminder of an intellectual tradition on the left that disdains Britain. It is a literature I once found intriguing. Martin Amis once said of Philip Larkin that he lived a miserable life so that you didn’t have to. I offer the same service with respect to Marxist histories of the nation because they provide the script for Mr Corbyn’s silence.
The far-left account of the nation comes from the theorist Perry Anderson’s 1964 essay Origins of the Present Crisis. With apologies for the language, Anderson denounces Britain’s “ferruginous philistinism and parochialism”. By missing out on a bourgeois revolution like Russia, we failed to properly evolve. This failure allowed the aristocratic establishment to reinvent itself and, to this day, the British state retains its feudal aspect. At its head, the monarchy personifies the exclusion of the people from real power. You find the same assumptions in Christopher Hill’s biography of Bunyan. I used to love that book. These days I think a history of bunions would contain more political wisdom.
The belief that Britain is the site of a class war that the workers have lost can lead a man astray. I am ashamed to be a member of a party that has room for such as John McDonnell near its summit. There has always been a choice on the left, to support Sinn Fein or the SDLP. Mr McDonnell’s remarks about the IRA derive from his belief that Britain has never cast off its imperial ambitions which, as the empire shrank, it visited upon Ireland. Mr Corbyn and Mr McDonnell, if pressed, do not regard the institutions of the British state as entirely legitimate. The whole panoply is part of a conspiracy, with the media as its mouthpiece. Hence Mr McDonnell’s belief that the road to socialism does not need to pass through parliament. Ed Miliband has been replaced by Ralph Miliband.
Even when confronted by nationalism, as it is in Scotland, the Labour party has tended to believe it can be bought off with more socialism. Failing to grasp the nature of the nationalist assault, Labour will shift to the left in Scotland and make its predicament worse. At the same time, failing to respond to what EP Thompson called the peculiarities of the English creates an opening for Ukip. Labour has usually struggled in England. Wilson and Blair won majorities there but, for most of its history, Labour has relied on votes from Scotland and Wales, from whence its greatest heroes, Hardie and Bevan, have come. Labour’s weakness in England explains why it is so suspicious of an English settlement in parliament.
Despite the recent efforts of John Denham and Jon Cruddas, Labour has rarely picked up Orwell’s challenge to marry socialism with national identity. When Peter Mandelson devised a television advert that contained a British bulldog it felt like the last refuge for the Labour party. It would have seemed a bit crass but entirely commonplace on the right.
On all this, Mr Corbyn will maintain his silence. He has already, under duress, proclaimed his love of the those parts of the country he regards as just. He is happier, though, lamenting that it is too class-bound, not far enough along the Marxist historical trajectory for his liking. It must be hard for him to be confronted with choices after so long in the comfort zone. Can you really govern a nation whose anthem you would rather not sing? It is a disconcerting sight to watch a man uncomfortably saying nothing but who claims he wants to speak for the nation.
Corbyn's age isn't relevant. In the US Hilary Clinton (67) and Donald Trump (69) aren't letting their ages stop them.God, but I wish it would!!!
As written by Blair's chief speechwriter.And how does that fact invalidate what he has written? Criticise the article, not the man.
"It is a disconcerting sight to watch a man uncomfortably saying nothing but who claims he wants to speak for the nation."Aww, bless. Whatever happened to "Freedom of Speech"? If you run for and win the position of Leader of the Opposition it's a dead cert you will be "attacked" by the media, particularly if you decide to antagonise them from the off in your acceptance speech (if not before).
He's only been in the job for six days!
Anyone who joins in with the media's assault on a new leader should be ashamed. Collins won't be because he knows perfectly well what he's doing - he enjoys joining the attack. By "realm of politics" he means the media that controls public discussion in a so-called democracy. Collins is happy about that. Corbyn isn't, and neither are those who voted for him. As ever that's where the struggle lies, and if Orwell were alive today he'd be on Corbyn's side (in that debate at least). Shame on Collins for suggesting otherwise.
Well worth a read, many points I agree with from the Times)
The left will never really love this country
Philip Collins
Post a comment
Share via
Google+
Published 1 minute ago
Jeremy Corbyn’s petulant refusal to sing the national anthem tells you all you need to know about his true sympathies
Why petulant?
How strange that silence should reveal so much more about a man than anything he says. At the Battle of Britain commemoration in St Paul’s cathedral, Jeremy Corbyn stood in silence as the national anthem played. Without uttering a word, he showed that the left has a fond idea of authenticity but is not fond of Britain. Which is something of a problem for a man auditioning to be prime minister.
Or not in favour of the monarchy?
To observe Mr Corbyn is an encounter with my adolescent self. I remember bucking the system by ignoring the headmaster’s orders to do up the top button of my shirt. I once stood in silence while all the losers sang lustily a song that celebrates monarchy rather than the nation. When I was ignorant of all history, I snottily declared that poppies simply celebrated war rather than peace. As a fledgeling radical, I declared loftily that, when the Queen inducted me into the privy council, I would not bend my knee.
A small part of me that is for ever radical still believes some of this. I am much closer to Mr Corbyn on these issues than most people. But since I first had these thoughts I have gone through a process I recommend. It is called growing up. It involves understanding that the etiquette of a public occasion demands respect and good manners. Mr Corbyn is absolutely at liberty, of course, not to sing the national anthem. Everyone else is at an equal liberty to draw their own conclusions.
All in order to suggest Corbyn is childish
It was a moment that spoke to the nation. It was, first, a reminder of a brutal political lesson that the Corbyn supporters are learning in public, at the expense of the Labour party. If you have spent your political life moving from a rally of the persuaded to a march of the already aggrieved, there is no need to persuade. An act of assertion, even if it is conducted in silence, is all that is ever required. However, as soon as you enter democratic politics you suddenly find that authenticity comes at a price.
Corbyn may still have some persuading to do, but he has already persuaded the Labour Party, it seems.
The best illustration is another one of the surprising number of questions on which I agree with Mr Corbyn. I’m going to have to be careful about this — before long I’ll be wearing my fountain pen in my top pocket. I do, however, broadly approve of Mr Corbyn’s liberal position on immigration. However I weigh that authentic liberalism against the clear view of the people, especially the English, that immigration is imperilling a sense of nationhood. My authenticity and granite integrity might land me in trouble with people attracted to Ukip in the north of England. There are consequences I will not like. There is a choice here, which takes you into the realm of politics, a land Mr Corbyn has never before visited.
As a long-standing MP I expect Mr Corbyn is not completely ignorant about politics. How patronising.
The country he lives in is not the same as the rest of us. These gestures, or absence of gestures, are not as trivial as Mr Corbyn’s supporters suggest. On the contrary, they are an eloquent reminder of an intellectual tradition on the left that disdains Britain. It is a literature I once found intriguing. Martin Amis once said of Philip Larkin that he lived a miserable life so that you didn’t have to. I offer the same service with respect to Marxist histories of the nation because they provide the script for Mr Corbyn’s silence.
If he knows as much about Marxism as most it won't be a lot
The far-left account of the nation comes from the theorist Perry Anderson’s 1964 essay Origins of the Present Crisis. With apologies for the language, Anderson denounces Britain’s “ferruginous philistinism and parochialism”. By missing out on a bourgeois revolution like Russia, we failed to properly evolve. This failure allowed the aristocratic establishment to reinvent itself and, to this day, the British state retains its feudal aspect. At its head, the monarchy personifies the exclusion of the people from real power. You find the same assumptions in Christopher Hill’s biography of Bunyan. I used to love that book. These days I think a history of bunions would contain more political wisdom.
There are many opinions on Marxism. I would like to know why he thinks Anderson's is the definitive one for the far left
The belief that Britain is the site of a class war that the workers have lost can lead a man astray. I am ashamed to be a member of a party that has room for such as John McDonnell near its summit. There has always been a choice on the left, to support Sinn Fein or the SDLP. Mr McDonnell’s remarks about the IRA derive from his belief that Britain has never cast off its imperial ambitions which, as the empire shrank, it visited upon Ireland. Mr Corbyn and Mr McDonnell, if pressed, do not regard the institutions of the British state as entirely legitimate. The whole panoply is part of a conspiracy, with the media as its mouthpiece. Hence Mr McDonnell’s belief that the road to socialism does not need to pass through parliament. Ed Miliband has been replaced by Ralph Miliband.
Perhaps he should resign his membership if he feels so strongly?
Even when confronted by nationalism, as it is in Scotland, the Labour party has tended to believe it can be bought off with more socialism. Failing to grasp the nature of the nationalist assault, Labour will shift to the left in Scotland and make its predicament worse. At the same time, failing to respond to what EP Thompson called the peculiarities of the English creates an opening for Ukip. Labour has usually struggled in England. Wilson and Blair won majorities there but, for most of its history, Labour has relied on votes from Scotland and Wales, from whence its greatest heroes, Hardie and Bevan, have come. Labour’s weakness in England explains why it is so suspicious of an English settlement in parliament.
Despite the recent efforts of John Denham and Jon Cruddas, Labour has rarely picked up Orwell’s challenge to marry socialism with national identity. When Peter Mandelson devised a television advert that contained a British bulldog it felt like the last refuge for the Labour party. It would have seemed a bit crass but entirely commonplace on the right.
On all this, Mr Corbyn will maintain his silence. He has already, under duress, proclaimed his love of the those parts of the country he regards as just. He is happier, though, lamenting that it is too class-bound, not far enough along the Marxist historical trajectory for his liking. It must be hard for him to be confronted with choices after so long in the comfort zone. Can you really govern a nation whose anthem you would rather not sing? It is a disconcerting sight to watch a man uncomfortably saying nothing but who claims he wants to speak for the nation.
All in all, spin and half-truths.If genuinely held opinion can be called spin then spin it is. Much of what he wrote chimes exactly with my opinion of JC, and (it seems) with many of those that left comments on the piece.
These pieces being cut and pasted are simply opinions dressed up as deeply thought out balanced evaluations of left-wing political thought. The writer's dislike of the left is evident in every line. So unbalanced and confused I don't think they're worth reading myself.Both these pieces were written by long-term Labour supporters, nothing confused about either article, and of course they are "unbalanced" - they are opinion pieces fgs. It is permissible to have a negative opinion of Corbyn and his politics and to voice it - for now!
Both these pieces were written by long-term Labour supporters, nothing confused about either article, and of course they are "unbalanced" - they are opinion pieces fgs. It is permissible to have a negative opinion of Corbyn and his politics and to voice it - for now!
Labour, as they say, is a broad church. Some Labour policians and supporters are difficult to separate from Tory politicians and supporters and that became a problem for the electorate. The clear difference between Corbyn and the Tories is a breath of fresh air.why is the moderate, centrist position such a bad place to be? over the last 25 years the electorate has made it clear that extremism is not for them.
The right of the Labour Party may be better employed demonstrating their differences from the Tories rather than their differences from Corbyn.
why is the moderate, centrist position such a bad place to be? over the last 25 years the electorate has made it clear that extremism is not for them.
There's nothing wrong with a centrist position. There's not much point in having more than one party if you have trouble telling the difference though. The electorate has voted (or not) for what was available. When something different (like UKIP) was offered they showed interest in that. We don't know if they would vote for a left wing Labour government as that has never been on offer.
There's nothing wrong with a centrist position. There's not much point in having more than one party if you have trouble telling the difference though. The electorate has voted (or not) for what was available. When something different (like UKIP) was offered they showed interest in that. We don't know if they would vote for a left wing Labour government as that has never been on offer.Oh well only 5 years to wait to find out, if indeed Corbyn and the far left are still in charge by then.
Oh well only 5 years to wait to find out, if indeed Corbyn and the far left are still in charge by then.
At least they will fight against injustices...what do your Tory mates do day in day out? The riff raff end of them at least who seem to be in power,b....r all, most of them are incompetent to run a brewery let alone a country, granted they can make millions for a few though"my Tory mates?" You see, this is an example of what Nick Cohen was referencing above. If you don't support Corbyn then you must be a Tory. FYI I have never voted Conservative in my life.
Aww, bless. Whatever happened to "Freedom of Speech"? If you run for and win the position of Leader of the Opposition it's a dead cert you will be "attacked" by the media, particularly if you decide to antagonise them from the off in your acceptance speech (if not before).
Oh well only 5 years to wait to find out, if indeed Corbyn and the far left are still in charge by then.
The "far left" aren't in charge. If only. Everyone knows he has little support from the MPs, and not even much in his shadow cabinet.Did I mis-hear Jeremy on Newsnight when he said ultimately it was up to him to decide on policy? If the Far Left does not now contol Labour who the hell does? The moderates??!
...and yes, as leader of the party Corbyn will be the decision maker, another simple fact...
You don't like Corbyn, big deal, and tough, it doesn't really matter, if you prefer a fascist one party dictatorship state, that's your prerogative but last time I looked, the UK was ruled under a democratic system so ...that's all basically
Did I mis-hear Jeremy on Newsnight when he said ultimately it was up to him to decide on policy? If the Far Left does not now contol Labour who the hell does? The moderates??!
Labour has effectively found itself in a political wilderness with few friends. The Party is already in turmoil over bombing Syria with half ts MP's about to rebel. If Labour is to survive as a Party I don't believe Corbyn's has a hope in hell of surviving a year as leader.
The party has always had few friends... except when it's being led by a Tory.Aww, come on - the party has some new friends now though doesn't it? Hezbollah and Hamas, to name but two. I expect ISIS were quite pleased with the result too... 8(0(*
Yet it always survives the attempts to destroy it ?{)(**
...and yes, as leader of the party Corbyn will be the decision maker, another simple fact...You do write the most absurd and offensive statements. If anyone supports one party dictatorship states you need look no further than your hero Corbyn and the list of leaders he admires.
You don't like Corbyn, big deal, and tough, it doesn't really matter, if you prefer a fascist one party dictatorship state, that's your prerogative but last time I looked, the UK was ruled under a democratic system so ...that's all basically
The party has always had few friends... except when it's being led by a Tory.
Yet it always survives the attempts to destroy it ?{)(**
Well now, I am getting really worried. For God's sake, even I am beginning to feel sorry for him. And you all know what your average Brit is like when it comes to defending the under dog.
I think we should all be saying, "Gung Ho, Feller, well met. Let's have a One Party Communist State." That should scare the shit out of anyone.
Exactly. The attacks are out of proportion to the perceived dangers and Brits love an underdog. Younger Brits don't like bullying either.Of course, that's why younger Brits embraced Ed Miliband, Nigel Farage, Nick Clegg and Nick Griffin, all "victims" of press "bullying" too and why each was such a resounding success at the ballot box.
If you read the newspapers Labour has committed electoral suicide. However, people voted for Corbyn and new members have joined since he won. This tells us that many people don't want the Labour Party to continue in the direction it has gone in recent years. 'Blairism' won votes but was it Labour? No. it was 'New Labour', which has now been resoundingly rejected by the majority.How many members of the Labour party have recently left though? I personally know at least half a dozen.
Exactly. The attacks are out of proportion to the perceived dangers and Brits love an underdog. Younger Brits don't like bullying either.
By electing Corbyn, party members have ensured Labour is unelectable as heading any Government for the foreseeable future. As in Scotland, the Labour Party is now a non entity in England too and for some that is much to cheer about.
You do write the most absurd and offensive statements. If anyone supports one party dictatorship states you need look no further than your hero Corbyn and the list of leaders he admires.
Do you have a cite showing the list of dictatorships that Jeremy Corbyn supports?Don't take my word for it, read what one of his supporters has to say on the subject. https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-tatchell/im-backing-jeremy-corbyn-for-labour-leadership-despite-his-unsavoury-frien
Including the rationale behind that "absurd" statement
As for offensive, well, what I find offensive is fabrication, spin, sensationalism and lies....
Don't take my word for it, read what one of his supporters has to say on the subject. https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-tatchell/im-backing-jeremy-corbyn-for-labour-leadership-despite-his-unsavoury-frien
great article supporting Corbyn but no list of dictatorships he supports....if not wanting to add fuel to fire but wanting negotiation is not your cup of tea, well that's ok, but check where it's lead in the past ...anythng which mnmises civilian deaths is always good In my books.does Corbyn support Castro for one? A simple yes / no will suffice.
Cameron supports Saudi Arabia, what dyou think about that then...bit hypocritical? Perchance?
does Corbyn support Castro for one? A simple yes / no will suffice.
i have no idea, you were the one who stated he supports dictators, your onus to supply the linksFidel Castro is a dictator, agreed? Here is proof of Jeremy's support for a communist dictator.
Fidel Castro is a dictator, agreed? Here is proof of Jeremy's support for a communist dictator.
http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2007-08/982
That this House commends the achievements of Fidel Castro in securing first-class free healthcare and education provision for the people of Cuba despite the 44 year illegal US embargo of the Cuban economy; notes the great strides Cuba has taken during this period in many fields such as biotechnology and sport in both of which Cuba is a world leader; acknowledges the esteem in which Castro is held by the people and leaders of Africa, Asia and Latin America for leading the calls for emancipation of the world's poorest people from slavery, hunger and the denial of human rights such as the right to life, the right to shelter, the right to healthcare and basic medicines and the right to education; welcomes the EU statement that constructive engagement with Cuba at this time is the most responsible course of action; and calls upon the Government to respect Cuba's right to self-determination and resist the aggressive forces within the US Administration who are openly planning their own illegal transition in Cuba.Do you accept that corbyn supports the dictator Castro, yes or no? If not then there's little point me providing further proof that you will only pooh-pooh in your own inimitable fashion..
Filter EDMs by:
Total number of signatures: 86
Lots of people agreed this was a good measure, what's the problem? sUpporting progress means just that...in your mind does supporting these support the idea of a cruel dictatorship? Doesn't make sense, with that kind of thinking Nazi Germany would never ever be allowed to become a normal country again??
now, wich other dictatorships does Corby support or else you can furnish the board with your fears of a labour govt which protect people from exploitation
Do you accept that corbyn supports the dictator Castro, yes or no? If not then there's little point me providing further proof that you will only pooh-pooh in your own inimitable fashion..
Corbyn and other supported progressive measures......not the notion of a dictatorship.....can't u tell the difference?????The motion I posted a link to specifically asked the house of commons to commend dictator Fidel Castro, and is signed by (amongst others) one Jeremy Corbyn. Are you continuing to deny that Corbyn supports (and clearly admires) Castro? Because if you are, despite clear proof that i have given confirming it, then there is no point me continuing to engage with you on this matter.
Cameron support Saudi Arabia hence cutting off people's hands and burying women adulterers in the sand and stoning their heads till they die,,,, hello???? Which one is worse
The motion I posted a link to specifically asked the house of commons to commend dictator Fidel Castro, and is signed by (amongst others) one Jeremy Corbyn. Are you continuing to deny that Corbyn supports (and clearly admires) Castro? Because if you are, despite clear proof that i have given confirming it, then there is no point me continuing to engage with you on this matter.
Do you accept that corbyn supports the dictator Castro, yes or no? If not then there's little point me providing further proof that you will only pooh-pooh in your own inimitable fashion..
Try comparing and contrasting Cuba and Saudi Arabia, Alfred. One is ruled by a communist party and the other by a monarchy. Neither has a great Human Rights record. One is shunned by UK governments and they sell arms to the other.My only reason for bringing up Castro was because Mercury asked me to back up my contention that Corbyn supports dictatorships. I have proven beyond doubt that he supports Castro and am not intersted in comparing and contrasting Cuba with any other country - start a new thread for that if you wish, this one is about Corbyn and what he stands for. He also expressed support for Gadaffi a few years back, lost the link momentarily and off to bed now, but will supply tomorrow as you're bound to want see it!
My only reason for bringing up Castro was because Mercury asked me to back up my contention that Corbyn supports dictatorships. I have proven beyond doubt that he supports Castro and am not intersted in comparing and contrasting Cuba with any other country - start a new thread for that if you wish, this one is about Corbyn and what he stands for. He also expressed support for Gadaffi a few years back, lost the link momentarily and off to bed now, but will supply tomorrow as you're bound to want see it!
ETA found it - written by a member of the far left, not a smeary old member of the Tory press before you go off on one.. http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/james-bloodworth-left-wing-case-against-comrade-jeremy-corbyn-1513969
My only reason for bringing up Castro was because Mercury asked me to back up my contention that Corbyn supports dictatorships. I have proven beyond doubt that he supports Castro and am not intersted in comparing and contrasting Cuba with any other country - start a new thread for that if you wish, this one is about Corbyn and what he stands for. He also expressed support for Gadaffi a few years back, lost the link momentarily and off to bed now, but will supply tomorrow as you're bound to want see it!
ETA found it - written by a member of the far left, not a smeary old member of the Tory press before you go off on one.. http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/james-bloodworth-left-wing-case-against-comrade-jeremy-corbyn-1513969
The link you provided showed that Corbyn and others supported Castro's achievements in providing good healthcare and education. I doubt he supports Castro's human rights record. All regimes have good and bad, including democracies, republics and monarchies.What apologist tosh. Hitler achieved plenty for his country too - would it be have been OK to commend HIS achievements to the house? It really is astounding that you refuse to accept that Corbyn supports Castro and his anti US regime, of course he does !
The NHS is turning to Cuba for inspiration on how to improve its services. Officials from the Department of Heath and 100 GPs visited the Caribbean island which, despite being short of medicines and money after decades of a US-led economic embargo, manages to deliver excellent healthcare at a fraction of our cost.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2000/oct/02/NHS.futureofthenhs
NB: I see the Tory press have printed all sorts of wild stories about Caneron this morning - I trust you will all be very vocal in condemning such bullying!
Do you mean the story about him and a certain animal in 'Call Me Dave? @)(++(*Yes I do. Now, had such a story been dredged up about dear old Jez, I'm sure you (or if not you then other Corbynistas) would be ranting about smears, bullying and evil Tory press s..m, etc etc - am I right or am I right (and I don't mean in my politics...)?
Yes I do. Now, had such a story been dredged up about dear old Jez, I'm sure you (or if not you then other Corbynistas) would be ranting about smears, bullying and evil Tory press s..m, etc etc - am I right or am I right (and I don't mean in my politics...)?
The interesting thing is that this story comes from a biography written by a Tory. With friends like that Dave doesn't need enemies. The best the papers could find on Corbyn was his great great grandad was a rather nasty workhouse official who bullied the poor; obviously he was a Tory at heart. @)(++(*Why so? If the story is a blatant lie then Dave will have no choice but to sue won't he? Or at least that's the logic I've seen used around these parts when it comes to smeary stories in the press about others.
Both stories demonstrate the futility of either reading or giving credence to newspaper stories.
Why so? If the story is a blatant lie then Dave will have no choice but to sue won't he? Or at least that's the logic I've seen used around these parts when it comes to smeary stories in the press about others.
I note you failed to actually answer my question btw. Is it not true that the Tory s..m press could have chosen to ignore this book? The fact that they have leapt upon this particular detail with glee seems to demonstrate to me that they'd print a damning story about their own grandmothers in order to sell a paper and that no one in the public eye (particularly those who put themselves forward as leaders and do-gooders) is safe from being picked on, exposed and ridiculed. Which, if you're in favour of a free press, is what you have to expect, even if you're as saintly and altruistic as Jeremy Corbyn.
I would avoid Twitter today, Alfred @)(++(* There is much hilarity.Of course there is - what makes you think I'd be remotely bothered? I know you have me pegged as a Tory, but as I have already said I've never once voted for them, sorry to disappoint.
It shows some of his colleagues want to get rid of him (but we already knew that).So - no one is safe then - everyone of any and every political persuasion is free game as far as the press are concerned. Last week it was Corbyn, this week Cameron, next week...?
Of course there is - what makes you think I'd be remotely bothered? I know you have me pegged as a Tory, but as I have already said I've never once voted for them, sorry to disappoint.
So - no one is safe then - everyone of any and every political persuasion is free game as far as the press are concerned. Last week it was Corbyn, this week Cameron, next week...?
You sounded bothered. Why not regard this Mail report the way you regard smears against Corbyn, you asked.I actually think its highly likely that the story about Dave is true, or at least based on truth. And if there's a photo then it will doubtless surface now. I think it's utterly hilarious but if it pleases you to imagine I'm crying in front of my laptop over it then fill yer boots.
Well, Cameron's only got where he is with the backing of those papers now having a go at him. If you live by the sword...
The Mail is serialising a book, written by a former Tory treasurer/donor? They probably already knew this rumour, but never printed it until the book was published.ORLY? Do you think the taint of face-f..king a pig will ever leave Dave now? Let's hope they don't call in Eddie and Keela to verify the rumour. @)(++(*
Serialising a book isn't the same thing as indulging in a sustained campaign day after day against an individual.
The absolute panic of the establishment is very amusing. Does Corbyn really pose such a threat to their stranglehold on power? Now we have an un-named general allegedly predicting a military coup if Labour are elected to government with Corbyn as leader. How telling that they are so afraid of a man with principles.If Corbyn's principles with regard to foreign policy and terrorism measures pose a threat to national security then anyone who cares about the future of this country has reason to be concerned. Mind you, the fact that we also have (allegedly) a general in the army planning a military coup following a democratic election is equally worrying tbh!
ORLY? Do you think the taint of face-f.....g a pig will ever leave Dave now? Let's hope they don't call in Eddie and Keela to verify the rumour. @)(++(*
Hell hath no fury. This is internal Tory struggle. The man deserves everything that comes to him.
I predict some strange grunting noises being heard during PMQ's this week. @)(++(*
I predict some strange grunting noises being heard during PMQ's this week. @)(++(*
I don't believe you will find Corbyn caught with his trousers down. @)(++(*Maybe that's one reason Diane Abbott got a job in the shadow cabinet - no lurid memoirs likely to be forth-coming in the near future.. 8(0(*
8)--)) Some cracking gags I've read today. But I'm boared now.
Cracking or crackling?
You can't blame him he needed an excellent education to insure he could always bring home the bacon lmao
ewwww don't know if the story is true or not, I wish we hadn't been told, need mind bleach now...
Of all the stories of men putting their bits where they shouldn't this one is pretty disgusting. I wonder if he'll sue and go for a bit of book-banning?
It makes you wonder though - if even the PM isn't safe from being exposed by the media, then how is it that the dastardly McCanns can wield such power over the press to have all their skeletons kept well and truly in the closet... &%+((£
It makes you wonder though - if even the PM isn't safe from being exposed by the media, then how is it that the dastardly McCanns can wield such power over the press to have all their skeletons kept well and truly in the closet... &%+((£
I thnk he's probably stuck between a rock and a hard place here....can you imagine the writ? Lol
If he says nothing and does nothing people will wonder, (probably best option as people who snort,excuse the pun, cocaine at a tender age at an Oxbridge institution with their funny old habits do do stupid things and people know this) if he does do somethng people will think and talk about it, either way he's screwed....doesn't do a lot for his image does it.
Erm, the media haven't exposed Dave, the writers of the book and it's publishers have.The book hasn't been published yet. The ToryDaily Mail published the story this morning. No one forced them to. It is now all over the world's media. The media broke the story, even if they did not actually author it in the first place.
If and when a book on this case is published the papers might well serialise that too. But in both cases it won't be their work.
It's cheered me up anyway. we have Doc Martin on TV at the moment and it's about a pig farmer. I will be smiling at pigs for some time I think.
Napoleon met his Waterloo, Cameron met his bacon. 8)--))
lol
Maybe Cameron will get the chop from other members, poor soul, imagine if this is what he is remembered for, cos for sure he's done nothing as PM so far he can be remembered for...nothing at all
[/quote
A pork chop, naturally. *&*%£ *&*%£
lol
Maybe Cameron will get the chop from other members, poor soul, imagine if this is what he is remembered for, cos for sure he's done nothing as PM so far he can be remembered for...nothing at all
A pork chop, naturally. *&*%£ *&*%£
It makes you wonder though - if even the PM isn't safe from being exposed by the media, then how is it that the dastardly McCanns can wield such power over the press to have all their skeletons kept well and truly in the closet... &%+((£
Following discussions with my friends* on the Madeleine McCann forum I thought it would be interesting to continue the discussion here. Anyone with an ounce of sense knows that pigs will sprout wings and fly before Corbyn gets his hands on the keys of Number 10, but putting that to one side - what do we think of his views, his ability to lead the Labour Party and the country, his beard and dress sense, etc?
* (friends in this instance is used in the same way as Corbyn claimed he used the word to describe the terrorist sympathisers he shared a platform with, ie: a bunch of people whose views I vehemently oppose but it's always good to talk!)
Holmes, and many other attention seekers (e.g. Crick on Channel Four News), are just trolling, because the odds are definitely high on Jezza telling them to s*d off one day. And who could blame him. Not me &%&£(+
I think he's done well, G ?{)(**
Corbyn will wipe the floor with him every time as he is leader and Camerons luxury of empty fob off answers at PMQs whch cannot be challenged by any one MP, will be curtailed
I await the handbags at dawn with Osbourne
People never learn. Thatcher's nemesis was the poll tax, will Cameron's be the tax credit cuts?
Jesus, Alf....did you just see John McDonnell on the Andrew Marr Show? Just as I thought when I saw him on Question Time, the man is an absolute simpleton. %56&I'm afraid none of them has covered themselves in glory in the last couple of weeks. It would be terrifying if it wasn't so comical, or should that be the other way round...? &%+((£
A question for Jez supporters on this thread - do you still see your man as an authentic conviction politician?
Christ on a bike. Jeremy Corbyn, Boris Johnson and Donald Trump.Indeed it has.
The world's gone mad. 8)><(
People never learn. Thatcher's nemesis was the poll tax, will Cameron's be the tax credit cuts?Erm...no. @)(++(*
A question for Jez supporters on this thread - do you still see your man as an authentic conviction politician?
I always ever saw Jez as an interim leader of the Labour Party. His populist support in London which enabled him to walk the leadership election has never been reproduced in the Labour heartlands. This has been borne out by the latest referendum where Labour voters in middle and northern England voted contrary to Party policy.
I always ever saw Jez as an interim leader of the Labour Party. His populist support in London which enabled him to walk the leadership election has never been reproduced in the Labour heartlands. This has been borne out by the latest referendum where Labour voters in middle and northern England voted contrary to Party policy.ng, he will be yesterday's man before the weeks out. Whether he can come back is another question?He's determined to go down fighting, even if it means destroying the Labour Party in the process.
He's determined to go down fighting, even if it means destroying the Labour Party in the process.
Why shouldnt he, the backstabbers and cowards and bandwagon jumpers can go join the tories if they want now, and bloody good riddanceAnd that is precisely why we need an opposition that has more than a snowball in hell's chance of standing up to them. Corbyn is not more important than the party.
We shall see if the party is destroyed and who were the culprits
You shouldnt worry your little head though,worry about the far right sneaking up then this country is well and truly ....well you know the word
And that is precisely why we need an opposition that has more than a snowball in hell's chance of standing up to them. Corbyn is not more important than the party.
Tories are now the far right?The leave vote and the ensuing shake up means the Tory party is almost certainly moving further to the right, yes. Your second sentence makes no sense. I am suggesting we need a serious electable opposition to counter the proliferation of right wing ideology in parliament.
JC as far as I know is not a far right apologiser,qute the opposite, so this logic seems all skewed
Eta
The cabinet traitors are not more important than the party....angela eagle was complaining today JC didnt call her back yesterday and it miffed her, well i imagine he had alot on his mind, what a waste of space that woman is as are the people who thnk she should be next labour leader LOLOLOLOLOL!!! And LOL for good measure
The leave vote and the ensuing shake up means the Tory party is almost certainly moving further to the right, yes. Your second sentence makes no sense. I am suggesting we need a serious electable opposition to counter the proliferation of right wing ideology in parliament.And a backstabbing cowardly motley crew is gonna sort it out, get real
And a backstabbing cowardly motley crew is gonna sort it out, get realI really don't think you know what you're talking about. The far right of the Tories isn't far right??? What is it then?
Ps the right of the tories isnt the fkn far right
Wow - over 80% of Labour MPs have no confidence in Corbyn, so where does he go from here?
Many of his proposed policies have public support, so either the UK people are loony lefties or is he more in touch than those who criticise him;Great. Should be a breeze for him to win the next election then. 75% of the Parliamentary Labour Party must be off their rockers too, if they can't see how eminently electable and engaged with the electorate is our Jezza!
Re-nationlisation of the railways; 60% agree.
75% top rate of tax on incomes over £1 million; 56% agree.
Formation of an international convention on banning nuclear weapons; 64% agree
Control of the levels of private housing rentals; 59% agree.
A mandatory living wage; 60% agree.
Scrapping University tuition fees and reinstating grants; the question hasn't been asked recently but is likely to have public support.
Opposition to the Iraq War; 43% agreed [37% supported it]
Opposition to bombing Syria; 60% agreed.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news-14-5/the-jeremy-corbyn-policies-that-most-people-actually-agree-with-10407148.html
Great. Should be a breeze for him to win the next election then. 75% of the Parliamentary Labour Party must be off their rockers too, if they can't see how eminently electable and engaged with the electorate is our Jezza!
The PLP are spoiled brats who thought refusing to play would get them their own way. Their bluff has been called and now they can't play. At the moment they face some stark choices; challenge Corbyn's leadership and perhaps lose. Stamp off and start a new party and perhaps sink into oblivion. Getting Blair to publicly support them was a bad move with hindsight. For him to oppose Corbyn has turned out to be a good thing; who wants his support?I don't think caring about the future electability of your party is selfish, the selfish idiot is Corbyn who by refusing to go has damned his party to years in the wilderness.
I don't think caring about the future electability of your party is selfish, the selfish idiot is Corbyn who by refusing to go has damned his party to years in the wilderness.
Do try to keep up;And your point is?
Jeremy Corbyn Attracts 'Huge Surge' In 100,000 New Labour Party Members
Huffington Post UK - 1 day ago
And your point is?That labour party supports corbyn and you totally wrong, tough shit isnt it deal with it
And your point is?
People are not joining the Party to support Eagle and the other rebels in my opinion.There has been a drive by those opposed to Corbyn to encourage new members to vote him out, approx 50% of new members polled refused to say that they had joined to support him. But even if 100% supported him, it doesn't mean he will breeze to victory at the next GE. If Corbyn really was so incredibly popular with the electorate why are the majority of his MPs so keen for him to go?
There has been a drive by those opposed to Corbyn to encourage new members to vote him out, approx 50% of new members polled refused to say that they had joined to support him. But even if 100% supported him, it doesn't mean he will breeze to victory at the next GE. If Corbyn really was so incredibly popular with the electorate why are the majority of his MPs so keen for him to go?
The answer lies in the leadership Election. Three candidates acceptable to the PLP were rejected. The PLP still hasn't taken that on board. They are determined to impose their views on the membership. Corbyn listens to the member's views.All MPs care about is their party getting into power. If they truly believed Jeremy was capable of leading them to a GE victory he would have their full support. The fact that they don't have his support is because they know he is a dead duck as far as the electorate is concerned.
All MPs care about is their party getting into power. If they truly believed Jeremy was capable of leading them to a GE victory he would have their full support. The fact that they don't have his support is because they know he is a dead duck as far as the electorate is concerned.
You keep repeating your opinions as facts. Not all MP's have that as their sole concern. Some are interested in representing and helping their constituents first and foremost. Good work can be done out of power as well as in power. You are taking the values of some and painting all MP's with the same brush. Valued MP's can make a difference when their party is in opposition too;Firstly, everything I write is my opinion, got that? Just so as I don't have to write IMO every single post.
http://www.frankfield.com/campaigns/poverty-and-life-changes.aspx
Firstly, everything I write is my opinion, got that? Just so as I don't have to write IMO every single post.
Secondly, If the PLP is content simply to remain in opposition, with its MPs unable to effect any serious policy change then of course it should be content to get behind Jeremy and let the Tories run rough shod over the country until he resigns, retires or kicks the bucket, whichever comes first. Is that what you think they should do? Simply shut up and put up with Jeremy whilst believing fervently that he will never lead their country to a GE victory?
What a lot of assumptions!Why on earth would labour MPs be afraid that labour might win at the next general election?
1. That the PLP believe JC can't win an election.
Maybe they're afraid he will!
2. That a party in opposition can't affect policy.
Farage managed it from outside Parliament!
3. That the Tories will run roughshod over the country.
Corbyn offers the clearest alternative, unlike the PLP before who seemed very similar to the Tories.
Finally, they are rejecting democracy which put them where they are. If they expect the electorate to shut up and accept election results so should they.
Andrew Neal just asked Eagle what if she loses to Corbyn? Her answer was that you have to accept the democratic process. But she's challenging because she hasn't accepted the previous democratic process.Do you believe that leadership challenges are undemocratic?
Completely illogical!!!!!
Why on earth would labour MPs be afraid that labour might win at the next general election?
Afraid thet they would win with Corbyn as Leader. The poor things might have to enact some socialist policies. Difficult for closet Tories. @)(++(*What utter rubbish. In what way do you think Angela Eagle is ideologically similar to Andrea Leadsom?
What utter rubbish. In what way do you think Angela Eagle is ideologically similar to Andrea Leadsom?
I judge by actions, not words.That's not true though is it? As we have seen time and again by your judgements on other matters, based on what people have said or written. If you think Angela Eagle is a closet Tory, perhaps you could point to those actions of hers (eg her voting record) which lead you to that conclusion.
That's not true though is it? As we have seen time and again by your judgements on other matters, based on what people have said or written. If you think Angela Eagle is a closet Tory, perhaps you could point to those actions of hers (eg her voting record) which lead you to that conclusion.
I'm just giving my opinion like others do. Why should I provide cites? No-one else bothers.So, you can give no sensible or logical reason why Labour MPs would be afraid that their OWN party would win a general election, it's just your own (rather illogical) opinion. OK, thanks for sharing.
Animal Farm:
“… and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”
By launching this mess in the aftermath of a very important referendum Labour MP's have shown their complete lack of judgement and timing. The Remain vote was not dependent on Labour voters; only the Tory voters could have kept the UK in the EU;They should be allowed to hold a vote of no confidence in their leader and mount a leadership challenge shouldn't they? Or is that undemocratic in your view?
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/06/dont-blame-jeremy-corbyn-polls-show-only-tory-voters-could-have-kept-us-eu
While their Leader travelled the country gathering votes for Remain they were busy plotting to overthrow him. On what grounds? A majority of Labour voters did vote for Remain, so it wasn't that.
If they had united behind their Leader they were in a very good position with the Tories in disarray. They threw that chance away.
Should 172 Members of Parliament be allowed to overturn a democratic vote by 251,417 Party members?
As she is now likely to face a vote of no confidence from her constituency how can Angela Eagle stand as a leadership candidate? She could face deselection shortly.
They should be allowed to hold a vote of no confidence in their leader and mount a leadership challenge shouldn't they? Or is that undemocratic in your view?
Votes of no confidence are a feature of the UK system of government and are usually aimed at the presiding government by the House of Commons. If the vote succeeds a General Election is called. The government then has a new mandate from the people or a new government is elected.The party will be destroyed as I predicted it would be when Corbyn was elected many months ago. It's very sad indeed. He will have to go when Labour flops at the next GE of course, but what a waste of time it will all have been.
It's a new departure as far as I can discover to have such a vote in order to dislodge a Party Leader.
If MP's are unhappy with the Leader of their Party the usual response is to mount a challenge.
It would seem that the MP's took this step purely because they were unsure of winning a Leadership Election. The hope was to force a resignation.
The democratic route was to mount a leadership challenge and have a fair fight. These MP's acted as they did because they hoped to avoid that. Now the sole candidate at the moment is on very shaky ground as she is facing her own problems. She could win the vote and then be deselected as an MP. P**s ups and Breweries come to mind.
The party will be destroyed as I predicted it would be when Corbyn was elected many months ago. It's very sad indeed. He will have to go when Labour flops at the next GE of course, but what a waste of time it will all have been.
On the other hand other rebel MP's could face discipline or deselection by their constituencies, real Labour MP's could be elected and there could be a Labour landslide for better reasons than last time. What is clear is that predictions have a habit of being wrong these days.Firstly, what is a "real" Labour MP? Someone who agrees with Jeremy as leader? Meaning anyone who doesn't agree with him as leader isn't really a Labour MP?
Firstly, what is a "real" Labour MP? Someone who agrees with Jeremy as leader? Meaning anyone who doesn't agree with him as leader isn't really a Labour MP?
Secondly, is it democratic that any MP who mounts a leadership challenge faces the prospect of de-selection thanks to the recently drafted in £3 members who have rallied to support an anti-establishment hero, individuals who may never have actually voted Labour before in their lives, and who had little interest in the party until Jeremy decided to stand as leader? How exactly is it democratic that an MP, elected as part of the democratic process by their constituents faces being booted out a job for daring to challenge Chairman Corbyn?
I don't see those who subscribe to'New Labour' as real Labourites. I don't think new £3 members would have much power in Constituency Parties as yet, and it is they who decide to deselect.So Chairman Corbyn can squash any challenge to his leadership. How very democratic.
Now we come to what is probably an undemocratic bit, but it's common to all Parties. The Electorate can only vote for candidates chosen by the Party. When you vote you are voting for people who have been 'selected'. I suppose it depends whether people are voting for the Party or the candidate.
However, those who select can also deselect. If they act contrary to the rules though, they can also be disciplined.
When the Coventry South East Constituency Party refused to abandon it's MP after his expulsion from the Party the National Executive suspended the Constituency Party.
The fluorescent-pink celebrity makeover didn't work...
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/07/11/14/3628BA3300000578-3684188-image-a-54_1468242664610.jpg)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3684188/The-Eagle-FINALLY-landed-Angela-Eagle-launches-desperate-bid-topple-Jeremy-Corbyn-s-branded-Empire-Strikes-candidate-allies.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3684188/The-Eagle-FINALLY-landed-Angela-Eagle-launches-desperate-bid-topple-Jeremy-Corbyn-s-branded-Empire-Strikes-candidate-allies.html)
People know what corbyns about, mostly, though in the end he will be the last one laughing,but shes a dark horse
Hmm. It might be a bit more reassuring if Corbyn brushed his snaggly teeth and put a bloody tie on!!
Nighty night, sugarplum!! xx
What a superficial lot we are now. If you haven't got a tie on and gleaming whitened straightened teeth you can't lead a political party!Of course you can, but don't expect to win an election looking like a tramp - just look at Michael Foot for instance.
"As of today you either understand that Corbyn is the most disastrous Labour leader of all time, or you are already a plot-holder on Bonkers Island. His net negative poll rating of minus 41 is a record-breaker for a leader of the opposition. In all those millions of houses and flats that the inconvenient masses inhabit, the talk is not of how much they look forward to a Corbyn government — and it never will be.
And yet the organisation is said to be awash with keeno joiners who are in it for Jeremy. Labour, it seems, has more excited new members than a YMCA pool party. Yet which party is in government and ahead in the polls? Why, the one with a third of the members of the party that is 8 per cent behind" - David Aronovitch in today's Times. @)(++(*
Did you mean David Aaronovitch the staunch Blairite?Yup, he's a journo and he writes a column for the Times. Say what you like about Blair, he did at least manage to get re-elected 3 times, something which is certainly beyond Corbyn's wildest dreams.
Yup, he's a journo and he writes a column for the Times. Say what you like about Blair, he did at least manage to get re-elected 3 times, something which is certainly beyond Corbyn's wildest dreams.
Perhaps he too will sell his soul to Murdoch.I beg your pardon?
I beg your pardon?
Blair and Cameron allegedly got elected with Murdoch's help. Even Brexit had The Sun on it's side.Tell me more about the soul selling.
Tell me more about the soul selling.
Anyone who cozies up to Murdoch is endangering their integrity imo.All the while Jeremy remains a man of "integrity" and continues to stonewall the media then he really isn't doing his prospects very much good at all. Of course some seem to think winning an election really isn't what it's all about but I beg to differ.
corbyn can be said to be tryng to save the labour party, thnk about it
As for that article, the writer doesnt know the meaning of the word hubris, poor, very poor
He doesn't realise he's showing his own hubris very clearly. @)(++(*It seems the only arguments you and Mercury can muster is to try and denounce the authors of the quotes I have posted without any attempt whatsoever to argue why what they have said is incorrect. I expected better of you (though not Mercury ob).
It seems the only arguments you and Mercury can muster is to try and denounce the authors of the quotes I have posted without any attempt whatsoever to argue why what they have said is incorrect. I expected better of you (though not Mercury ob).
Thank you for the back-handed compliment. I think both mercury and I found the article full of opinion and humbug, so not really worth the argument.Firstly, re: the bit in bold above, that is a nihilist, defeatist position to take though I recognise that *some* people may very well hold that view, when push comes to shove, the majority of the electorate DO go out to vote, and use their vote to try and elect those candidates they feel best represent their views and wishes.
He calls himself a marxist but fails to acknowledge that something different has happened. I've never seen ordinary people making their views known like this before. They appear to be rejecting all politicians, not just Labour ones. They don't think any of them represent their interests.
No wonder May has made a bid for the centre ground, but will they believe her? I suspect not. If, as he acknowledges, Labour had refrained from attacking it's own people it might have survived, but it didn't. It's problems are of it's own making, not Corbyn's. What he doesn't address is how Centrist Labour politicians can beat May, she is on their patch at the moment. They have to move significantly left to oppose her. The one occupying that ground is Corbyn.
At the moment they could oppose if they adopted his stance, but not otherwise. Are any of them prepared to do that? I doubt it.
Firstly, re: the bit in bold above, that is a nihilist, defeatist position to take though I recognise that *some* people may very well hold that view, when push comes to shove, the majority of the electorate DO go out to vote, and use their vote to try and elect those candidates they feel best represent their views and wishes.
The rebel Labour MPs who stood and who were elected to parliament at the last election did so when Ed Miliband was their leader, not Jeremy Corbyn, so it's no wonder that the latter's election to that position has caused many of those MPs such disquiet, as Jez is clearly intent on taking the party they represent in a direction that most of them do not wholeheartedly agree with, and in a manner which clearly many of them feel makes their own party unlikely to win an election anytime soon. What are they reasonably supposed to do? Just shut up and keep their fingers crossed that by some miracle the GBP will fall in love with Jeremy's presentation and policies before the next election? Give us your guidance for these MPs.
PS: Did you read the whole article I linked to, or just the quote I posted?
Andrew Neal just asked Eagle what if she loses to Corbyn? Her answer was that you have to accept the democratic process. But she's challenging because she hasn't accepted the previous democratic process.
Completely illogical!!!!!
Only just;Thanks for the statistics, however even the 2010 figures back up my statement that the majority of the election do go out and vote, unless you're going to somehow argue that 65% is not the majority?!
Election Year UK England
2010 65.1% 65.5%
2005 61.4% 61.3%
2001 59.4% 59.2%
1997 71.4% 71.4%
Blair got a big turn-out, because he appeared to offer something new. Brexit beat him; 72.2%.
Labour leaders and MP's have failed to inspire since, as the voting percentages show.
It's all very well criticising Corbyn, but he has inspired people which the party wasn't doing.
I agree with the writer that proportional representation is the future, but the electorate rejected it.
Nevertheless in the last election 34% of the electorate didn't vote. Neither of our largest parties reached 34% in votes. The Tories are ruling with 24% of the electorate voting for them.
http://www.votenone.org.uk/uk-unheard-third.html
All the while Jeremy remains a man of "integrity" and continues to stonewall the media then he really isn't doing his prospects very much good at all. Of course some seem to think winning an election really isn't what it's all about but I beg to differ.
The man has faced an orchestrated negative campaign ever since he was elected leader. Every politician deserves a level playing field. Interesting comments too.Bless him. But what's new? He was a fool to think that stonewalling the media was going to endear himself to them, it's just one example of how he's not made great decisions since becoming leader.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-media-bias-attacks-75-per-cent-three-quarters-fail-to-accurately-report-a7140681.html
Only one person has retained their dignity in all this and that's Corbyn. He hasn't publicly criticised any of his MP's as far as I know. He hasn't resorted to whingeing on Facebook. He hasn't ignored the wishes of the Party members or of constituency members.If there was a snap election next month, how would you rate Labour's chances of winning?
The MP's seem to have been phased by his leadership style; collegiate and less confrontational, but he stated his intention at the beginning.
Liz Kendall identified the problem clearly after losing the Leadership contest;
No one has a monopoly on being led by their conscience. But modernisers must be honest with ourselves: many people who’ve joined our party in recent months do not believe we are offering change and some of them doubt our principles altogether. This is partly because too often in the past we’ve come across as technocratic and managerial.
“We’ve allowed ourselves to be defined as purely pragmatic – concerned with winning elections alone, rather than winning for a purpose – thereby ceding the mantle of principle to the far left.”
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/10/jeremy-corbyn-confident-labour-will-unite-around-him-if-he-wins
Rather than absorbing Kendall's [true] opinion, the MP's proceeded to prove her right. They have demonstrated yet again their lack of principles and their focus on winning elections at all costs.
Corbyn's critics outside the Party also concentrate on his perceived inability to win a general election. Well, no-one expected him to win the leadership election so who knows?
If there was a snap election next month, how would you rate Labour's chances of winning?
That's right. Reduce a very complicated set of circumstances to a simplistic question. After all, winning at all costs is what politics is all about, isn't it?If winning general elections wasn't what politics was all about there wouldn't be general elections. You and Corbyn and his followers are perfectly entitled to think they fulfil a useful function in society by politely challenging the opposition with questions in the House from Gail in Rotherham, but in my opinion the Opposition needs to be more effective than that. It needs to have coherent policies, know what it stands for and have the majority of MPs supportive of those policies, be effectively and robustly led by a leader who appeals to a wide cross-section of the electorate, who is able with his/her on-side colleagues to forcefully and intelligently challenge government decisions, with the ultimate goal of being in a position to put their own policies into practise ie: by being in Government.
Or is it? Maybe 172 MP's think so, but many Party members seem to disagree. Of course they have seen winning at all costs in action with Blair. He won but was he Labour? Some would say not, and that was the cost.
The GBP, on the whole don't understand politics. I'm sure a lot of people on tax credits voted Conservative only to find themselves attacked. What a shock that must have been. Those who understand politics know where Conservative loyalties lie in the end. Theresa May mentioned the 'Unionist' part of her party's name, but it's origins have sweet FA to do with uniting the nation.You seem to be suggesting that the GBP is as thick as two short planks and more forgetful than goldfish. &%+((£ Maybe it explains why the majority voted for Brexit....but I digress.... 8(0(*
People should be educated about the subject. They should know who created the NHS, who cleared all the slum houses away, who helped NATO to be formed, who granted independence to Empire countries. All Labour achievements when the country, reeling from WWII, moved sharply to the left.
For the short-term short-sighted politics is about winning elections whatever the cost. For others politics is about a fair society where everyone has a decent life. Unfortunately the GBP never remember the lessons of the past. Thatcher has been forgotten with her attacks on the poor, so the turkeys voted for Christmas again and got Osborne.
Now people have had a glimpse of something different at a time when, under attack from the Conservative Party, they had no strong Labour Party to defend them. The result was a surge of support for Corbyn. The reaction was attacks on him and his supporters by those who had failed to appeal to the electorate in the 2015 election. Their arrogance and lack of understanding is staggering.
You seem to be suggesting that the GBP is as thick as two short planks and more forgetful than goldfish. &%+((£ Maybe it explains why the majority voted for Brexit....but I digress.... 8(0(*
I notice you bemoaning the lack of a strong Labour Party in the face of Tory attack, well isn't that what I have been saying all along?! Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party is currently as weakened and ineffectual as it's possible for a political party to be, and yet you and half a million other Corbynistas seem to think he's some sort of saviour. It's astounding, but then there's nowt so queer as (some) folk.
People aren't thick, they vote based on experience and what the politicians and the media say. They have insufficient information, that's all.If you assert that Labour was weak under Miliband (ancient history now, bearing in mind a week is a long time in politics), what do you think of its position now under Corbyn? Stronger? if Corbyn really is the best and only man for the job of leader, then I'm afraid IMO Labour is truly doomed.
It was Milliband's Labour PLP which was weak in the face of the attacks. The ones who have caused all the recent trouble. The ones who are now saying they know how to do it this time. Really?
You are a very short sighted man alfie
Like a lot of the commentators Alfie thinks the sole purpose of a political party is to win elections no matter what it takes. The party working hardest in my area is the Green Party, who are principled people caring desperately for the environment and drawing attention to what we can all do. They won't win a general election but they do a lot of good. From being derided as tree huggers they've come a long way.So you don't think the country needs a strong and united opposition to government? Like I've said several times beffore, if you're content for the Labour Party to sink to the level of a pressure group like the Greens, relinquishing any opportunity to govern the country, then fine. It's your position, but one which many particularly within the PLP would disagree with.
The 172 rebel MP's are centrist modernisers. The Conservatives are occupying their ground at the moment so they haven't a hope of defeating them. Corbyn seems to have inspired a lot of people and Labour should give his ideas a proper chance. Being popular with the media is no accolade in my opinion because the media supports the status quo.
Why does a centre left Labour Party have no hope of beating a centre right Conservative Party? With a charismatic leader, who enjoys a united front bench and support from the back bench, with coherent and well-communicated policies that appeal to the electorate, surely that is a better bet than a Jeremy Corbyn who fronts a party in complete disarray, who treats the media with contempt, who surrounds himself with intimidating thugs and bullies, a man who votes against his party's OWN policies as we saw last night on Trident. How in God's name is that a preferable scenario?!
I do chuckle at the way he deals with the press on his doorstep whilst they're firing questions at him...
'goodmorning, how nice to see you, thankyou so much for coming, goodbye'
He doesn't play their game, & that's why I like him.
I've just seen the arch snake Hilary Benn on TV. He's supporting Angela Eagle but was completely unable to explain just what she has to offer. The latest poll puts JC well ahead of both of the challengers. What on earth happens if he wins again I don't know. Will MP's be deselected and new by-elections arranged? The Constituency Parties would have already deselected a few had they not been stopped. Whether the MP's like it or not the party members seem to prefer Corbyn.The end of the Labour Party as a serious force in politics, obviously.
The end of the Labour Party as a serious force in politics, obviously.
It would be interesting to see what the Conservatives would do in that situation. Would they give full reign to their instincts or play nicely?Similarly it would be interesting to know what you would advocate Tory MPs should do if they found themselves with a far right leader whose views did not chime with the majority of his/her fellow Tory MPs but who found him/herself leader thanks to a change to the voting system which skewed things very much in favour of someone with extreme conservative views. Just put up with it, I suppose!
Similarly it would be interesting to know what you would advocate Tory MPs should do if they found themselves with a far right leader whose views did not chime with the majority of his/her fellow Tory MPs but who found him/herself leader thanks to a change to the voting system which skewed things very much in favour of someone with extreme conservative views. Just put up with it, I suppose!
Not interested in the Tories, but;You don't need to be interested in the Tories to answer my question, but I understand if swerving it is easier.
It's all down to the first past the post system whereby career politicians shoehorn themselves into the two largest Parties because they want promotion. Blair ruthlessly hijacked the Labour Party and took it away from it's roots. He won elections but he wasn't Labour.
The people saw this and have joined in their thousands to vote for a Labour leader. If Smith or Eagle win those members will go again and the backstabbers will be left in the wilderness because who's going to vote for people who have rejected democracy?
The NEC is running scared because they know if they allow constituency meetings there will be deselections. They can't suspend the meetings forever though. The grassroots seem determined to have their say.
For those of you who like to rubbish the rebel Labour MPs as self-interested, selfish opportunists, perhaps you should read the following speech by the ex shadow-transport minister Lilian Greenwood. It tells you everything you need to know about Corbyn's competency to lead a team.
"How would you feel if your boss undermined your work and when you complained he listened and then did nothing different?
How would you feel if you were part of a team and you knew that not only was your boss undermining you but that this was happening to other colleagues?"
http://www.liliangreenwood.co.uk/lilian_s_speech_to_nottingham_south_labour_party_members
Easy to dismiss it as a whinge, as I'm sure you will, but do try and put yourself in this woman's shoes if you possible can, then tell us why she is wrong about Jeremy.
I do chuckle at the way he deals with the press on his doorstep whilst they're firing questions at him...
'goodmorning, how nice to see you, thankyou so much for coming, goodbye'
He doesn't play their game, & that's why I like him.
The way I see it is the rebel MPs have two months to try and persuade the members to see sense and if they fail (which they almost certainly will) then it's curtains for the Labour Party.
I also expect them to fail. If they were responding to discontent among the members that would be different, but they're not. You seem to think it makes sense to support a group of people who;If my boss was as useless as Jeremy Corbyn clearly is, then I would be looking for a new job. Unfortunately it's not that simple for Labour MPs. Their choices are
Lost a democratic leadership election.
Decided to start an internal war in their Party at a time when they should have been uniting to attack a vulnerable government.
When their attempts to force their leader to resign failed, launched an official challenge.
Expect those who didn't vote for them a year ago to change their minds. Why? Because [they say] Corbyn isn't a good leader.
I expect the membership would like to test Corbyn's leadership skills with a supportive team rather than a group who were set against him from the beginning.
Perhaps Labour will rise from this stronger; appealing to it's true support base instead of trying to beat the Conservatives on their own ground. It would be nice for voters to have a clear choice instead of two similar parties.
If my boss was as useless as Jeremy Corbyn clearly is, then I would be looking for a new job. Unfortunately it's not that simple for Labour MPs. Their choices are
1) leaving politics altogether
2) joining a different political party one that does necessarily share their views
3) setting up a new political party of their own
4) speaking up about their issues with their boss, calling for a vote of no confidence in him and thereby forcing a leadership election.
5) Saying and doing nothing, whilst enduring poor his leadership and his insistence of repeatedly voting against labour policy, and hoping for the best.
Which would you do?
Democracy is all very well, I suppose you support the Turkish President too, seeing as how he was democratically elected and all, and despite the fact that he has all the makings of a radical Islamic despot. Hitler too was democratically elected I believe. (Yes Godwin's Law *clang*)
The only ones saying Corbyn is useless are the middle-class career politicians who couldn't beat him
in a leadership election. Oh...and a biased media who don't reflect what people are thinking, they try to tell them what they should think, just like those patronising MP's.
Those who the Party was set up to represent; the working class, have flocked to join the Party. So have educated middle-class people of conscience. In 48 hours 183,000 people have paid £25 to vote. Did they do that to support a little-known challenger? I think not. Unions who turned their backs on New Labour have re-affiliated because of Corbyn.
We are seeing an unprecedented popular movement by people who see a chance to have their views represented for the first time in decades. Succeed or fail, it behoves all politicians to take note.
I noticed when the great leader raised genuine issues like food banks & zero hours contracts during PM Q's, Maggie May didn't give any answers, all she could do was 'joke' about his job security.
Corbyn is adressing real issues, whilst the career politicians on both sides are more interested in playing the same old shitty games for & with the media.
F*ck the lot of them, I hope he wins.
The only ones saying Corbyn is useless are the middle-class career politicians who couldn't beat himThere are 172 rebel Labour MPs - I don't recall them all putting themselves forward to lead the party. Also, it is completely untrue to say the ONLY people saying he's useless are the MPs themselves and the media. Every single one of my labour voting friends think he's useless too, we can't be the only people in the country tho think so! But what you or I say is not important. What is important is the result at the next GE and then we will see who is proven right (clue: it will be me 8(0(* )
in a leadership election. Oh...and a biased media who don't reflect what people are thinking, they try to tell them what they should think, just like those patronising MP's.
Those who the Party was set up to represent; the working class, have flocked to join the Party. So have educated middle-class people of conscience. In 48 hours 183,000 people have paid £25 to vote. Did they do that to support a little-known challenger? I think not. Unions who turned their backs on New Labour have re-affiliated because of Corbyn.
We are seeing an unprecedented popular movement by people who see a chance to have their views represented for the first time in decades. Succeed or fail, it behoves all politicians to take note.
There are 172 rebel Labour MPs - I don't recall them all putting themselves forward to lead the party. Also, it is completely untrue to say the ONLY people saying he's useless are the MPs themselves and the media. Every single one of my labour voting friends think he's useless too, we can't be the only people in the country tho think so! But what you or I say is not important. What is important is the result at the next GE and then we will see who is proven right (clue: it will be me 8(0(* )
There are 172 rebel Labour MPs - I don't recall them all putting themselves forward to lead the party. Also, it is completely untrue to say the ONLY people saying he's useless are the MPs themselves and the media. Every single one of my labour voting friends think he's useless too, we can't be the only people in the country tho think so! But what you or I say is not important. What is important is the result at the next GE and then we will see who is proven right (clue: it will be me 8(0(* )
Well, if you and your friends think so it must be right. @)(++(*1) I mentioned my friends' views simply to point out that it is nonsense to suggest that ordinary Labour voters don't have a problem with Jeremy. Many do, of course you don't have to believe me, and I don't expect you to, you doubt pretty much everything I write anyway.
I take it you think Smith will lose the leadership election then?
As to a general election, watch out for UKIP is my prediction, especially if Brexit is fudged.
1) I mentioned my friends' views simply to point out that it is nonsense to suggest that ordinary Labour voters don't have a problem with Jeremy. Many do, of course you don't have to believe me, and I don't expect you to, you doubt pretty much everything I write anyway.
2)I have already stated clearly on this thread that I expect Chairman Corbyn to win. He can then form a shadow cabinet out of the dregs of his MPs and we will be blessed with the weakest opposition ever known. Of course I'm sure as far as you're concerned that's no problem at all, as long as Jeremy's still able to earnestly ask his worthy questions from the front bench on behalf of Sally from Stoke, and Kevin from Canterbury.
3) Yes, UKIP, exactly - they will move onto Labour territory thanks very much to Jeremy Corbyn wrecking the Labour Party. Perhaps at the end of the day, this is why you are so apparently very fond of him?
I suppose it depends whether your 'ordinary' Labour voters prefer the traditional party or the Blairite rehashed party.1) Most of the friends I am referring to were children under Wilson, Callaghan and young adults when Blair started his first term as PM. I think only a fool would want a return to a Wilson or Callaghan style government but perhaps you meant more "traditional" than that?
Why 'Chairman'? Are you suggesting Corbyn is a communist? Cites?
If the present MP's don't unite behind their leader I expect deselections to follow once the Constituencies are allowed to meet again.
Corbyn hasn't wrecked the party, the rebels who wanted to overturn a democratic election are doing that.
I think the Tories, who are in charge of Brexit, have more to fear from UKIP than Labour. It was Tory voters who carried the Brexit vote.
Liverpool Lime Street had to be closed as thousands turned out to hear Corbyn.
(http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/incoming/article11692172.ece/ALTERNATES/s510b/JS96096800.jpg)
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/jeremy-corbyn-rally-liverpool-tonight-11691781
Where's Wally? Oh I've just spotted him 8((()*/
Anyone watch Jeremy give a completely evasive answer on immigration controls post-Brexit on Newsnight? If anyone did and can explain what he was actually advocating please let us know.
LOL
Well, the Labour party proper has been screwed by Blair for years now, just a thatcher puppet more or less, (there is no such thng as centre) but corbyn is getting the rap for being a proper labour person, couldnt make it up
Its ok for people to say they dnt like the party or its policies, its not ok to lambast the first real labour leader for years, its not rocket science
LOL
Well, the Labour party proper has been screwed by Blair for years now, just a thatcher puppet more or less, (there is no such thng as centre) but corbyn is getting the rap for being a proper labour person, couldnt make it up
Its ok for people to say they dnt like the party or its policies, its not ok to lambast the first real labour leader for years, its not rocket science
Liverpool Lime Street had to be closed as thousands turned out to hear Corbyn.
(http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/incoming/article11692172.ece/ALTERNATES/s510b/JS96096800.jpg)
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/jeremy-corbyn-rally-liverpool-tonight-11691781
In any event I can't take men seriously who wear cream jackets and facial hair. At least Martin Bell only has the cream jacket. 8(8-))
8((()*/
A million plus turned up to hear/see Pope John Paul II in Liverpool in 1982. Thousands turn up at Anfield every week for home games during the football season. I wouldn't mind betting a Beatles reunion would attract more than the Pope and JC put together with the late Cilla Black not far behind, justifiably so imo. Who wants to listen to elderly out of touch men with a penchant for white/cream coloured clothing? This in itself indicates they are impractical and others are probably responsible for their washing? 8((()*/
If JC is still leader at the time of next GE it will be interesting to see if the numbers he attracts at his rallies translate to sufficient 'X's at the ballot box. During recent times Lab has been at its most successful ie electable/winning elections when it has elected centrist modernisers like the late John Smith and Tony Blair. JS and TB completed their degrees with one enduring marriage each. JC dropped out of college and is on his third marriage. JC strikes me as an overgrown student and idealist who doesn't live in the real world. I would no more vote for him that I would John Redwood. I don't do extremes. I'm a JS, TB, Ken Clarke, Theresa May sort of person. Yes JC's authentic and a 'conviction' politician but are the masses going to sign up to his brand of socialism? I suspect not.
In any event I can't take men seriously who wear cream jackets and facial hair. At least Martin Bell only has the cream jacket. 8(8-))
8((()*/
A million plus turned up to hear/see Pope John Paul II in Liverpool in 1982. Thousands turn up at Anfield every week for home games during the football season. I wouldn't mind betting a Beatles reunion would attract more than the Pope and JC put together with the late Cilla Black not far behind, justifiably so imo. Who wants to listen to elderly out of touch men with a penchant for white/cream coloured clothing? This in itself indicates they are impractical and others are probably responsible for their washing? 8((()*/
Owen Smith got 300 people when he went to Liverpool, so it looks like Corbyn [who is a politician btw, not a religious leader, pop star or footballer] is well ahead. Ten thousand turning out in the rain wanted to hear what he had to say. I don't think they were there because of his dress sense, my guess is they're sick of the slick, well-tailored, soundbite spouting, completely out of touch career politicians.15-20,000 turned out to see Michael Foot when he attended a rally in Hyde Park when party leader. And your point is...?
From around 1:40 for reference... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36863378 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36863378)To me he gave a completely typical politician's fudged answer. What did you understand by it? Where does he stand on the single market and/or free movement of people?
Beatles reunion!!!?... now that would be more miraculous than the Pope singing a duet with Mother Theresa (and Naughty Nun on Bass).
Not only Labour leader but rather dapper and at the cutting edge of fashion...
http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/590x/secondary/corbyn-347830.jpg (http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/590x/secondary/corbyn-347830.jpg)
Has he really? You're "Doing a Bamber"...
http://legacymedia.localworld.co.uk/275775/Article/images/17300652/4301906.jpg (http://legacymedia.localworld.co.uk/275775/Article/images/17300652/4301906.jpg)
http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000DotbZABrSU0/s/600/600/FROSTPL70705-023.jpg (http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000DotbZABrSU0/s/600/600/FROSTPL70705-023.jpg)
Even if he doesntget elected as PM his little or big dagger will be there in opposition..no ones done it better than him
Im a bit cnfused though why you see a lasting "marriage" as a sign of anything apart from a couple deciding to stay married, as if me than ne makes one morally inferior, id argue the opposite, oh well
Owen Smith got 300 people when he went to Liverpool, so it looks like Corbyn [who is a politician btw, not a religious leader, pop star or footballer] is well ahead. Ten thousand turning out in the rain wanted to hear what he had to say. I don't think they were there because of his dress sense, my guess is they're sick of the slick, well-tailored, soundbite spouting, completely out of touch career politicians.
Yes I agree it's always good to have a strong opposition but I'm not sure JC can offer it. Time will tell. Early days. New PM and JC is still relatively new.
I'm not suggesting those that have 3 or more marriages are morally inferior. Just think dropping out of college AND 3 marriages might mean he's a bit fickle that's all. It's just an observation.
Yes I agree it's always good to have a strong opposition but I'm not sure JC can offer it. Time will tell. Early days. New PM and JC is still relatively new.
I'm not suggesting those that have 3 or more marriages are morally inferior. Just think dropping out of college AND 3 marriages might mean he's a bit fickle that's all. It's just an observation.
How on earth can anyone take Corby seriously now when there are as many scowling behind him in Parliament as are in front of him. The man's an idiot if he thinks he will survive much longer imo. Jeez how many MP's support him anyway these days?
In all seriousness G-Unit what else is there to do in Liverpool on a wet Monday eve?
Well, staying in and watching TV would seem to be a better idea on the face of it than going out in the rain to listen to a badly dressed pensioner rabbiting on. I don't think it was just people looking for a way of filling time, but if that's what you choose to believe, fair enough.
Liverpool isn't quite the boring place you seem to think it is, by the way;
http://www.visitliverpool.com/whats-on
"Jeremy Corbyn put the creation of a million new jobs at the heart of his pitch for re-election as Labour leader as he unveiled a ten-point plan to “transform and rebuild Britain” today.
Vowing that “no-one, and no one part of the country, should be left behind”, he set out a £500bn investment programme covering infrastructure, industry and the construction of a million new homes, half of them council-owned."
£500 BILLION??!
*&*%£
We can all play fantasy lets "transform and rebuild Britain" today with £500 billion. Where exactly is the £500 billion coming from?It's not a question he ever need seriously answer as the likelihood of him ever having to put his money where his mouth is is precisely zero.
It could also mean he is true to hmself when things dont work out
Yup, time will tell
I'm sorry, duck, but Corbyn does NOT do it for me. He's scruffy, shabby, grudging, universally disliked within his own party, he's got dodgy teeth, bad hair, he's been married THREE TIMES, he's also made the beast with Diane Abbot (Diane ABBOT!!) and he couldn't give a shit about people who've worked hard and made a few bob. He's a total shambles, and he'd make us a laughing stock.
%56&
I'm sorry, duck, but Corbyn does NOT do it for me. He's scruffy, shabby, grudging, universally disliked within his own party, he's got dodgy teeth, bad hair, he's been married THREE TIMES, he's also made the beast with Diane Abbot (Diane ABBOT!!) and he couldn't give a shit about people who've worked hard and made a few bob. He's a total shambles, and he'd make us a laughing stock.But worst of all he doesn't have the skills necessary of a successful leader, as evidenced by the huge vote of no confidence in those he is supposed to be leading.
%56&
I actually like to sit in my garden at the end of the day, watching the bats, drinking Pimms and giving the cucumber and strawberries to my horses. I've bloody earnt it, and deserve it. But if it was up to Corbyn, we'd all be Winston Smith. %56&
As long as you're OK the rest of the people of Britain who don't have what you have can starve? Including those who can't improve their position; the sick, the old, the disabled? Nice.Yes, that's exactly what Puglove said - jeez, talk about putting words in people's mouths!
Corbyn has pledged to build 1 million new homes (half of them council houses) in 5 years. That's 547 new houses built every single day for 5 years. Do we have that many builders or will we have to import the whole of Poland to get them built?
I actually like to sit in my garden at the end of the day, watching the bats, drinking Pimms and giving the cucumber and strawberries to my horses. I've bloody earnt it, and deserve it. But if it was up to Corbyn, we'd all be Winston Smith. %56&
Whatever people think about Corbyn the Labour Party is changing under his leadership. The NEC elections gave the Left Wingers a majority, thanks to the constituency party votes.Yes, the Labour Party is changing - from an electable party to an unelectable one, well done Jeremy and all his fed-up supporters.
Here is an analysis of his supporters - who they really are and why they want change;
Corbyn supporters are not delusional Leninists but ordinary, fed-up voters
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/09/jeremy-corbyn-supporters-voters-labour-leader-politics
Yes, the Labour Party is changing - from an electable party to an unelectable one, well done Jeremy and all his fed-up supporters.
Yes, the Labour Party is changing - from an electable party to an unelectable one, well done Jeremy and all his fed-up supporters.
What use is an electable party which doesn't deliver the policies it's members need? Who says it's unelectable? It's MP's [who haven't even attempted to represent the party members], various 'experts [they got Brexit wrong], the media [what do they know] and Alfie. Let's just wait and see where this goes, it's certainly putting the wind up the establishment. The desperate attempts to discredit Corbyn suggest he is a real threat.Yes, Corbyn is a threat - to his own party and to those who don't relish another generation of Tory rule. Do you REALLY believe I am the only ordinary voter who thinks Corbyn is a complete disaster for his party, and for the concept of democracy in this country generally? Get real.
Yes, Corbyn is a threat - to his own party and to those who don't relish another generation of Tory rule. Do you REALLY believe I am the only ordinary voter who thinks Corbyn is a complete disaster for his party, and for the concept of democracy in this country generally? Get real.
Yes, Corbyn is a threat - to his own party and to those who don't relish another generation of Tory rule. Do you REALLY believe I am the only ordinary voter who thinks Corbyn is a complete disaster for his party, and for the concept of democracy in this country generally? Get real.
There are all sorts of fringe, extremist parties for the GBP to vote for in elections, the Labour Party will soon be able to count itself as one. But which party will step up to the plate as a credible alternative to the Tories? If UKIP were able to organise a piss up in a brewery this would be their big opportunity, especially when the Tories fail to deliver the Brexit all the Leavers were dreaming of...
I don't know what your 'concept of democracy' is, please explain.
Corbyn. like Brexit, is the product of a truly democratic election.
I don't know what your 'concept of democracy' is, please explain.I don't recall having to pay any money in order to vote in the referendum, but that's by the by. My concept of democracy is one in which there is one (if not more) alternative(s) to the present government, that stands a realistic chance of being elected. The way things are shaping up within the Labour Party with a split almost inevitable it seems to me that we are looking at a one party Tory state for the next god knows how many years. You and Corbyn and his supporters don't seem to think that winning an election is important - I find that quite flabbergasting tbh.
Corbyn. like Brexit, is the product of a truly democratic election.
Jeremy Corbyn has far too many skeletons in his cupboard to ever be taken seriously as a contender for PM of this country. I fear he has missed his calling by about 25 years.
Jeremy Corbyn spent much of the 1980s speaking at Troops Out rallies. Given the choice between standing with Irish nationalists in the SDLP or Irish republicans in Sinn Fein and the IRA, Jeremy Corbyn chose the latter path. Perhaps someone will now ask him why. Perhaps they’ll ask him why he’s been happy to ‘honour’ IRA members shot by the British Army but disinclined to shed too many tears for those murdered by the IRA.
www.blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/09/the-labour-party-is-now-led-by-people-who-wanted-the-ira-to-win/
I don't recall having to pay any money in order to vote in the referendum, but that's by the by. My concept of democracy is one in which there is one (if not more) alternative(s) to the present government, that stands a realistic chance of being elected. The way things are shaping up within the Labour Party with a split almost inevitable it seems to me that we are looking at a one party Tory state for the next god knows how many years. You and Corbyn and his supporters don't seem to think that winning an election is important - I find that quite flabbergasting tbh.
The Labour Party can make itself electable by ditching Grandpa in a shell suit for starters. The country wants a government that will lead them out of the EU and make this country even more prosperous and successful than it is already - is the man for that job Jeremy Corbyn? Seriously??
The referendum was a national ballot open to all those eligible. The leader of the Labour Party was chosen by a ballot of members. Whenever you join something you pay, be it a Golf Club, a Trade Union, a Social Club or any UK political Party.Is it any wonder? Labour MPs stood for election for the party they felt best represented their views, and now find they have a leader who has consistently voted against his own party for the last 30 years or more! How can you blame them for the state the party is in at the moment?! And yet, it's not simply a case of an ideological shift to the left which these MPs have had to deal with - many accepted this and were happy to give Jeremy a chance as leader but he has turned out to be completely inept in this role. That is why so many have voted "no confidence" in him. His adoring fans don't see this ineptitude as in any way a drawback to their party leadership - unbelievable, truly.
That's not a 'concept of democracy' you're discussing. Such a discussion would involve defining what you think democracy is. Your starting point seems to be the representative democracy we have in the UK with a party system and first past the post result. Then you're back to your opinion of 'what happens next'.
At this moment, due to the behaviour of Labour MP's, the party is having to go through a period of massive change. Instead of doing what they were elected to do [form a government or opposition] they are having to decide what kind of party they want to be in the future. They will either return to a centrist stance or they will return to the democratic socialists they were founded as. Once that's settled the winners can address the question of general elections. Until we know which faction will end up in charge it's too early to forecast their electability imo.
Jeremy Corbyn reminds me of what I'd expect a committee member of a social club to look like, I can't work him out, I've never heard any of his policies and they'd have been better off leaving Ed Milliband insitu.I'm still waiting to hear a coherent explanation of the current Labour Party's position on Brexit - Jeremy has recently pontificated on the subject but I am still none the wiser.
Jeremy Corbyn reminds me of what I'd expect a committee member of a social club to look like, I can't work him out, I've never heard any of his policies and they'd have been better off leaving Ed Milliband insitu.
Perhaps people have decided to stop voting for snake oil salesmen? Here are his pledges, hover over them for more details;Do you find them realistic and achievable?
http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/10_pledges
Do you find them realistic and achievable?
After the war Britain was virtually bankrupt. The Labour government nevertheless achieved a much more radical set of proposals than those which Corbyn is pledging. They built 3 million homes and set the Welfare State up from scratch. In addition they nationalised 20% of British industry.With $120 billion thanks to Marshall Aid. Are we still eligible?
With $120 billion thanks to Marshall Aid. Are we still eligible?
With $120 billion thanks to Marshall Aid. Are we still eligible?
It will be a long long time before a majority Labour government ever does anything again. Corbyn may very well be a legend at his own rallies - but with the Tories at 39% and Labour at 26% I think the electorate may be trying to tell him something.(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nkWYlQxuMU8/UARKZo5P93I/AAAAAAAAAPk/iKr5E2vggFg/s320/Nero%2Bfiddling%2Bwhile%2BRome%2Bburns.gif)
"A week is a long time in politics". James Harold Wilson mid 1960s.
"Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government" said David Steele in 1982 encouraged by the opinion polls.
It's at the next general election the truth will be revealed. Up til then about 30% of the population will decide according to the colour of the rosette the monkey is wearing, 60% will haver [both English and Scottish definitions of haver will work!] until one side or another offers them a sucker bet. Ten per cent will be able to see the wood from the trees but they don't count because there aren't enough of them. It was ever thus and ever more shall be so.
Really no need to bring Wolfie back from retirement. We've got Derek Hatton and Militant along with the spectacle of the Labour Party imploding. In the meantime ... the Tories ... anybody remember them or holding their governance to scrutiny? have the the ball at their feet and are running with it.
No sit-com script writer is going to be able to come up with anything to match or surpass the very public suicide of the party established to represent the people and the workers - not the vainglorious ego of any individual.(http://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/7f/cf/f3/7fcff3403a82b0b4b947c91d73094f3a.jpg)Classic 1970s BBC comedy Citizen Smith set to return
Citizen Smith is back: Classic 1970s BBC comedy starring Robert Lindsay set to return - News - TV & Radio - The Independent
Really no need to bring Wolfie back from retirement. We've got Derek Hatton and Militant along with the spectacle of the Labour Party imploding. In the meantime ... the Tories ... anybody remember them or holding their governance to scrutiny? have the the ball at their feet and are running with it.
No sit-com script writer is going to be able to come up with anything to match or surpass the very public suicide of the party established to represent the people and the workers - not the vainglorious ego of any individual.(http://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/7f/cf/f3/7fcff3403a82b0b4b947c91d73094f3a.jpg)Classic 1970s BBC comedy Citizen Smith set to return
Citizen Smith is back: Classic 1970s BBC comedy starring Robert Lindsay set to return - News - TV & Radio - The Independent
I fail to understand the relevance of a Robert Lindsay sitcom to what I posted.
If you wish to have a political discussion I am your man ; if you wish to deflect and be daft then deal me out.
Have a nice day.
I tend to equate Citizen Smith with the various anti-Roman factions in Life of Brian such as The People's Front of Judea. In fact those factions in the film were a satire on the small ineffectual Trotskyist factions in 1970's UK. It has nothing to say about what is happening in the Labour Party now, despite some efforts to equate the two. A rather desperate ploy, I think.
I fail to understand the relevance of a Robert Lindsay sitcom to what I posted.
If you wish to have a political discussion I am your man ; if you wish to deflect and be daft then deal me out.
Have a nice day.
A very pertinent question in there ... "what is happening to the Labour Party now?" Soon perhaps to be transferred into ... "what will happen to the Labour Party under an entryist ideology?"
It may well be worth considering that.
A very pertinent question in there ... "what is happening to the Labour Party now?" Soon perhaps to be transferred into ... "what will happen to the Labour Party under an entryist ideology?"
It may well be worth considering that.
The Labour Party should not have got itself in this mess and taking months to try and sort it out will not remedy the original ailment. All very poor show in my opinion.
A disaster for democracy, John.
Whatever the complexion of the government there has to be the balance of effective opposition. At least Cameron had the dignity to fall on his sword thus preventing anything like this debacle happening in the governing party. There was no immediate clamour for his resignation among his peers.
The amount quoted was shared between all the countries of Western Europe, it didn't all come to Britain. Much of it was loaned, the last repayment being made in 2006, and;OK, so how is Jeremy going to raise £500 million, sorry BILLION pounds to implement his policies then? Some of his policy promises put me in mind of Francois Hollande's and look how well he's doing!
The loan was made primarily to support British overseas expenditure in the immediate post-war years and not to implement the Labour government's welfare reforms. British treasury officials believed they could implement the Labour government's domestic reforms without the loan if Britain withdrew from all major overseas commitments.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-American_loan
A disaster for democracy, John.
Whatever the complexion of the government there has to be the balance of effective opposition. At least Cameron had the dignity to fall on his sword thus preventing anything like this debacle happening in the governing party. There was no immediate clamour for his resignation among his peers.
There is no doubting that Jeremy has support from certan factions but I don't think that support translates across all Labour heartlands. In my view he is simply hanging on out of his own vested interests and not for the greater good of the Labour Party. Or to put it another way, the Party will remain divided for as long as he remains its leader.
I don't see how it benefits Corbyn to 'hang on' as you put it. He has been subjected to hatred and ridicule, back-stabbing and disloyalty. At the moment he and Smith are touring the country setting out their visions for the future of the party. Thousands are turning out and it's not to hear Smith. If Corbyn goes so will all those who have been given hope after the despair caused by New Labour and the Conservatives. The establishment knows what it wants; centrist parties with similar policies. The people supporting Corbyn want something different.
There is a school of thought that the art of debate is to pick up whatever is pitched and to run with it. The antithesis being the petty put down.
I'm obliged to you for dealing me out of the latter scenario. 8)--))
....and how many people are there who want something different ?
i.e. a return to the good old days of the 70's ? 8)--))
The Labour Party should not have got itself in this mess and taking months to try and sort it out will not remedy the original ailment. All very poor show in my opinion.
I don't see how it benefits Corbyn to 'hang on' as you put it. He has been subjected to hatred and ridicule, back-stabbing and disloyalty. At the moment he and Smith are touring the country setting out their visions for the future of the party. Thousands are turning out and it's not to hear Smith. If Corbyn goes so will all those who have been given hope after the despair caused by New Labour and the Conservatives. The establishment knows what it wants; centrist parties with similar policies. The people supporting Corbyn want something different.
It will be a long long time before a majority Labour government ever does anything again. Corbyn may very well be a legend at his own rallies - but with the Tories at 39% and Labour at 26% I think the electorate may be trying to tell him something.Polls have been proven to be worthless, well, most of the time(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nkWYlQxuMU8/UARKZo5P93I/AAAAAAAAAPk/iKr5E2vggFg/s320/Nero%2Bfiddling%2Bwhile%2BRome%2Bburns.gif)
A very pertinent question in there ... "what is happening to the Labour Party now?" Soon perhaps to be transferred into ... "what will happen to the Labour Party under an entryist ideology?"It may well be worth considering what a disgusting shambles cameron and his predecessors made and who can reverse it all
It may well be worth considering that.
....and how many people are there who want something different ?
i.e. a return to the good old days of the 70's ? 8)--))
Stephen, times move on, the labour party will have learnt from any mistakes, sadly the tories never do thats why were in this mess now
In 2010 Cameron portrayed himself as a one nation Tory but ever since the poor have been consistently attacked. May has also claimed to be a one nation Tory. Time will tell.
Corbyn is a democratic socialist and his stated aim is to improve the lot of the poor and the working class. If the Tories continue to attack them Corbyn will become a realistic alternative. The only ones with reason to fear him are the rich.
The working class, by the way, I define as anyone who relies on wages to live.
In 2010 Cameron portrayed himself as a one nation Tory but ever since the poor have been consistently attacked. May has also claimed to be a one nation Tory. Time will tell.
Corbyn is a democratic socialist and his stated aim is to improve the lot of the poor and the working class. If the Tories continue to attack them Corbyn will become a realistic alternative. The only ones with reason to fear him are the rich.
The working class, by the way, I define as anyone who relies on wages to live.
Sadly G this is his personal stated aim, and a very admiral quality it is,However, he requires others to implement this new 3rd way thinking, as long as we have corruption, greed, party politics, self centred lobbyists, fat cat unions- it will stay a personal admiral quality. It will also be interesting who is defined as 'poor' and how much the working class have to pay tax for these 'poor' The working classes are paying for those better off then thmselves in some cases!
" The only ones with reason to fear him are the rich". who will move themselves and their money abroad-leaving the working classes to pick up the tabs! There is nothing fair about socialism they belive in'positive' discrimination and implement it and support it. ask any token 'black, disabled, asian,women, who have been given a job just because they are the token black, disabled, asian, woman not because they are the best person for the job. It does not redress th balance of negative decrimination at all it is...discrimination in another frock.
In 2010 Cameron portrayed himself as a one nation Tory but ever since the poor have been consistently attacked. May has also claimed to be a one nation Tory. Time will tell.What do you call those who don't receive wages and who rely on state support to live? According to your definition I am working class but don't see how Jeremy is going to improve my lot as he will no doubt be anxious to put my taxes up!
Corbyn is a democratic socialist and his stated aim is to improve the lot of the poor and the working class. If the Tories continue to attack them Corbyn will become a realistic alternative. The only ones with reason to fear him are the rich.
The working class, by the way, I define as anyone who relies on wages to live.
What do you call those who don't receive wages and who rely on state support to live? According to your definition I am working class but don't see how Jeremy is going to improve my lot as he will no doubt be anxious to put my taxes up!
Anyone on benefits is working class, otherwise they wouldn't need benefits. He is planning a 1% rise in Corporation Tax if you pay that, and a return to the 50p higher tax rate if you are on PAYE.Absolute tosh that anyone on benefits is working class - your definitions need some work methinks. YesJeremy's higher taxes will certainly effect me, and a significant percentage of the population. If they did a referendum on whether or not to raise taxes I doubt there would be a majority "yes" vote.
Benefit payments will be reduced by a return to full employment. I remember that - you could quit a job in the morning and start a new one in the afternoon. Unskilled workers didn't need a CV or have to jump through hoops convincing employers that they were team players with their only aim in life being to serve people in a fast food outlet. More council houses will stop private landlords lining their pockets with housing benefit; they charge double what councils charge and don't provide safe housing. 40% of flats being let out by these landlords are ex-council.
Someone needs to address the growth of sub standard multiple occupancy housing where strangers[often immigrants] are living two to a room or sleeping in cellars. There are terrible problems being faced by the 999 service, the police and ambulance services. They are having to deal with lack of interpreters and being the first call for mental health problems, time wasters, illegal immigrants and alcoholics. I've seen some terribly sad programmes highlighting these problems;
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/999-whats-your-emergency
Anyone on benefits is working class, otherwise they wouldn't need benefits. He is planning a 1% rise in Corporation Tax if you pay that, and a return to the 50p higher tax rate if you are on PAYE.Brexit will solve this - send 'em all home! 8(0(*
Benefit payments will be reduced by a return to full employment. I remember that - you could quit a job in the morning and start a new one in the afternoon. Unskilled workers didn't need a CV or have to jump through hoops convincing employers that they were team players with their only aim in life being to serve people in a fast food outlet. More council houses will stop private landlords lining their pockets with housing benefit; they charge double what councils charge and don't provide safe housing. 40% of flats being let out by these landlords are ex-council.
Someone needs to address the growth of sub standard multiple occupancy housing where strangers[often immigrants] are living two to a room or sleeping in cellars. There are terrible problems being faced by the 999 service, the police and ambulance services. They are having to deal with lack of interpreters and being the first call for mental health problems, time wasters, illegal immigrants and alcoholics. I've seen some terribly sad programmes highlighting these problems;
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/999-whats-your-emergency
What do you call those who don't receive wages and who rely on state support to live? According to your definition I am working class but don't see how Jeremy is going to improve my lot as he will no doubt be anxious to put my taxes up!
What a topsy turvy world we inhabit on this forum, one in which it is the Tories who are in a mess, and not the Labour Party!! One in which we can casually ignore polls and believe that the country is simple gagging to vote Jeremy in as PM. *&*%£the tories have a disgraceful history off of their last two terms in power, sadly people have short memories or dont care
The Conservative and Unionist Party have to extricate themselves from the mire they created by having two long running factions, one of which is in favour of remaining in the EU the other is not. Does anyone seriously believe these factions have suddenly disappeared and everyone is of single accord ? Watch this space when the recess is over.Indeed shes no pushover, shes a steady grip
Mr Cameron offered a referendum more to stuff a bun in the mouth of one faction and to divest himself of another monkey that was on his back than for any other reason. It didn't pan out except for divesting himself of one monkey.
Next General Election due 2020 it is pointless talking about Mr Corbyn's merit as a PM until we know he is a contender *. Or more importantly what the world looks like in 2020.
Unless this is a proxy war of course.
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wz6YMrJt7xk
p.s as for opposition, like her or loathe her Ms Sturgeon will rally her troops well enough to provide an effective opposition. She will make plenty of bullets for Mr Robertson to fire I am sure... ?{)(**
the tories have a disgraceful history off of their last two terms in power, sadly people have short memories or dont careHow so? The only way I and others will be the fool at the end of it is if Jeremy becomes PM. That simply is not going to happen, no matter how hard you wish for it to be so.
Corbyn is playing them all and good on him
Hes too long in the tooth to be told anything at all by fkwits from whatever party
They are all being truly taught a lesson or two
He is a man of principle, is proving it, and you and countless others will be the fool at the end of it
I remain with bated breath waiting to hear Alfie's alternative proposals to taxation for revenue generation.1) I have never suggested that we should not be taxed at all.
1) I have never suggested that we should not be taxed at all.
2) This thread is not about what I would do, but about what Jeremy Corbyn plans to do when he is PM (chortle).
3) This is the last time I respond to your goading comments.
Goodbye. &8#£%
I wonder if his plans would affect you, or were you crying wolf for no reason.Yes they would affect me of course, they would affect most people in this country one way or another.
Yes they would affect me of course, they would affect most people in this country one way or another.
Any idea yet what he plans to do with regard Brexit?
1) I have never suggested that we should not be taxed at all.
2) This thread is not about what I would do, but about what Jeremy Corbyn plans to do when he is PM (chortle).
3) This is the last time I respond to your goading comments.
Goodbye. &8#£%
Under The Tories more and more people have been taken out of paying any tax at all, nearly 50% in fact, whilst over a quarter of all taxes raised are paid by just 300,000 people. It would be interesting to see how Jeremy's tax policies would change these figures.
Under The Tories more and more people have been taken out of paying any tax at all, nearly 50% in fact, whilst over a quarter of all taxes raised are paid by just 300,000 people. It would be interesting to see how Jeremy's tax policies would change these figures.
The personal allowance is £ 11,000, so you pay nothing if you earn less than that. Who are these lucky people? Those on minimum wage? It depends on your age and how many hours you work.or c) move to countries with lower taxes?
Age 18 - 20 £5,39 per hour. Multiplied by 37.5 hours per week is £ 10, 335 per annum. So they pay no tax.
Age 21-24 £ 6.70 per hour. Calculate as above £ 12,090 per annum. They pay tax.
Age 25 plus £ 7.20 per hour. Calculate as above £ 14,040 per annum. They pay tax.
It would seem that those paying no tax are either young workers or part-time workers.
So a full time adult worker on minimum wage pays tax. If they have a family they also get top-ups; working tax credits etc. Raising the minimum wage would mean less top-ups would be needed. That would add to the governments coffers. Would companies then be less competitive because of the higher wages bill? Perhaps those at the top might a] take a pay cut or b] earn their higher salaries by finding ways to cut costs elsewhere.
How so? The only way I and others will be the fool at the end of it is if Jeremy becomes PM. That simply is not going to happen, no matter how hard you wish for it to be so.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/26/nearly-half-of-britons-pay-no-income-tax-as-burden-on-rich-incre/
The devil is in the detail. aka RTFSPS
it stands to reason, if you increase the income tax threshold, fewer people will be paying income tax, does it not? Under a Tory government the threshold has risen from £6475 to £10600, did no low paid person benefit as a result?
The figures you quoted seem to refer only to the 2016 budget, so previous years would have to be researched. I'm sure the figures exist, why not research it?I quoted two figures - one the tax threshold when the Tories came to power and the other the revised threshold at the last budget, a figure which will be going up to over £11k next year. If you had a part-time job on the minimum wage (and many people do) youwould likely have been taken out of income tax, in any case raising the threshold means low paid full time workers only pay tax on a small minority of their earnings. If you would like to make the case that Osborne's tax changes have not benefited the low paid at all then let's hear why not.
I have shown that a person aged 21 years of age or over working 37.5 hours per week for the 'living wage' will exceed £11,000, so it seems that no-one with a 'full-time' job was taken out of income tax.
That leaves young workers 20 years of age or below and part-time workers. Can you think of any others?
And as this thread is about Jeremy's policies, what are his plans re: tax and low paid workers, and how is he going to guarantee jobs for all?
I quoted two figures - one the tax threshold when the Tories came to power and the other the revised threshold at the last budget, a figure which will be going up to over £11k next year. If you had a part-time job on the minimum wage (and many people do) youwould likely have been taken out of income tax, in any case raising the threshold means low paid full time workers only pay tax on a small minority of their earnings. If you would like to make the case that Osborne's tax changes have not benefited the low paid at all then let's hear why not.
Do you ever get the feeling that someone is just desperate for my attention no matter what I write, or what position I take on any given subject...? &%+((£
The figures you quoted need researching as to the amount of the minumum wage and the tax threshold for the years 2010-2015, as I pointed out.They have and I already did, you have chosen not to accept them, your choice. I'm currently waiting to fly out of the country and as I've never been a Tory voter I'm not going to waste any more time defending their policies. Tory s..m, robbing the poor, I can't wait for Jeremy to sort it all out for us. There, talking your language now... 8(0(*
Most part-time workers on minimum wage wouldn't have reached the tax threshold anyway. It doesn't matter if the raising of the threshold reduced income tax, it's paying no income tax Osborne was bragging about.
Minimum wage part time workers would have paid less income tax when the allowance was raised if they were in the taxable bracket originally. Osborne then proposed cutting tax credits. Giving with one hand and taking away with the other.
You are the one who said the Tories took people out of paying tax, so you should provide figures to support your assertion.
They have and I already did, you have chosen not to accept them, your choice. I'm currently waiting to fly out of the country and as I've never been a Tory voter I'm not going to waste any more time defending their policies. Tory s..m, robbing the poor, I can't wait for Jeremy to sort it all out for us. There, talking your language now... 8(0(*
it stands to reason, if you increase the income tax threshold, fewer people will be paying income tax, does it not? Under a Tory government the threshold has risen from £6475 to £10600, did no low paid person benefit as a result?Thats a 750 quid roughly saving per year, until you start factoring in the CUTS and the RISING prices of certain things
They have and I already did, you have chosen not to accept them, your choice. I'm currently waiting to fly out of the country and as I've never been a Tory voter I'm not going to waste any more time defending their policies. Tory s..m, robbing the poor, I can't wait for Jeremy to sort it all out for us. There, talking your language now... 8(0(*
The BBC hosted a debate between Corbyn and Smith yesterday. The audience included supporters of both men and a group of undecided. At the end the undecideds were asked to choose a side. They all moved to the Corbyn side, as did a couple of Smith supporters.Hardly surprising, Owen Smith has even less going for him than Corbyn!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/37104865
Hardly surprising, Owen Smith has even less going for him than Corbyn!
Remember these faces; only two had the guts to challenge Corbyn;I thought you thought they were all scheming backstabbers only in it for the power and the glory, what's with the guts thing?
(http://www.irishexaminer.com/remote/media.central.ie/media/images/z/zzzShadowCabinetMembersWhoJumpedShip270616_large.jpg?width=648&s=ie-407267)
I thought you thought they were all scheming backstabbers only in it for the power and the glory, what's with the guts thing?
Remember these faces; only two had the guts to challenge Corbyn;
(http://www.irishexaminer.com/remote/media.central.ie/media/images/z/zzzShadowCabinetMembersWhoJumpedShip270616_large.jpg?width=648&s=ie-407267)
whens the muppet show coming back to itv?not quite sure what half your post means but I don't HATE Corbyn (I actually think he's rather endearing in a funny old way) but I DO think he's a disaster for the Labour party. As for negotiating with ISIS, I think you'll find that Corbyn is keen on talking with terrorists rather than hunting them down and killing them or detaining them for years.
See alfie? corbyns given everyone a run for their money
Every s..m book has been thrown on him, only to be proved a s..m book..not sure why you hate him so much he hasnt actually had a chance yet to inplement anything and lets face it everything the tories have implemented has harmed all people and the whole country, but at least the tosser and fake cNefin has run off with his tails between his legs
not quite sure what half your post means but I don't HATE Corbyn (I actually think he's rather endearing in a funny old way) but I DO think he's a disaster for the Labour party. As for negotiating with ISIS, I think you'll find that Corbyn is keen on talking with terrorists rather than hunting them down and killing them or detaining them for years.
History tells us over and over again that today's terrorists are tomorrow's politicians. Unless you talk to them how is a solution ever going to be found? Hunting them down and killing them just encourages others to take up the fight. Northern Ireland only settled down when the very real oppression of the Catholic population was accepted and a workable solution found.
not quite sure what half your post means but I don't HATE Corbyn (I actually think he's rather endearing in a funny old way) but I DO think he's a disaster for the Labour party. As for negotiating with ISIS, I think you'll find that Corbyn is keen on talking with terrorists rather than hunting them down and killing them or detaining them for years.
History tells us over and over again that today's terrorists are tomorrow's politicians. Unless you talk to them how is a solution ever going to be found? Hunting them down and killing them just encourages others to take up the fight. Northern Ireland only settled down when the very real oppression of the Catholic population was accepted and a workable solution found.ddYou should have adressed your post to Mercury who scoffed at the idea of Owen Davis negotiating wth ISIS. As we all know that this is Jeremy's position also, and that he is a man of great courage with much sympathy for the plight of those tormented in the Middle East especially by the evil Israelis, so perhaps one day when he is Prime Minister he will be able to sit down and negotiate with ISIS, and all the the other terrorist groups in the world and make the world a better place...
Which ones is he so keen on talking to and having no desire to hunt down and punish...presumably those in the uk? Where he has or has he? Power to do so? So which ones?In the event of a Paris style incident, with terrorists running rampage and killing dozens of innocent people on the streets and in clubs, Jeremy has clearly stated that he does NOT support a shoot to kill policy, preferring instead I presume to negotiate a non-violent resolution to the situation.
As for my post, which bit wasnt too clear barring spellos?
As for beng a disaster for the party, not at all, best thng since sliced bread
In the event of a Paris style incident, with terrorists running rampage and killing dozens of innocent people on the streets and in clubs, Jeremy has clearly stated that he does NOT support a shoot to kill policy, preferring instead I presume to negotiate a non-violent resolution to the situation.
Best thing since sliced bread, my arse!
Making things up again are we? So sadyou're very ill-informed.
you're very ill-informed.
Mr Corbyn said: "I'm not happy with the shoot-to-kill policy in general - I think that is quite dangerous and I think can often can be counterproductive.
"I think you have to have security that prevents people firing off weapons where you can, there are various degrees for doing things as we know.
"But the idea you end up with a war on the streets is not a good thing."
BBC News
Corbyn doesn't seem to indulge in sound bites. Not every question has a simple answer. Perhaps he understands that?Blah blah blah. As a potential PM I want to know how Corbyn would react in a terrorist situation and what measures he would be willing to take to counter terrorist action. I have a pretty good idea that Theresa May would have no compunction whatsoever about issung a shoot to kill order to try and bring about a swift conclusion to the attack. What I don't have, based on what he has already said on the subject and his general position, is any confidence at all that Jeremy would issue such swift and decisive orders. What about you, or don't you really care either way?
Reasonable force is the norm in the UK, which can include shooting to kill.
The problem is not whether you specifically allow shooting to kill; any shooting has the potential to be fatal. The problem is shooting the right people at the right time because mistakes can't be corrected.
Why shooting to wound doesn't make sense scientifically, legally or tactically
https://www.pfoa.co.uk/110/shooting-to-wound
Blah blah blah. As a potential PM I want to know how Corbyn would react in a terrorist situation and what measures he would be willing to take to counter terrorist action. I have a pretty good idea that Theresa May would have no compunction whatsoever about issung a shoot to kill order to try and bring about a swift conclusion to the attack. What I don't have, based on what he has already said on the subject and his general position, is any confidence at all that Jeremy would issue such swift and decisive orders. What about you, or don't you really care either way?
It's no use dismissing the facts with 'Blah blah blah'In extreme terrorist situations yes I would expect the PM and / or home secretary to be informed immediately, why ever not? Police will not shoot to kill if there are no laws to protect them in the event that they do shoot someone. Jeremy does not approve of shoot to kill as a resolution to trrrorist situations. He thought the shooting of Osama Bin Laden was as much of a tragedy as 9/11. Incredible.
What makes you think anyone would have time for a check with Corbyn or May if an attack was taking place? Would the Met say 'Hold it, lads, while we try to get hold of May in Italy'?
As I understand it the police are able to use reasonable force. That obviously includes killing so long as it can be justified. Normally they aim for the torso when shooting, except for suspected suicide bombers when they aim for the head. Clearly both are likely to kill. It's unrealistic to expect a guaranteed outcome once shooting begins.
Politicians can say what they like to curry favour with voters, but the police decide what to aim at on the day.
It's no use dismissing the facts with 'Blah blah blah'
What makes you think anyone would have time for a check with Corbyn or May if an attack was taking place? Would the Met say 'Hold it, lads, while we try to get hold of May in Italy'?
As I understand it the police are able to use reasonable force. That obviously includes killing so long as it can be justified. Normally they aim for the torso when shooting, except for suspected suicide bombers when they aim for the head. Clearly both are likely to kill. It's unrealistic to expect a guaranteed outcome once shooting begins.
Politicians can say what they like to curry favour with voters, but the police decide what to aim at on the day.
It is called intellectual well researched and well reasoned argument ..... 8(0(*
I can imagine some on here were up in arms in the 1960s because Harold Wilson did not allow the UK to be sucked into the Vietnam war.
Is 9/11 becoming a lower threshold in Godwin's Rule ? 8(0(*
you're very ill-informed.
Mr Corbyn said: "I'm not happy with the shoot-to-kill policy in general - I think that is quite dangerous and I think can often can be counterproductive.
"I think you have to have security that prevents people firing off weapons where you can, there are various degrees for doing things as we know.
"But the idea you end up with a war on the streets is not a good thing."
BBC News
In extreme terrorist situations yes I would expect the PM and / or home secretary to be informed immediately, why ever not? Police will not shoot to kill if there are no laws to protect them in the event that they do shoot someone. Jeremy does not approve of shoot to kill as a resolution to trrrorist situations. He thought the shooting of Osama Bin Laden was as much of a tragedy as 9/11. Incredible.
What greatly amuses me about the Corbyn debates on this forum is that I don't get the sense that there is a single one of his staunch defenders on here who would actually vote for him in a general election, but of course winning elections doesn't matter does it? As long as amiable, humble, saintly old Jeremy can keep posing questions in Parliament on behalf of Sonia from Sc..thorpe and Pete from Peterbrough then that is just as effective as governing the country, isn't it?
You do understand that he only people who can vote for Corbyn in a general election are his constituents, don't you?You patronizing tone has been noted. In return I take it you understand the meanng of the word "would", and the hypothetical nature of my question? Maybe not...
The way our 'democracy' works is that a few marginal constituencies decide who governs. There are 'safe seats' where the voters would vote in a chimp if it wore the right colour rosette.
You patronizing tone has been noted. In return I take it you understand the meanng of the word "would", and the hypothetical nature of my question? Maybe not...
Amaral
Grime
Trump
Corbyn
????
faites vos jeux in the "Who Will Be The Next Boogah Man Stakes".
Is there a common thread here one wonders?
The common thread seems to be that demonising people no longer works [if it ever did]. If anything it increases their support. @)(++(*In what way do you believe I have "demonised" Corbyn and in what way do you believe that me, expressing my genuinely held opinion about the man has not only failed in some way but also actually increased support for the man? Are you suggesting that by holding this debate with you I have turned you from a non-Corbyn supporter, into a supporter? Are you furthermore suggesting that expressing a negative opinion about a politician be it Corbyn or Trump equals demonising them, and that therefore one should simply be quiet on the subject or only say pleasant things about them? That Donald Trump has such fine hands and is surely a super and successful businessman, whilst Jeremy Corbyn looks very kind and I'd happily let him babysit my kids. Is that more the sort of observations you think we should be making in a discussion about these politicians?
In what way do you believe I have "demonised" Corbyn and in what way do you believe that me, expressing my genuinely held opinion about the man has not only failed in some way but also actually increased support for the man? Are you suggesting that by holding this debate with you I have turned you from a non-Corbyn supporter, into a supporter? Are you furthermore suggesting that expressing a negative opinion about a politician be it Corbyn or Trump equals demonising them, and that therefore one should simply be quiet on the subject or only say pleasant things about them? That Donald Trump has such fine hands and is surely a super and successful businessman, whilst Jeremy Corbyn looks very kind and I'd happily let him babysit my kids. Is that more the sort of observations you think we should be making in a discussion about these politicians?
I wasn't actually thinking of you Alfie, I was thinking of the media.There seems to be somene new every day doing it, he really must be the new wicked wizard of the west or is it east, cant remember my wizard of oz lol
I wasn't actually thinking of you Alfie, I was thinking of the media.You were responding to a comment by Alice which was a list of men that have come under criticism specifically on this forum - I don't believe Grime has ever been demonised in the press for instance. It's clear Alice's dig was at posters on this forum, not the media however you chose to interpret it.
You were responding to a comment by Alice which was a list of men that have come under criticism specifically on this forum - I don't believe Grime has ever been demonised in the press for instance. It's clear Alice's dig was at posters on this forum, not the media however you chose to interpret it.
You were responding to a comment by Alice which was a list of men that have come under criticism specifically on this forum - I don't believe Grime has ever been demonised in the press for instance. It's clear Alice's dig was at posters on this forum, not the media however you chose to interpret it.
I thought I was on ignore?
It was a general pop about how people are turned into Boogah Men on the basis not of what they actually said or did but on the basis of what someone else said they said or did mostly as reported the press then modified by the reader according to his prejudices.
The most notorious of which became known as "The Rivers of Blood Speech". Guess what he did not say?
It is worth a read in the light of today's shenanigans.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3643823/Enoch-Powells-Rivers-of-Blood-speech.html
But back to the plot with Mr Corbyn.
He is the legally elected leader of the Labour Party which also is HM Opposition. Just what is the beef ?
Whether he is electable as PM or not is irrelevant, see the bit in bold italics in the preceding sentence.
Trying to second guess what he would do now as PM, if elected, based on what you think he might have done 40 years ago is a bit futile but entertaining for the rest of us.
It was perfectly obvious to me that Ed Milliband wasn't going to win a general election, but he didn't get the flack Corbyn has suffered. Was that because in the unlikely event that he did win he was seen as 'a safe pair of hands'?Miliband got huge amounts of flack from the media. He was a laughing stock by the time of the GE, you must have a very short memory. But at least he was someone cabable of leading a united party, one who had not voted against his own party throughout his political life.
Corbyn's intentions are very clear; nationlisation, council house building, more union influence, public ownership of the NHS. Shock horror! It would take the Tory's ages to reverse all that next time they were elected. He must be stopped!
Corbyn has had a message of support from Bernie Sanders in the US. The US media portrayed him as unelectable also, but Sanders said the reality was that he was electable but posed a threat to the establishment.If he was electable why did Hillary get 3 million more votes...?
Seems he agrees with my suspicions as to Corbyn has been so comprehensively attacked by all sides.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/23/bernie-sanders-backs-jeremy-corbyn-in-labour-leadership-race/
It was perfectly obvious to me that Ed Milliband wasn't going to win a general election, but he didn't get the flack Corbyn has suffered. Was that because in the unlikely event that he did win he was seen as 'a safe pair of hands'?What are Corbyn's very clear intentions with regard The EU??
Corbyn's intentions are very clear; nationlisation, council house building, more union influence, public ownership of the NHS. Shock horror! It would take the Tory's ages to reverse all that next time they were elected. He must be stopped!
What are Corbyn's very clear intentions with regard The EU??
Miliband got huge amounts of flack from the media. He was a laughing stock by the time of the GE, you must have a very short memory. But at least he was someone cabable of leading a united party, one who had not voted against his own party throughout his political life.
BTW, Alice should know that yes he is on ignore bucause he's an irritating WUM, but when his posts get quoted by others and referenced then sadly I have no option but to see and read them.
I thought I was on ignore?
It was a general pop about how people are turned into Boogah Men on the basis not of what they actually said or did but on the basis of what someone else said they said or did mostly as reported the press then modified by the reader according to his prejudices.
The most notorious of which became known as "The Rivers of Blood Speech". Guess what he did not say?
It is worth a read in the light of today's shenanigans.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3643823/Enoch-Powells-Rivers-of-Blood-speech.html
But back to the plot with Mr Corbyn.
He is the legally elected leader of the Labour Party which also is HM Opposition. Just what is the beef ?
Whether he is electable as PM or not is irrelevant, see the bit in bold italics in the preceding sentence.
Trying to second guess what he would do now as PM, if elected, based on what you think he might have done 40 years ago is a bit futile but entertaining for the rest of us.
It is not good for the country to have a dishevelled, terrorist supporting, radical, anti-white, anti- British leader of one of the two major parties! Corbyn was an embarrassing back bencher for decades who the Labour leadership pretended didn't exist and then he becomes leader of Labour! You cant make that shit up! Corbyn makes old Michael Foot look like a Saville Row tailor's dummy! Dumby?I never thought I'd agree with a post written by Tim Invictus, I feel slightly queasy now.
Corbyn is hari-kari for Labour and although I am Conservative, that isn't good for a balanced society!
I never thought I'd agree with a post written by Tim Invictus, I feel slightly queasy now.
So, how do we all think our man is getting on now? Who can see Corbyn in the PM role in 2020? But that's not the b all and end all is it, I remember now.... it's not about votes, and it's not about winning, it's about being a decent, honest bloke, not like yer usual s..mbag politician...kind of.... &%+((£
I think Copeland might prove to be the proverbial straw. Corby means nought to anyone outside London and as for Chakrabarti and Abbott, what a pair of friggin tossers... @)(++(*
If Corbyn could get his act together he may get a sniff at actual power. Is it possible that St Theresa has overestimated her support in the country?@)(++(* Not a chance.
If Corbyn could get his act together he may get a sniff at actual power. Is it possible that St Theresa has overestimated her support in the country?
I don't think there was anything saintly about her today. In Louis L'Amour books she would be described as a low down dirty bushwhacker after today's performance. Vice Admiral Horatio Lord Nelson would have been proud of her.
If Mr Corbyn could be as ungentlemanly as Viscount Nelson and nick Mrs May's clothes as it were then...................... &%+((£
Sorry Alice - just trying to get the image of our Jeremy in the leather trousers and kitten heels out of my head......
Hi all, my 2 pence is Mr Corbyn comes across as a nice man with many qualities, well intentioned etc however he and his party will be disastrous for this country. I think over the next 6 weeks of campaigning, when the undecided voters actually see what they're getting, the conservative landslide will be even greater than current polling indicates.
For example his lunatic policy to scrap trident at a time when the world is more belligerent than ever and laying off loyal Scots. The lunacy of a boycott of Israel which will only hurt the Palestinian people they are naively trying to help. His populist social reforms that require an increase in taxes on the rich which are proven over time to actually have the opposite effect of decreasing the tax intake.
Then there's the disarray in his party over brexit. Or how about the shadow cabinet after all those resignations. Diane Abbott as home secretary anyone ? Emily Thornberry as foreign secretary ? hmmmm....
Labour are going to be crushed and those that can't bear to vote tory will end up voting liberal or some minor party like that if they can be bothered at all.
I think traditional Labour voters feel betrayed by Jeremy Corbyn so probably will abstain as you suggest. I can't see the Lib Dems or UKIP picking up much to be honest. A definite Tory landslide is on the cards by the looks of it.
If Mrs May is returned with a landslide Boris will be for the high jump.
I think traditional Labour voters feel betrayed by Jeremy Corbyn so probably will abstain as you suggest. I can't see the Lib Dems or UKIP picking up much to be honest. A definite Tory landslide is on the cards by the looks of it.
Quite possibly!!
I would imagine, however, that many people in Labour held constituencies might still vote Labour, if they like their own MP, despite Corbyn. I can also imagine the Lib Dems gaining from people who are disillusioned with Labour---traditional Labour voters are not going to find it easy to vote Conservative, although, as you suggest, many just wont bother voting. Is there still any point in voting UKIP, now that we are definitely "Brexiting"?
I think UKIP have had their day and have been destroyed by their ownn success.
There's a serious possibility of this idiot not resigning after taking his party to its worst defeat at the polls in decades.... 8(8-))
Decent opposition is always good for democarcy so I would like to see someone electable take over from the unelectable JC eg Keir Starmer. Hopefully this will happen shortly after 8th June when the Tories win with a thumping majority!
Meanwhile for the next 5 years we can rely upon the able and delightful Mays to see us through Brexit and beyond ?{)(**
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1S99-3C16SA
Given that one has to be about 60 to remember the utter mismanagement by Labour and the Unions in the late 1970s, not forgetting Michael Foots 'longest suicide note in history' manifesto, and then the last shambles during Brown'sterm of office.
The unfettered huge immigration deliberately encouraged as a political tool for Labour, how can anyone think that Corbyn, who avowedly wants to return the country to the 1970s, stands any chance ?
Where's the massive defeat for Corbyn and Labour then? @)(++(*
Where's the massive defeat for Corbyn and Labour then? @)(++(*
No "massive" defeat for JC just another defeat for Labour 8((()*/
It looks like many young voters came out unexpectedly.
It looks like many young voters came out unexpectedly.
Well their votes were effectively bought, weren't they?
Corbyn promised free University .. so no debts for the students, nor financial pain for the parents. Very clever move, he grabbed two age groups at the same time
This Country has mind boggling debt already, thanks Mr Blair.
Gawd knows who we would be selling ourselves to if Jeremy Corbyn got in with all his expendature. His financial expert Diane Abbott hasn't even bothered to do her sums and doesn't know how much all the give aways will cost.
I am of the opinion that we are in such debt now that despite all austerity measures, it will be unlikely that we will ever, ever, be able to pay our debts off %#&%4%
Someone with expert financial and political knowledge, please come in and cheer me up
Why all the despondency? Politicians have predicted doom and gloom for years in order to make us accept their unpopular policies, but we're all still here living our lives.
Whatever people think of Corbyn's political aims or methods he got his message across despite the herculean efforts made to discredit him. People heard, approved and voted Labour. He judged it perfectly.
On the other hand May did not get her message across. She made a huge error of judgement and will pay the price before 2017 is out imo.
She will pay the price but so will the rest of us? She needed a strong hand in order to negotiate Brexit but now she looks fragile and weak. Her enforced cosy arrangement with Ulster's DUP is bound to end in tears and do absolutely nothing for cross community relations in the province. What a bloody mess!
Well their votes were effectively bought, weren't they?
Corbyn promised free University .. so no debts for the students, nor financial pain for the parents. Very clever move, he grabbed two age groups at the same time
This Country has mind boggling debt already, thanks Mr Blair.
Gawd knows who we would be selling ourselves to if Jeremy Corbyn got in with all his expendature. His financial expert Diane Abbott hasn't even bothered to do her sums and doesn't know how much all the give aways will cost.
I am of the opinion that we are in such debt now that despite all austerity measures, it will be unlikely that we will ever, ever, be able to pay our debts off %#&%4%
Someone with expert financial and political knowledge, please come in and cheer me up
It looks like a 68 year old with 'old Labour' values and policies was able to inspire young people to take an interest and vote. Who'd a thunk it? Not the media and not the 'experts' they trot out.
I don't really care at my age, but I'm glad people are realising that they don't have to believe what MP's tell them any more. They have a clear choice now, not just more of the same with a different label.
its just that the young were taken in by the rubbish corbyn promised...older voters had more sense and have seen it all before. I dont rate May highly but corbyn is far far far worse
Yes, the media are saying that, aren't they? All the clever folk who couldn't see what was happening under their noses are now desperately trying to explain it while refusing to answer when asked why they got it so wrong. @)(++(*
they got it so wrong because they understimated the gullibility of the younger voters..
Corby is a Marxist
Both China and Russia have abandoned Marxism and are doing rather well .
8((()*/ anyone actually notice IRA Corbyn lost by 50 odd seats ...... he only 'did well' compared to the car crash disaster he was expected to be! His 'success' was May's fault anyway..... their manifesto was abysmal and their campaign pathetic. That along with her wooden charisma bypass all helped IRA Corbyn do just slightly worse than Gordon Brown!
Well, calling him names will stop him. Or didn't the media and the 'experts' do that and no-one took any notice? @)(++(*
The Tories were in trouble very quickly, before May revealed her manifesto or her woodenness. People were bombarded with propaganda against Labour but voted for them anyway. That's why May's still PM. The Tories know very well he'd win a second election because those who believed the media and wrote Labour off would return to them. .
Another poor deluded fellow acting like IRA Corbyn won the election!
I am glad IRA Corby wasn't routed though .... as long as that scruffy Lenin wannabe sits on the opposition benches with car crash Abbot at his side, Labour will never win anything!
Corbyn and Momentum noticed that younger voters were disengaged with the political process. They focused on them, informed them and motivated them. An amazing achievement. 8@??)(
They were making promises they could not keep! it is because of a labour government and their EU luvvies immigration policy, the 'young' are getting shoddy watered down education, no access to affordable social housing- unless they have a child, if you are infertile tough luck, and NHS waiting lists are so long people really are dying to get admitted- no pun there! They raised stealth taxes, did nothing about tax evasion and there was no improvements in any of the public services, they also sent soldiers not equipped properly to die in a pointless war!
Let's keep it real people. 8((()*/ 8(0(*
G-Unit, as a supporter and defender of Corbyn on this thread, if not in real life, what is your view of Corbyn’s refusal to work with thr government to deliver Brexit unless “no deal” is taken off the table?
Would it be that simple to work with Jeremy Corbyn. I though all he wanted was a General Election to be honest.Theresa May appealed to all leaders of parliamentary parties to work with her to deliver Brexit and Corbyn has refused.
They were making promises they could not keep! it is because of a labour government and their EU luvvies immigration policy, the 'young' are getting shoddy watered down education, no access to affordable social housing- unless they have a child, if you are infertile tough luck, and NHS waiting lists are so long people really are dying to get admitted- no pun there! They raised stealth taxes, did nothing about tax evasion and there was no improvements in any of the public services, they also sent soldiers not equipped properly to die in a pointless war!
Let's keep it real people. 8((()*/ 8(0(*
Some people may be so shallow, just as some people may be shallow enough to support Cameron because he referred to immigrants as a 'swarm'. This made me wonder why McVey is being attacked?You seem to have changed your mind about her recently!
Esther McVey is committed to and defends sanctioning benefit claimants. She defended the policy at a select committee inquiry into sanctions. The case of a diabetic who died after his electricity was cut off because he was sanctioned and had no money was raised. His sister said 'diabetics can't wait two weeks for a hardship payment to be authorised'
A Labour MP said;
Once again Esther McVey has shown a stunning disregard for the mountain of evidence provided during this inquiry from individuals, academics and organisations who have seen first-hand, or worse experienced, the effect of this government’s inhumane approach to sanctioning, especially against vulnerable people.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/grieving-relative-confronts-dwp-minister-esther-mcvey-after-benefit-sanctions
McVey seems to lack empathy for the disadvantaged of the UK.
You seem to have changed your mind about her recently!
Not at all. Politicians seak on a range of subjects and are sometimes wrong and sometimes right.You must find it incredibly difficult to decide who to vote for.
You must find it incredibly difficult to decide who to vote for.
I have a degree in Politics which I chose because I wanted to understand the subject. I belong to no political party and vote for whoever I think will best represent the area where I live. If I don't have a preferred candidate I vote against the one who will do the most harm in my opinion.Would you vote for Esther McVey if she stood in your constituency?
Would you vote for Esther McVey if she stood in your constituency?
That would depend on her campaign, but I disagree with the Conservative's habit of making life harder for the poorest members of society.Which no deal Brexit will almost certainly do of course. And your views on arch Leaver Corbyn insisting on the removal of No Deal from the table? Insanity, surely?!
Which no deal Brexit will almost certainly do of course. And your views on arch Leaver Corbyn insisting on the removal of No Deal from the table? Insanity, surely?!
How do you know a no deal Brexit would make the poor poorer? As I said, Corbyn's priority is to force a general election. Is he an arch Leaver?Because nearly all the experts say so, and we all know what store you set by them! Plus it stands to reason IMO if prices go up, EU companies withdraw, jobs in industry are lost, farms and small businesses go bust owing to withdrawal of subsidies, lack of foreign workers, increased tarriffs on imports and exports, etc. The poorest and most vulnerable in society will be harmed, hell isn’t that what St Jeremy of Corbyn has said, and why he doesn’t want there to be a no deal, or are you suggesting he’s just playing political games to get into power? Have you ever checked out his voting record on Europe btw?
Because nearly all the experts say so, and we all know what store you set by them! Plus it stands to reason IMO if prices go up, EU companies withdraw, jobs in industry are lost, farms and small businesses go bust owing to withdrawal of subsidies, lack of foreign workers, increased tarriffs on imports and exports, etc. The poorest and most vulnerable in society will be harmed, hell isn’t that what St Jeremy of Corbyn has said, and why he doesn’t want there to be a no deal, or are you suggesting he’s just playing political games to get into power? Have you ever checked out his voting record on Europe btw?
Because nearly all the experts say so, and we all know what store you set by them! Plus it stands to reason IMO if prices go up, EU companies withdraw, jobs in industry are lost, farms and small businesses go bust owing to withdrawal of subsidies, lack of foreign workers, increased tarriffs on imports and exports, etc. The poorest and most vulnerable in society will be harmed, hell isn’t that what St Jeremy of Corbyn has said, and why he doesn’t want there to be a no deal, or are you suggesting he’s just playing political games to get into power? Have you ever checked out his voting record on Europe btw?
So 'if' all those things happen, the poor will be poorer? I don't think it's quite so definite. Losing foreign workers might push wages up, for example. I haven't studied Corbyn's views because he seems very ambivalent so I'm not sure what they are.
So 'if' all those things happen, the poor will be poorer? I don't think it's quite so definite. Losing foreign workers might push wages up, for example. I haven't studied Corbyn's views because he seems very ambivalent so I'm not sure what they are.How do you think pushing wages up is going to effect prices of goods and services?
How do you think pushing wages up is going to effect prices of goods and services?
They may rise in the sectors which are competing for scarcer workers. In 2015 EU ctizens worked in; (most popular first)Oh. What about all the low skilled jobs in the food and farming industry that Brits aren’t interested in doing?
Households. (as nannies and au pairs)
Accomodation and food. (hotels and restaurants)
Admin and Manufacturing
Transport
Construction
Most EU unskilled workers are working for private households, hotels ans restaurants. Rising prices in those sectors are unlikely to impact on the poor.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41176699
Oh. What about all the low skilled jobs in the food and farming industry that Brits aren’t interested in doing?
The jobs WE ARE TOLD that Brits aren't interested in doing.Oh? You don’t think it’s true then? You think EU workers came over here and stole jobs from British workers desperate to pull carrots out of the Lincolnshire soil is that it?
Oh look:
“The area that relies on EEA workers the most is food and drink manufacturing - they accounted for about one quarter of staff in 2016”
So if wages rise in this sector this won’t affect prices you dont think?
I understand if wages for some will rise then their disposable income will also rise so those who receive any pay rise will spend more of this on goods and services, hopefully locally.My understanding is if farmers (or any employer in the food industry) has to pay higher wages to get fruit and veg harvested or food processed in abbatoirs and factories then there are two risks: one going bust, two putting up cost prices. Of course once trade deals have been done which won’t happen immediately we could be flooded with cheap low quality imports from the USA for example which again threatens local production and puts low quality food into the food chain which does nothing for the health of those who are living in poverty.
Oh? You don’t think it’s true then? You think EU workers came over here and stole jobs from British workers desperate to pull carrots out of the Lincolnshire soil is that it?
Oh yes! and the new look European carrot puller looks rather like this:Better send the details to this lot:
https://www.grimme.com/uk/producttypes/selbstfahrende-erntetechnik-kartoffel/varitron-470
“Theresa May would win a working majority if a general election were held today, according to YouGov modelling for The Times that correctly predicted the 2017 hung parliament.
Labour is pushing for a general election but the new research suggests that this would backfire, with Jeremy Corbyn’s party losing 12 seats and the Tories gaining four”.
Time for Jeremy and his Marxist pals to wake up and smell the coffee...
I agree. Jeremy is the best thing to have happened to the Tories for years and I am not a Tory voter.
I agree. Jeremy is the best thing to have happened to the Tories for years and I am not a Tory voter.He’s effectively turned this country into a one party state, just not the one party he was hoping for.
My understanding is if farmers (or any employer in the food industry) has to pay higher wages to get fruit and veg harvested or food processed in abbatoirs and factories then there are two risks: one going bust, two putting up cost prices. Of course once trade deals have been done which won’t happen immediately we could be flooded with cheap low quality imports from the USA for example which again threatens local production and puts low quality food into the food chain which does nothing for the health of those who are living in poverty.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1088370/brexit-news-nigel-farage-brexit-party-ukip-new-party
Nige for PM?
looks like he is back in the political arena. whoah!
What's his plan or isn't that useful to know?
Why not join and ask him? he has a radio show you could phone in and find out or just sit and slag him off behind a screen...Quite, slagging people off behind a screen is jolly unpleasant behaviour isn’t it Miss Taken?
At last! Good on 'em....
Seven MPs have resigned from the Labour Party in protest at Jeremy Corbyn's approach to Brexit and anti-Semitism.
They are: Chuka Umunna, Luciana Berger, Chris Leslie, Angela Smith, Mike Gapes, Gavin Shuker and Ann Coffey.
At last! Good on 'em....
Seven MPs have resigned from the Labour Party in protest at Jeremy Corbyn's approach to Brexit and anti-Semitism.
They are: Chuka Umunna, Luciana Berger, Chris Leslie, Angela Smith, Mike Gapes, Gavin Shuker and Ann Coffey.
The gang of seven. Off into oblivian rather quicker than the gang of four imo.Why do you think that?
The gang of seven. Off into oblivian rather quicker than the gang of four imo.
There may be a resonance of support amongst the grass roots of the Thatcher years for the seven ... bearing in mind the resistance to Militant entryism of that time.
There's nothing to support. No Party, no leader, no policies. The gang of four at least put those things in place. People had heard of them too.Different times. Writing them off on day one may prove a little premature.
There's nothing to support. No Party, no leader, no policies. The gang of four at least put those things in place. People had heard of them too.
Perhaps they will gain momentum with time.
At the moment they are a protest group. We know what they don't like but not what they want. I don't see where a protest group fit into our system of party politics. Perhaps our MP's will split and form snaller groups like these because in respect of Brexit party politics hasn't managed to reach a concensus. If that happens then our voting system also needs to change to reflect the diversity of views.
At the moment they are a protest group. We know what they don't like but not what they want. I don't see where a protest group fit into our system of party politics. Perhaps our MP's will split and form snaller groups like these because in respect of Brexit party politics hasn't managed to reach a concensus. If that happens then our voting system also needs to change to reflect the diversity of views.It has already been tried in the voting systems incumbent with the introduction of devolution. I doubt very much if the advent of the magnificent seven has as much to do with Corbyn's demonstrable brexit ineptitude as it does with his cohort's take over.
It seems to me they are protesting because corbyn is unelectable.... Once he's gone and the party moves towards the centre the party will be reunitedMaybe the signed 'loyalty pledge' (did you ever!) was a bridge too far.
It seems to me they are protesting because corbyn is unelectable.... Once he's gone and the party moves towards the centre the party will be reunited
Two days ago Labour were level with the Conservatives in the opinion polls.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/support-for-labour-and-tories-neck-and-neck-new-poll-suggests-a4068871.html
Given the current situation into which Her Majesty's Government have steered the country on their watch any Loyal Opposition worthy of it's salt ... in my opinion ... could have been expected to have been streets ahead in opinion polls (for what they are worth).
Quite, slagging people off behind a screen is jolly unpleasant behaviour isn’t it Miss Taken?
There's nothing to support. No Party, no leader, no policies. The gang of four at least put those things in place. People had heard of them too.
There's nothing to support. No Party, no leader, no policies. The gang of four at least put those things in place. People had heard of them too.
One has to wonder why now? if they were so affected by the anti Semitism why not leave when it was a huge thing?
I never got to read about those claims. Is not agreeing with Israeli land grabbing policy an anti Semite badge now? is that the same as racism?
As I understand it there are Jews and there are Zionist Jews. A lot of people equate anti-Zionism with anti-Semetism, but they're not the same thing. I think the Zionists are the ones in favout of land-grabbing.There are just Jews. Zionist is a term of abuse used by Anti- semites who object to the existence of the state of Israel. IMO.
I don't see what these MP's are thinking, but at least two of them have nothing to lose, having had votes of no confidence passed against them by their constituences.
What people need to remember is that Labour is a left-wing party. It was dragged to the right by Blair and Brown in order to get elected. The Conservatives have been very right-wing imo with theit attacks on public expenditure and it's that which made people turn to a left-wing alternative.
Corbyn's policies are very different to those of 'New Labour' which these MP's preferred.
There are just Jews. Zionist is a term of abuse used by Anti- semites who object to the existence of the state of Israel. IMO.
Historically that isn't so, unless you think the United Nations were anti-semetic.What is your quote supposed to prove?
n 1975, the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 3379, which designated Zionism as "a form of racism and racial discrimination". The resolution was repealed in 1991
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism
As I understand it there are Jews and there are Zionist Jews. A lot of people equate anti-Zionism with anti-Semetism, but they're not the same thing. I think the Zionists are the ones in favout of land-grabbing.
I don't see what these MP's are thinking, but at least two of them have nothing to lose, having had votes of no confidence passed against them by their constituences.
What people need to remember is that Labour is a left-wing party. It was dragged to the right by Blair and Brown in order to get elected. The Conservatives have been very right-wing imo with theit attacks on public expenditure and it's that which made people turn to a left-wing alternative.
Corbyn's policies are very different to those of 'New Labour' which these MP's preferred.
What is your quote supposed to prove?
That Zionism is not the same as Jewishness.How does it do that?
It's a debate around which emotions run high. It's also obviously true that being a Zionist and being Jewish are not the same thing.There is being critical of the actions of the state of Israel and then there is intolerance for the very existence of that state. Corbyn has been an active supporter of those who deny Israel’s right to exist all his
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36160928
It's been very difficult to have any reasonable discussions about the actions of the state of Israel because anyone critical of them has tended to be accused of anti-Semetosm, anti-Zionism or both.
The U.S. Congress is split on passing a law against anti-Semitism, a law which would jail Americans for 20 years for the crime of criticizing Israel. Anyone criticizing Israel’s war against Palestine gets accused of anti-Semitism, which I consider a red herring to deflect accountability for murder. Just because Jews have been persecuted, doesn’t make their persecution of Palestinians acceptable. Persecution is persecution. It’s always wrong.
https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2018/05/30/israeli-atrocities-against-palestinians-and-international-response/
Is it riight to equate criticism of a government to anti-Semetism? Wouldn't that mean that all those criticising the actions of the Iranian government are anti-Persian or anti-Muslim?
There is being critical of the actions of the state of Israel and then there is intolerance for the very existence of that state. Corbyn has been an active supporter of those who deny Israel’s right to exist all his
political life. I call that anti-semitic, as do most Jews if you ask them, and surely it is the vtargets of hatred ideology who are best placed to decide whether or not they are victims of it?
So you agree that equating criticism of Israel with anti-Semetism is a step too far? Yet many Jews hold that opinion. Subjective views can't be the sole measuure of anything imo, be it sexism, racism or anti-Semetism. I'm all for equal treatment for women, but I certainly don't agree with some of the opinions expressed by some women. Is it sensible to campaign to remove the word 'man' ftom 'woman' and call women 'wo' instead?
https://www.change.org/p/theresa-may-fight-the-patriarchy-by-removing-man-from-woman
criticisn of the Israeli govt is not anti semetic...criticism of israel as a country as a whole...is xenophobic and anti semetic.
There are Americans who disagree with you to the extent that they want to make it illegal. That would be giving the Israeli government carte blanche whatever it did.
There are Americans who disagree with you to the extent that they want to make it illegal. That would be giving the Israeli government carte blanche whatever it did.
On a more personal note, my stepmother who I didn't like all that much, and who certainly didn't like me, was a Jew. And when I lived with her as a child she was in permanent fear, to such an extent that she pretended that my half brother wasn't Jewish, thereby depriving him of something I consider to be of importance to him. But in those days one did as one must.
Israel would never have survived without Zionists. They didn't just fight. They turned a desert which the Arabs didn't want, into a land fit to live in. They picked up the detritus of the death camps and turned it into a working nation, while Palestine looked on. When the Palestinians weren't trying to slaughter them.
The Zionists were just fighters who were done with being victimised. How bloody dare they.
Try living with someone who is in fear. Try being eight years old and seeing what the Germans did. I will never forget.
I don't suppose the Arabs who were shunted off THEIR land -their children slaughtered for throwing stones felt a bit annoyed. So what we are saying here is the Zionists who stole land slaughtered innocents are the good guys because they were shunted our of THEIR land in Europe and slaughtered.. yes makes sense doesn't it?
The Zionist are still land grabbing claiming it was given to them by god. A lot of Israeli citizens do not support this land grabbing and leaving Arabs homeless.
It is NOT the arabs fault what happened to the Jews (let us not forget them many millions of non jews) so why treat them so badly.
fundamentalist on both sides would best be eradicated! if the ordinary people want peace.
make what illegal..you belong to a group that sees criticising the portuguese police as xenophobic...it isnt
Do you read my posta?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6559.msg513889#msg513889
Some Americans think that criticising Israel is antu-Semetic and that anyone doing so should be jailed for 20 years.
I don't suppose the Arabs who were shunted off THEIR land -their children slaughtered for throwing stones felt a bit annoyed. So what we are saying here is the Zionists who stole land slaughtered innocents are the good guys because they were shunted our of THEIR land in Europe and slaughtered.. yes makes sense doesn't it?
The Zionist are still land grabbing claiming it was given to them by god. A lot of Israeli citizens do not support this land grabbing and leaving Arabs homeless.
It is NOT the arabs fault what happened to the Jews (let us not forget them many millions of non jews) so why treat them so badly.
fundamentalist on both sides would best be eradicated! if the ordinary people want peace.
I do find it difficult to justify recreating a state in the 20th Century which last existed in the 4th Century.Do you deny Jews the right to a homeland?
Do you deny Jews the right to a homeland?
Do you deny Jews the right to a homeland?
It's such a unique case. The territiry had been occupied and ruled by others for such a long time In order for the Jews ro have a homeland the Palestinians lost theirs.Do you deny the Jews a homeland? Is there not a two state solution, and which side is firmly against it, because it denies the right of Israel to exist?
Do you deny the Jews a homeland? Is there not a two state solution, and which side is firmly against it, because it denies the right of Israel to exist?
I understand the Jews wanting a homeland, but being given territory they last ruled in the 4th Century is definitely unusual.I see you are unable to give a straight answer.
I see you are unable to give a straight answer.
It's such a complex subject there isn't a simple answer. I can understand the Jews wanting a homeland. I find rheir right to the homeland they were given to be questionable. It was occupied by others and had been for around 2,000 years. That's a very long time. At the momemt Israel occupies most of the Palestinian territories ullegally so they are denying the Palestinians a homeland.Well either Israel continues to exist and a two party solution is implemented (and it would seem most people on either side of the divide seem to prefer that) or the state of Israel is destroyed by those who support Hamas and Hezbollah. That seems to be the stark choice, and the latter seems to be the one that Jeremy supports based in the company he likes to keep and the causes he supports, unless I’m very much mistaken.
Well either Israel continues to exist and a two party solution is implemented (and it would seem most people on either side of the divide seem to prefer that) or the state of Israel is destroyed by those who support Hamas and Hezbollah. That seems to be the stark choice, and the latter seems to be the one that Jeremy supports based in the company he likes to keep and the causes he supports, unless I’m very much mistaken.
I don't know if Corbyn has expressed an opinion on the solution but;
Siding with the Palestinian struggle is not [ censored word]emitic
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/28/palestinian-struggle-jeremy-corbyn-zionism
You should read this article...it shows clear anti semitism in the labour party
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/05/jewish-concern-corbyn-israel-palestine-[ censored word]emitism-ihra
I don't know if Corbyn has expressed an opinion on the solution but;Says Palestinian Ahmad Samih Khalidi @)(++(*
Siding with the Palestinian struggle is not [ censored word]emitic
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/28/palestinian-struggle-jeremy-corbyn-zionism
I would say it's an atack by a Zionist on Corbyn, not the party.
If you read the, article you will see there ate attacks on jews from members of the labour party... Which is, [ censored word]emetic
Anit semetic, islamophobe new words invented to beat those, by those who wish to silence those who dare to question them when they demand we turn a blind eye to their crimes.
Israeli policy on moving 'forgeiners' onto land they stole now called the 'settlements' is immoral and illegal under international law... If the Zionist Jews were asked to leave london to let Romanians in to settle there- some one would have something to say anout that... hmm let me see , Oh Yes, rascist- NAZIs -[ censored word]emetic blah blah blah.
I think you need to do a little more research... Try reading the Guardian article I quoted where at a Jewish meeting addressed bu Gordon Brown he was applauded when he raised such points... Not all Jews, agree with the illtreatment of the Palestinians... You are woefully ill informed imo and are just following the hard left's anti Semitic propaganda
“Anyone remember the good old days when the opposition opposed the government, not themselves?”
@)(++(*
Party loyalty is finished in both major parties it seems, which makes our 'first past the post' system obsolete in my opinion.The future is all about coalitions. Really looking forward to a Tory - Brexit Party - DUP coalition. Not.
Party loyalty is finished in both major parties it seems, which makes our 'first past the post' system obsolete in my opinion.
Who just loves Jeremy’s idea of free fast fibre optic broadband for all via a state controlled organisation??
That's tellin' 'em!... https://news.sky.com/video/i-call-him-buffoon-voter-unhappy-with-pm-11871833 (https://news.sky.com/video/i-call-him-buffoon-voter-unhappy-with-pm-11871833)She echoes almost precisely my views.
Oh Jeremy Corbyn!! Didn’t he do well against Andrew Neil on the telly last night? @)(++(*
Bye Jeremy.
The former Labour home secretary, Alan Johnson, told ITV: “The Corbynistas will make an argument that victory is a bourgeois concept and the only goal for true socialists is glorious bloody defeat and now we just had another one of them . . . but it’s Corbyn. We knew that in parliament. We knew he was incapable of leading. We knew he was worse than useless.”
Bye Jeremy.
The former Labour home secretary, Alan Johnson, told ITV: “The Corbynistas will make an argument that victory is a bourgeois concept and the only goal for true socialists is glorious bloody defeat and now we just had another one of them . . . but it’s Corbyn. We knew that in parliament. We knew he was incapable of leading. We knew he was worse than useless.”
Wow. What a night. Beyond anything I dreamed of. I can still hardly believe what has happened. I shall now try to work up a bit of sympathy for Corbyn. Pillock.
He misread what the voters wanted and has paid the price.
Not only him,listening to an interview with an elector in Bolsover where Skinner lost out,the voter and he was not alone according to the interviewee said that they weren't listened to after the referendum,its pay back or words to that effect.
Quite right. The electorate shouldn't be ignored.
Unless you are the Scottish electorate of course!
The Scottish Electorate is just a part of the Electorate of the United Kingdom. As such, the result of the Brexit referendum is as binding on them as it is on anyone else.
Funny they didn't mention he is useless a bit sooner.Oh but many members of the PLP have done and were all booted out or forced to leave for their troubles .
Indeed!I believe Boris will preside over the break up of the Union, his lasting legacy.
However, the desire of the Scottish electorate to remain in the EU but having to leave because Scotland is part of the UK, only increases the desire to leave the UK.
So, it's good.
I believe Boris will preside over the break up of the Union, his lasting legacy.
He seems to be doing his very best to ensure he does.
There's no evidence imo showing that a majority of the Scottish people want independance from the UK. The SNP did well in the election, but only 45% of the electorate voted for them.
Do you believe that the result of the election in Scotland which now means there are six Conservative MPs, four LD MPs, one Labour MP and 48 SNP MPs gives no indication of the wishes of the Scottish electorate?
It doesn't tell us that they want independance.
Really?
What do "they" want ?
Really?
What do "they" want ?
I don't know and neither do you. You're assuming that the Scottish people want to go it alone, but where's the evidence?
I believe Boris will preside over the break up of the Union, his lasting legacy.
To return to the thread topic, Jeremy Corbyn will not become PM. In my opinion the Labour Party, along with many others, failed to understand that Brexit would be the most important issue in the Election.Jeremy was given several opportunities to improve his chances of becoming PM and fluffed every one of them (thank god). He’s not terribly bright, I’m afraid, unlike Bozzer and Dom Cumm.
People have been told they got it wrong in the referendum, they have been told they had changed their minds, they have been told that it would be democratic to have another vote. The reply is loud and clear; they voted for the man who said he would deliver Brexit and rejected those who refused to listen.
Jeremy was given several opportunities to improve his chances of becoming PM and fluffed every one of them (thank god). He’s not terribly bright, I’m afraid, unlike Bozzer and Dom Cumm.
All Boris Johnson did was pledge to abide by the result of the Brexit referendum. A simple but winning promise. All those who demonstrated by word or deed that they didn't care about democracy were quite rightly punished.How come Jeremy wasn’t able to figure that one out then?
How come Jeremy wasn’t able to figure that one out then?
How do I know? He wasn't the only one to be fair. That Lib Dem Leader woman made a complete fool of herself, as did quite a few others. The 'experts' on politics on the TV were gobsmacked by the exit polls.The Lib Dems did at least have a very clear policy on Brexit. Revoke Article 50. Labour’s policy on the other hand was farcical. Like I said, Jeremy = not very bright IMO. Anyway, he’s yesterday’s man as is John McDonnell, good riddance to the pair of them.
Following discussions with my friends* on the Madeleine McCann forum I thought it would be interesting to continue the discussion here. Anyone with an ounce of sense knows that pigs will sprout wings and fly before Corbyn gets his hands on the keys of Number 10, but putting that to one side - what do we think of his views, his ability to lead the Labour Party and the country, his beard and dress sense, etc?
* (friends in this instance is used in the same way as Corbyn claimed he used the word to describe the terrorist sympathisers he shared a platform with, ie: a bunch of people whose views I vehemently oppose but it's always good to talk!)
463
You don't consider the election result as evidence that many Scottish people seek independence?
Can you suggest another reason why so many Scots voted for the SNP, other than the desire for independence..
You really have no idea of how "scunnered" folk here are with Westminster politics!
Just within our family group several who voted no last time, will now vote yes and that is because of Brexit!
Many voted no last time because we would be out of the EU.
Well now we are out , not by our choice!
I know why my family and friends and I vote SNP.
I'm unsure whether there would be a majority vote for independence next year but I do firmly believe that the desire for independence will increase and Boris is doing his very best to ensure it does!
It seems pretty obvious to me that many people in Scotland want independence (and to stay in the EU), which is why they voted SNP.
However, I suspect that some voted SNP because they felt the alternatives were awful (just my opinion). At least Nicola Sturgeon is a good leader (again my opinion)!
Lol Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnel, does anyone seriously think the great British public would vote in this pair of Marxist numpties? @)(++(*
&^&*%
Lol Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnel, does anyone seriously think the great British public would vote in this pair of Marxist numpties? @)(++(*
&^&*%
Well, many of the "Great British Public" did vote for them.
Labour's overall result may have been disastrous, but they still got over 200 seats. When you think about it, that's a lot of people voting Labour.
Both Corbyn and McDonnell also won their own seats with rather large majorities.
Well, many of the "Great British Public" did vote for them.
Labour's overall result may have been disastrous, but they still got over 200 seats. When you think about it, that's a lot of people voting Labour.
Both Corbyn and McDonnell also won their own seats with rather large majorities.
Yes of course but not in enough numbers to get the pair in 10/11 Downing Street.A London based Remainer? How is he going to win back the northern working class Brexit voters?
Keir Starmer is Lab's best hope going forward.
A London based Remainer? How is he going to win back the northern working class Brexit voters?
I agree with Holly re Keir Starmer.Quite a few ifs and buts there.
Once Brexit is done (and although I don't have much faith in Boris, I do believe he will get Brexit done), the northern working class people will be happier (IMO), at least for a while. If, after that while, they see that Brexit is not making their lives easier, or solving their problems , which (again, just my opinion), it may well not, then they may well revert to being Labour supporters, and by that time, they won't mind that Starmer is a remainer. Why should they, as we will have left the EU by then.
I hope this makes some sense------if it doesn't, it's because I've just had some wine with dinner!!!!!
Quite a few ifs and buts there.
I agree with Holly re Keir Starmer.
Once Brexit is done (and although I don't have much faith in Boris, I do believe he will get Brexit done), the northern working class people will be happier (IMO), at least for a while. If, after that while, they see that Brexit is not making their lives easier, or solving their problems , which (again, just my opinion), it may well not, then they may well revert to being Labour supporters, and by that time, they won't mind that Starmer is a remainer. Why should they, as we will have left the EU by then.
I hope this makes some sense------if it doesn't, it's because I've just had some wine with dinner!!!!!
Yep that's how I see it; the outcome of Brexit is an unknown.He’s the best of a very bad bunch, but I really don’t think he’s got kerb appeal, and certainly seems to have had a charisma bypass, IMO.
I must admit I quite 8**8:/: Keir. Even his name is 8(>((. Apparently his parents named him after James Keir Hardie.
It wasn't just the 'Northern working class' who voted Brexit. Many academics, and the professional class also voted Brexit. ALSO land owners and fishermen...It’s an undeniable (if unpalatable to some) fact that the more educated and the more middle class the voter the more likely they were to have voted Remain.
It’s an undeniable (if unpalatable to some) fact that the more educated and the more middle class the voter the more likely they were to have voted Remain.
It is not undeniable at all. You have no actual evidence which claims to make your statements true- no matter how you try.There is actual evidence but is there any point me supplying it? You will no doubt refuse to accept it if I do.
Some arrogant people actually believe themselves to be better than others with nothing to evidence this, they rant on and on about what they think making it sound as if they know. (&^&
A London based Remainer? How is he going to win back the northern working class Brexit voters?
Indeed. Ian Lavery would be my choice. An ex miner who didn’t vote for a second referendum, knows the North and its voters very well but is sophisticated enough to appeal to Labour’s newly-acquired southern voters.How has his sophistication manifested itself?
How has his sophistication manifested itself?Dropped "g"s, "t"s and a Geordie accent?
Dropped "g"s, "t"s and a Geordie accent?I know he’s a union man and wrote the failed Labour election manifesto, but I’m not entirely sure what other areas of sophistication may appeal to the student population of Canterbury. Whoever Labour elect it won’t make much difference anyway, they are done for IMO.
I know he’s a union man and wrote the failed Labour election manifesto, but I’m not entirely sure what other areas of sophistication may appeal to the student population of Canterbury. Whoever Labour elect it won’t make much difference anyway, they are done for IMO.
Failed Labour manifesto? You don’t really believe that, do you ?It’s not a question of belief, it’s a question of fact. Was Brexit not mentioned in the Labour manifesto? And don’t give me media bias, you don’t think the media laid into Boris with at least equal ferocity? Just like the Labour leadership, you are completely in denial and blind to the faults at the very heart of the party and only want to blame external factors. It’s pathetic and it will ensure that Labour learns nothing from its mistakes and is doomed to repeat them over and over again.
So you don’t think that media bias or Labour’s stand on Brexit had anything to do with it ?
It’s not a question of belief, it’s a question of fact. Was Brexit not mentioned in the Labour manifesto? And don’t give me media bias, you don’t think the media laid into Boris with at least equal ferocity? Just like the Labour leadership, you are completely in denial and blind to the faults at the very heart of the party and only want to blame external factors. It’s pathetic and it will ensure that Labour learns nothing from its mistakes and is doomed to repeat them over and over again.
It really is easier to fool someone than to convince them that they’ve been fooled.As you so have so amply demonstrated.
As you so have so amply demonstrated.
I know he’s a union man and wrote the failed Labour election manifesto, but I’m not entirely sure what other areas of sophistication may appeal to the student population of Canterbury. Whoever Labour elect it won’t make much difference anyway, they are done for IMO.
I don't think they're "done for". I remember after the 1992 election, when Neil Kinnock lost, people were going around saying Labour was "unelectable". Then Tony Blair won in 1997. It's not good at the moment though, I have to agree---------but I think they'll be back.
It very much depends on Boris and whether he fulfills his promises to The North. Labour is dead in the water though for the time being thanks to Corbyn and his racist cronies.
Do you seriously believe that the Labour members who voted in that waste of space Corbyn and going to turn around and vote in a centrist moderate leader like Blair anytime soon? No, they will vote in another not very bright Corbynista and they will lose the next election too, which means 10 years more of Tories. I was right about Corbyn and I’m pretty sure I’ll be proven right about this, unless a miracle happens and Labour party membership received a sudden and massive influx of sane individuals plus a candidate with the broad appeal of a 1997 Tony Blair. They’d better hurry up though!
I don't think they're "done for". I remember after the 1992 election, when Neil Kinnock lost, people were going around saying Labour was "unelectable". Then Tony Blair won in 1997. It's not good at the moment though, I have to agree---------but I think they'll be back.
Do you seriously believe that the Labour members who voted in that waste of space Corbyn and going to turn around and vote in a centrist moderate leader like Blair anytime soon? No, they will vote in another not very bright Corbynista and they will lose the next election too, which means 10 years more of Tories. I was right about Corbyn and I’m pretty sure I’ll be proven right about this, unless a miracle happens and Labour party membership received a sudden and massive influx of sane individuals plus a candidate with the broad appeal of a 1997 Tony Blair. They’d better hurry up though!
You are right of course. Corbyn actually believes he did well getting his message out there. They just have to try a bit harder next time.yeah, it was all somebody else’s fault that Labour didn’t win the election, those beastly Jews probably had a lot to do with it!
yeah, it was all somebody else’s fault that Labour didn’t win the election, those beastly Jews probably had a lot to do with it!
Do you seriously believe that the Labour members who voted in that waste of space Corbyn and going to turn around and vote in a centrist moderate leader like Blair anytime soon? No, they will vote in another not very bright Corbynista and they will lose the next election too, which means 10 years more of Tories. I was right about Corbyn and I’m pretty sure I’ll be proven right about this, unless a miracle happens and Labour party membership received a sudden and massive influx of sane individuals plus a candidate with the broad appeal of a 1997 Tony Blair. They’d better hurry up though!
I agree they have to go: Corbyn and the "Corbynistas ", but it is certainly not impossible for a more moderate and sensible leader to emerge. It might not be soon, but , IMO, it will happen.
And, who knows what could happen when Boris' "honeymoon period" is over, which will happen at some time. He will release us from the EU, but that doesn't necessarily mean a happy ending. A good number of people will (IMO) come to realise that they are no better off outside the EU, that jobs will disappear, immigrants will still arrive, goods may become more expensive, etc.
I will be watching with interest------and I am prepared to admit having been unduly influenced by my Remoaner husband!!!
Never marry a moaner, especially not a remoaner.
yeah, it was all somebody else’s fault that Labour didn’t win the election, those beastly Jews probably had a lot to do with it!
Strange how no one seems the least bit fussed with ant-semitism now it’s served it’s purpose. Not a word from Johnson or Patel condemning the anti-Semitic graffiti in London...Corbyn, of course, did. Anti-semitism has, of course, always been more prevalent on the right as has been ably demonstrated by the arrest in New York of a suspected Nazi sympathiser.Don’tt look over here, look over there. To New York in fact. LOL. Your delusion and denial mirrors exactly the behaviour of your idol.
The terrible irony of the smear campaign against Corbyn and Labour is real Jewish people are in danger of real anti-semitic attacks but not from the left but the right who have wholeheartedly embraced Johnson and his right-wing cabal, and that is being terrifyingly ignored.
Don’tt look over here, look over there. To New York in fact. LOL. Your delusion and denial mirrors exactly the behaviour of your idol.
Then you’ll be able to give me comparable scenarios of anti-Semitic crimes perpetrated by individuals on the left of politics or indeed anything anti-Semitic uttered by Corbyn ?JC considers members of Hezbollah and Hamas (organisations that actively seek the complete annihilation of Israel) as his friends and has Jews throughout Britain and including in his own party fearful for their safety because if his past affiliations and complacency over the issue of [ censored word]emitism in the Labour party. Your man is yesterday’s news, his allotment waits, bette get over it and move on, your continued propagandization of the loser is nauseating to me.
I’ll tell you what I’ll detail some of the actions Corbyn has taken to defend Jewish people and you can debunk them.
Corbyn organised the Apr. 1977 defence of Jewish populated Wood Green from a Neo-Nazi march
EDM3933 7 Nov. 1990: Corbyn signs motion condemning the rise of [ censored word]emitism
EDM634, 11 Apr. 2000: Jeremy Corbyn signs motion condemning David Irving for being a Holocaust Denier
EDM1124, 6 Nov. 2000: Jeremy Corbyn praised the ‘British Schindler’, Bill Barazetti, for his WW2 kindertransport
EDM742, 28 Jan. 2002: Jeremy Corbyn signs motion praising football clubs for commemorating Holocaust Day
EDM1233 30 Apr. 2002: Corbyn was a primary sponsor on a motion condemning [ censored word]emitism
11 May 2002: Jeremy led a clean up of Finsbury Park Synagogue after an anti-Semitic attack
EDM1691, 23 July 2002: Corbyn condemned attacks on a synagogue in Swansea
EDM123 26 Nov. 2003: Corbyn officially condemns attacks on 2 Istanbul synagogues
EDM298, 16 Dec. 2003: Jeremy Corbyn signs motion commemorating International Holocaust Day
2004: Jeremy condemned news that anti-Semitic hate crimes had risen for yet another year
EDM461, 21 Jan. 2004: Jeremy Corbyn condemned the French government’s moves to ban the Jewish Kippa in French Schools
EDM717, 26 Feb. 2004: Jeremy signed a motion praising Simon Wiesenthal for bringing Nazi perpetrators of the Holocaust to justice
EDM1613, 8 Sept. 2004: Corbyn co-sponsored a bill expressing fears for the future of the United Synagogue Pension Scheme
EDM1699, 11 Oct. 2004: Jeremy Corbyn condemned arbitrary attacks on civilians in Israel and Palestine
EDM482, 12 Jan. 2005: Jeremy Corbyn signs a motion commemorating International Holocaust Day
EDM343, 16 June 2005: Jeremy condemned the desecration of a Jewish cemetery in east London
EDM1343, 11 Jan. 2006: Jeremy Corbyn signs a motion commemorating International Holocaust Day
EDM1774, 8 Mar. 2006: Jeremy Corbyn led condemnations of an Iranian Magazine soliciting cartoons about the Holocaust
EDM1267, 16 Apr. 2006: Jeremy Corbyn condemned Bryan Ferry for anti-Semitic remarks
EDM2414, 26 June 2006: Jeremy Corbyn praised British war veterans for their efforts to combat the Holocaust
EDM2705, 10 Oct. 2006: Jeremy signed a motion marking the 70th anniversary of Cable Street
EDM271, 14 Nov. 2007: Jeremy co-sponsored a motion lamenting the poverty and social exclusion East London Jews suffered
EDM153, 12 May 2008: Corbyn praised the efforts of the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto during the uprising of 1944
EDM2350, 27 Oct 2008: Jeremy Corbyn signs a motion marking the 70th anniversary of the horrors of the holocaust
EDM173, 8 Dec. 2008: Jeremy condemned the Press Complaints Commission for refusing to sanction The Times for [ censored word]emitism
EDM461, 14 Jan. 2009: Jeremy Corbyn condemned a wave of recent anti-Semitic incidents targeted
EDM605, 27 Jan. 2009: Corbyn signed John Mann’s motion condemning [ censored word]emitism on university campuses
EDM917 26 Feb. 2009: Jeremy signs a motion condemning [ censored word]emitism on the internet
EDM1175 24 Mar. 2009: Corbyn signs a motion praising the heroism of British Jews during Holocaust
EDM337, 2 Dec. 2009: Jeremy Condemned Iran’s treatment of Jewish minorities in Iran
EDM850 9 Feb. 2010: Jeremy joins in calls for Facebook to do more to fight [ censored word]emitism
EDM891: 22 Feb 2010: Corbyn co-sponsors a motion calling for Yemen’s Jews to be given refugee status to the UK
EDM908 27 Oct. 2010: Corbyn praises work of late Israeli PM in his pursuit of a 2 state solution
EDM1360, 27 Jan. 2011: Corbyn co-sponsored a motion praising the ‘never again for anyone initiative’
EDM1527, 3 Mar. 2011: Corbyn backed Ian Paisley’s motion condemning the anti-Semitic remarks of Dior’s lead fashion designer
EDM2870, 14 Mar. 2012: Jeremy Corbyn condemned the sale of Nazi memorabilia at an auction in Bristol
EDM2866, 14 Mar 2012: Jeremy Corbyn co-sponsored a bill condemning the rise of [ censored word]emitism in Lithuania
EDM2899, 20 Mar. 2012, Jeremy Corbyn condemned a terrorist attack on a Jewish school in Toulouse
EDM168, 12 June 2012, Jeremy co-sponsored a motion condemning anti-Semitic attacks during EURO 2012 in Poland
EDM 195 13 June 2012: Jeremy attacks BBC for cutting Jewish programmes from Its schedule
EDM 1133 1 Mar 2013: Corbyn joins a chorus of calls condemning [ censored word]emitism In sport
1 Oct. 2013: Corbyn was one of the few MPs who defended Ralph Miliband from Daily Mail [ censored word]emitism
EDM 932 9 Jan 2014: Jeremy praises Holocaust Memorial’s work on [ censored word]emitism education
EDM 165 22 June 2015: Jeremy condemns a Neo-Nazi rally planned for a Jewish area of London
Sat 4 July 2015: Jeremy co-planned a counter-fascist demo in defence of Jewish residents at Golders Green. The march was re-routed
18 Nov. 2015, Corbyn used one of his first PMQs to challenge Cameron to do more on [ censored word]emiUsm
9 Oct 2016: Corbyn, close to tears, leads commemoration of the Battle of Cable Street
3 Dec. 2016: Corbyn visits Terezin Concentration Camp to commemorate Holocaust victims
In 2017-19 Jeremy introduced 20 new measures to combat [ censored word]emitism in the Labour Party
Your turn ?
JC considers members of Hezbollah and Hamas (organisations that actively seek the complete annihilation of Israel) as his friends and has Jews throughout Britain and including in his own party fearful for their safety because if his past affiliations and complacency over the issue of [ censored word]emitism in the Labour party. Your man is yesterday’s news, his allotment waits, bette get over it and move on, your continued propagandization of the loser is nauseating to me.
What would you consider Corbyn called factions he was trying to get to the negotiating table ?What was crude about my post and why should I answer ANY of the points made in your posts when you don’t bother doing so for mine? Check back, you ignored every point I made. I am seriously not interested in discussing this any further with you. Jeremy’s failures with regard [ censored word]emitism in the Labour Party are a matter of public record. It’s just one of the reasons why his was the worst election performance since Michael Foot. You can carry on being a Corbyn apologist for the rest of your life, it won’t change a thing. Ta ta!
I noticed, as usual, that you failed to address my points.
I don’t have time to fully answer your rather crude post atm but I’ll leave this here for you to chew on.
https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/smoke-without-fire-the-myth-of-a-labour-[ censored word]emitism-crisis/
What was crude about my post and why should I answer ANY of the points made in your posts when you don’t bother doing so for mine? Check back, you ignored every point I made. I am seriously not interested in discussing this any further with you. Jeremy’s failures with regard [ censored word]emitism in the Labour Party are a matter of public record. It’s just one of the reasons why his was the worst election performance since Michael Foot. You can carry on being a Corbyn apologist for the rest of your life, it won’t change a thing. Ta ta!
Of course you are not interested in discussing it any further. Why would you want to publicly defend a country who the U.N. has all but accused of war crimes ?No need, my moral compass is perfectly aligned. I do not defend Israel’s foreign policy, and you won’t find a single instance of me doing so. You’re comprehension skills are woefully lacking. What I have said, repeatedly, is that comparing Israeli actions to those of the Nazis is [ censored word]emitic. Even the Labour Party that you support officially agree that it is so why you persist with your disgraceful argument that it isn’t I really don’t know. If anyone needs a lesson in morality it sure as hell ain’t me.
https://www.un.org/unispal/document/un-independent-commission-of-inquiry-on-protests-in-gaza-presents-its-findings-press-release/
I will leave you to let you realign your moral compass....I think it needs it.
No need, my moral compass is perfectly aligned. I do not defend Israel’s foreign policy, and you won’t find a single instance of me doing so. You’re comprehension skills are woefully lacking. What I have said, repeatedly, is that comparing Israeli actions to those of the Nazis is [ censored word]emitic. Even the Labour Party that you support officially agree that it is so why you persist with your disgraceful argument that it isn’t I really don’t know. If anyone needs a lesson in morality it sure as hell ain’t me.
So you agree with the U.N. that Israel’s actions against the Palestinians could amount to war crimes ?It’s possible. I think all armies are guilty of them at some point, especially in a long, drawn out conflict. They must be investigated and suffer the consequences if found guilty, but I note you have completely dodged the issue. You attempted to completely misrepresent my views and attempted to smear me by claiming my morality was faulty simply because I took issue with you comparing Israelis to Nazis, something which is internationally regarded as [ censored word]emitic by many countries and organisations including the Labour Party. I think I am owed an apology, but I’m sure I will never get one from you.
It’s possible. I think all armies are guilty of them at some point, especially in a long, drawn out conflict. They must be investigated and suffer the consequences if found guilty, but I note you have completely dodged the issue. You attempted to completely misrepresent my views and attempted to smear me by claiming my morality was faulty simply because I took issue with you comparing Israelis to Nazis, something which is internationally regarded as [ censored word]emitic by many countries and organisations including the Labour Party. I think I am owed an apology, but I’m sure I will never get one from you.
You may dismiss Al Jazeera but it is a globally recognised news organization. So again I point you back to my original link, which none of the content so far you have attempted to rebut.It really is laughable that you are attempting to defend your position by quoting Al Jazeera at me, it would be a bit like me quoting the Daily Mail or the Telegraph back at you, in fact you’d probably scoff at a BBC report as Jezbollah’s supporters are convinced the Beeb were out to smear him at every opportunity. Stop trying to defend the indefensible. Even Labour has given up now, time for you to accept it and move on.
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/israel-nation-state-law-parallels-nazi-nuremberg-laws-180725084739536.html
It really is laughable that you are attempting to defend your position by quoting Al Jazeera at me, it would be a bit like me quoting the Daily Mail or the Telegraph back at you, in fact you’d probably scoff at a BBC report as Jezbollah’s supporters are convinced the Beeb were out to smear him at every opportunity. Stop trying to defend the indefensible. Even Labour has given up now, time for you to accept it and move on.
Jezbollah ? Is name calling really the best you have to offer by way of mature political debate ?You do realise that the article you’ve quoted from is an opinion piece written by some Palestinian author, don’t you? So, basically it’s one Palestinian’s opinion in the Arab news outlet Al Jazeera that the Israelis are like the Nazis and you think THAT’S worthy of rebutting??! The woman is clearly and obviously an [ censored word]emite as evidenced by her comparison and as confirmed by the IHRA’s guidelines on the subject, the same guidelines that Jezzbollah and his party finally signed up to, which means that if you asked them publicly to comment on it, they too would have to say the same, that her views are unacceptable. Why are you so utterly DETERMINED to defend [ censored word]emitism?
And yet again you refuse to rebut any of the points made in the Al Jazeera article posted. Come on Alfie, if the article is as worthy of contempt as you suggest then it should be simple for you to pull apart.
You do realise that the article you’ve quoted from is an opinion piece written by some Palestinian author, don’t you? So, basically it’s one Palestinian’s opinion in the Arab news outlet Al Jazeera that the Israelis are like the Nazis and you think THAT’S worthy of rebutting??! The woman is clearly and obviously an [ censored word]emite as evidenced by her comparison and as confirmed by the IHRA’s guidelines on the subject, the same guidelines that Jezzbollah and his party finally signed up to, which means that if you asked them publicly to comment on it, they too would have to say the same, that her views are unacceptable. Why are you so utterly DETERMINED to defend [ censored word]emitism?
Furthermore I have posted several articles on why referring to Israelis as like Nazis is unacceptable and [ censored word]emitic and you have ignored every single one of them. Why have you not rebutted any of those?
I believe the link you provided was an opinion piece too but it appears to have been deleted...no matter.Faithlilly, this entire discussion came about because I pointed out that comparing Israelis to Nazis was [ censored word]emitic, something which you vociferously disputed. Fortunately for you, your defence of those who make this [ censored word]emitic comparison has been deleted forever, so you can rest easy and pretend that you never expressed the view in the first place.
First let me be clear....I do not and have never compared Israelis to the Nazis....in fact there are many Israelis who despise the atrocities their own government perpetrate daily on the Palestinian people.
The Al-Jazeera piece points to laws brought in by the Israeli government and compares and contrasts those with the Nuremberg Race Laws brought in under the Nazis. The Amnesty International report linked below says broadly the same thing....is it also anti-Semitic ?
https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/middle-east-and-north-africa/israel-and-occupied-palestinian-territories/report-israel-and-occupied-palestinian-territories/.
‘DISCRIMINATION
Israel continued to pass legislation that discriminates against non-Jewish citizens, particularly Palestinians. The Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People, passed in July, described the Israeli state as being only for the Jewish people, confirming the status of the almost one fifth of the population who are Palestinian citizens of Israel as second-class citizens.’
Too often the accusation of anti-semitism is used to close down any criticism of Israeli actions towards the Palestinian people. This is not a conflict of equals, it is an occupation by a powerful military state, armed and supported by the West, against an impoverished, stateless and displaced people.
Faithlilly, this entire discussion came about because I pointed out that comparing Israelis to Nazis was [ censored word]emitic, something which you vociferously disputed. Fortunately for you, your defence of those who make this [ censored word]emitic comparison has been deleted forever, so you can rest easy and pretend that you never expressed the view in the first place.
I compared the Israeli state’s actions towards the Palestinian people to the Nazi treatment of the Jews...I did not compare Israelis (one fifth of who are Arabs ) to Nazis and it is grossly dishonest of you to imply that I did.She would not let it lie but she would split hairs to the nth degree. Don’t mention Israel and Nazis in the same breath if you don’t wish to be accused of [ censored word]emitism. You reckon it’s ok to do so, it is not. The end.
What is clear is that your slur against me of anti-semitism is unfounded and that my position is mirrored and strengthened by the report posted above by Amnesty International.
She would not let it lie but she would split hairs to the nth degree. Don’t mention Israel and Nazis in the same breath if you don’t wish to be accused of [ censored word]emitism. You reckon it’s ok to do so, it is not. The end.
There is an Israeli Arab living in my Hamlet. He is a really nice man. He has been here for years and years. He doesn't appear to have a problem with what he is. He earned a lot of money working in Paris.
Meanwhile my Jewish half brother went to Israel and decided that he didn't like it. He then went back to Britain and joined The Freemasons, what ever that means these days.
Why didn’t your half brother like Israel ?
I suspect that it might have looked too much like hard work and his mother didn't raise him with that idea in mind. Most Jewish mothers don't.
Reclaiming a desert is hardly easy. I would have loved it if only I'd had the courage. I joined The Navy instead and took to mending aeroplanes. The Royal Navy had no gender bias even that long ago.
Be careful Eleanor, your second sentence could be considered [ censored word]emitic.
Splitting hairs ? The Israeli people are, as I have pointed out, a fifth Arab so why would I compare the Israeli people to the Nazis ?
I have provided evidence that the Israeli government is acting in much the same way as the Nazis did during their rise to power, Amnesty International agree. That many Israeli Jews agree with me and not you is also testament to that truth. That you don’t is, unfortunately, testament to your bias.
The end ? You have tried to misrepresent my argument and now you attempt to shut down the debate when you see your position is untenable. Same old tactics, different subject.
Be careful Eleanor, your second sentence could be considered [ censored word]emitic.*%87
So you admit you compared Israel to the Nazis. According to the IHRA’s working definition of [ censored word]emitism which Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party eventually signed up to, one of the examples of anti semitism is as follows:
“ Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis”.
https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/working-definition-[ censored word]emitism
Therefore this proves that by the internationally accepted definition of [ censored word]emitism Faithlilly has expressed [ censored word]emitic views. Now, do you want to keep on doing this, because I am happy to keep on hammering this point home for as long as you like.
‘However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as [ censored word]emitic.’This thread is about your hero Jeremy Corbyn. He stood accused of failing to tackle anti-semitism in the Labour Party. He did at least finally agree to adopt the IHRA’s definition of [ censored word]emitism, which includes the part about comparing Israel to Nazis. Do you think when he signed up to this he had his fingers crossed?
If any government had brought in the kind of policies the Israeli government has I’d use the same comparison.
‘Its adoption of the concept of new [ censored word]emitism, specifically connecting some criticism of Israel with [ censored word]emitism, has generated controversy.[14][15] High-profile controversies took place in the United Kingdom in 2011 within the University and College Union[16][17] and within the Labour Party in 2018. The definition has been contested by scholars of [ censored word]emitism for conflating [ censored word]emitism with criticism of the Israeli government, obstructing campaigning for the rights of Palestinians and being so vague as to fail the test of any definition – to be definitive. These include Brian Klug,[18] David Feldman,[19] and Antony Lerman;[12] jurists including Hugh Tomlinson,[20] Stephen Sedley,[21] Geoffrey Bindman,[22] and Geoffrey Robertson;[23] and one of the original drafters Kenneth S. Stern has opposed the misuse of the definition to suppress and limit free speech’
Btw how many countries have actually formally endorsed or adopted the IHRA definition of anti-semitism...17 I believe. The IHRA has 31 members.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Definition_of_[ censored word]emitism
This thread is about your hero Jeremy Corbyn. He stood accused of failing to tackle anti-semitism in the Labour Party. He did at least finally agree to adopt the IHRA’s definition of [ censored word]emitism, which includes the part about comparing Israel to Nazis. Do you think when he signed up to this he had his fingers crossed?
You do understand that the Nazis killed 6 million Jews and that by comparing Israel to the organisation that wanted their people wiped off the face of the planet that this is extraordinarily offensive? Perhaps you’re simply not sensitive enough to understand how offensive this is to Israelis whose relatives suffered at the hands of the Nazis, to see their national flag altered to show the star of David as a swastika, a flag which has been seen flying at rallies at which your hero has spoken incidentally.
Let’s not get sidetracked. Even one of the drafters of the IHRA definition of [ censored word]emitism has opposed the misuse of the definition to suppress criticism of Israel. Indeed scholars on [ censored word]emitism have also criticised the definition for conflating [ censored word]emitism with criticism of Israel.Did I say he held the flag aloft? No. Did I say criticism of Israel was [ censored word]emitic? No. It is abundantly clear what I am saying, I have said it over and over again, and everytime you erect a strawman against it. Here it is again. To compare Israel to the Nazis is [ censored word]emitic, as per the IHRA’s guidelines, the same ones that Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party eventually signed up to. Now, shall we keep on going?
As I have already said many Israelis whose relatives perished in the holocaust vehemently oppose their government’s actions towards the Palestinian people. The altered Star of David is of course offensive but that has nothing with me or Corbyn for that matter, it just more emotive rhetoric written to imply collective guilt. At rallies many flags are waved, some offensive to certain groups....that does not mean everyone attending the rally is collectively guilty. Now if Corbyn had held the flag aloft you may have a point....is that what you are saying ?
Good Heavens. What a hoot. How would that be? I have great admiration for what The Jews did with Israel. They didn't just deserve it. They earned it. While The Arabs in general sat on their backsides and complained about poverty.
I however, will never forget being subjected in school to a film of the liberation of The Death Camps. I was eight years old. I have never quite recovered. While Germany was not subjected to this for a very long time afterwards. By which time they had all reinvented themselves. Not my fault. It was my deluded Dad who wasn't a Nazi anyway Really?
With the size of The German Army who weren't Nazis you have to wonder why they didn't win. But that is another story, and I know that one as well.
I know what Britain tried to do to Israel.
Not quite holding the flag aloft, but not far off...
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/jeremy-corbyn/news/105689/jeremy-corbyn-fresh-anti-semitism
Did I say he held the flag aloft? No. Did I say criticism of Israel was [ censored word]emitic? No. It is abundantly clear what I am saying, I have said it over and over again, and everytime you erect a strawman against it. Here it is again. To compare Israel to the Nazis is [ censored word]emitic, as per the IHRA’s guidelines, the same ones that Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party eventually signed up to. Now, shall we keep on going?
So not even near the offensive banners.Yes, very near the offensive banners. If fact there only seemed to be a couple dozen marching, looking at those pictures, were you one of them? If not, why not?
‘Paul Iganski states that parallels between Israeli policy and those of the Nazis are "arguably not intrinsically [ censored word]emitic", and that the context in which they are made is critical’
https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/arts-and-social-sciences/about-us/people/paul-iganski
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Definition_of_[ censored word]emitism
‘Paul Iganski states that parallels between Israeli policy and those of the Nazis are "arguably not intrinsically [ censored word]emitic", and that the context in which they are made is critical’Hmm...
https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/arts-and-social-sciences/about-us/people/paul-iganski
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Definition_of_[ censored word]emitism
Hmm...
“It may well be that arguments about whether Nazi comparisons are [ censored word]emitic can seem sterile and repetitive, but to abandon that discussion as if it simply doesn't matter is perverse. It's tantamount to an admission that the term "[ censored word]emitism" has been rendered useless. In fact, Iganski and Sweiry don't abandon the term at all. Instead, to support their argument, they urge on all and sundry the adoption of the so-called "Working Definition of [ censored word]emitism" produced by the former European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC), now recast as the Federal Rights Agency (FRA). I write "so-called" because the definition is rapidly becoming the new orthodoxy”.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/jul/24/israel-nazi-analogies-ban
Perhaps you should not over-rely on snippets taken out of context from Wikipedia and read around a bit, as his views are a little more nuanced than you are attempting to make out.
This snippet from your article particularly interested me.And your point is?
‘".The authors write: "although the playing of the Nazi card is not always [ censored word]emitic, it unquestionably always harms" ( the author of the article disputes Iganski and Sweiry’s use of the word harm )
And your point is?
My Iganski quote ‘ parallels between Israeli policy and those of the Nazis are arguably not intrinsically [ censored word]emitic ‘You did read that he fully endorsed the Working Definition of [ censored word]emitism, the one signed up to by Jeremy Corbyn, the one which states that it is anti semitic to make the comparison didn’t you? In any case so what? One man, one viewpoint, versus numerous countries and organisations including the Labour Party that agree: comparing Israel with Nazis = [ censored word]emitic. I believe Iganski thinks those who do so should face criminal charges, so...
Iganski quote from your link ‘although the playing of the Nazi card is not always [ censored word]emitic’.
See my point now ?
Saddiq Khan in today’s Times, speaking sense, IMO.
Should Corbyn have accepted more of the blame? “What Jeremy and those around him should have the humility to recognise is [they] let Corbyn be Corbyn, and we got pasted,” he says.
Khan believes Labour needs deeper change than at the top. “It’s not just about changing the lead singer, it’s the whole band,” he says. “The music was wrong.”
He reels off reasons Labour lost. “I probably knocked on more doors than any candidate, and people didn’t have confidence in the party and our values,” he says. “They thought we were making promises just to win votes. And they thought we were a racist party because of our failure to tackle anti-semitism.”
It is the last part that pains Khan most. A Muslim, his first act as mayor was to attend a Holocaust memorial.
“We’re Labour, a party that’s about anti-racism,” he says. “For the leadership not to understand the impact of us being seen to condone anti-semitism is heartbreaking. We’ve demonstrated a breathtaking lack of emotional intelligence — or humanity.”
He has Jewish friends who did not vote for Labour because they felt it was racist. “And you know what? If a dog barks, and a duck quacks . . .” He tails off and does not finish the analogy, but adds: “It’s a disqualification to be Labour leader if you don’t understand it and don’t have a clear plan to address it.”
Does that mean throwing people out? “You’ve got to. If someone takes us to court, so be it. The ease with which Alastair Campbell was chucked out for talking about voting for another party, and yet you have anti-semites still in, beggars belief.”
He is tired of the “what-aboutery” deployed to defend Labour. “Sure, the Tories may be Islamophobic,” he says. “That doesn’t concern me. The standards I expect from Labour are higher than other parties.”
He points to the case of the former Labour mayor, Ken Livingstone. “He said things that were clearly anti-semitic,” Khan says. “He remained a Labour member for two years until he quit. He wasn’t kicked out.”
Unless anti-semitism and racism are dealt with at their roots, they become “normalised”, he adds. “It is toxic. I met decent people who said, ‘It’s a bit smelly, this anti-semitism stuff,’ and they didn’t vote for us.”
So a racist culture encouraged by the Corbyn leadership contributed to Labour losing the election it’s claimed. Although I have yet to see one racist remark attributed to Corbyn it is common knowledge that Johnson himself has used racist language and Baroness Warsi has called her own party institutionally Islamophobic. During the election campaign there was even calls for three Conservative MPs to be investigated for anti-Semitic statements....at least two of the three are still MPs and have faced no sanctions....so why do you think that racism claims played a part in the downfall of Labour but saw an increase in votes for the Conservatives ?Like Khan says
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/07/tories-investigate-three-candidates-over-alleged-[ censored word]emitism
And on the topic of [ censored word]emitism, what do you think about the claims against Bernie Sanders ?
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/bernie-sanders-campaign-has-an-anti-semitism-problem
Oooo I'm currently in bed with Keir Starmer! He's on AM show and I'm watching in bed!Ooh matron, he can slip up my back alley any time. 8**8:/:
Ooh matron, he can slip up my back alley any time. 8**8:/:
Yes he's quite delectable, electable too!No, I was only kidding, just attempting to connect with you by talking your language. I don’t really fancy him, but I agree that out of a bad bunch he is probably the most presentable. Zero charisma IMO though.
Like Khan says
“He is tired of the “what-aboutery” deployed to defend Labour. “Sure, the Tories may be Islamophobic,” he says. “That doesn’t concern me. The standards I expect from Labour are higher than other parties.”
He points to the case of the former Labour mayor, Ken Livingstone. “He said things that were clearly anti-semitic,” Khan says. “He remained a Labour member for two years until he quit. He wasn’t kicked out.”
Unless anti-semitism and racism are dealt with at their roots, they become “normalised”, he adds. “It is toxic. I met decent people who said, ‘It’s a bit smelly, this anti-semitism stuff,’ and they didn’t vote for us.”
I have no views on Bernie Sanders as I know very little about the man or the views he holds, and this thread is about Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party, and their failure to provide effective opposition to a Tory government, one that we will have to put up with for at least another 5 years, probably 10. Thanks Jeremy andd all his devoted supporters (you included) - you need to own this, not be cry babies blaming everyone else.
Then let me fill you in on Sanders. He is a Jewish democrat who is being accused by the right-wing Israel lobby of being anti-Semitic because of his stance on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Of course the smears are ridiculous, and nonsensical, but yet again we are seeing anti-semitism being weaponised to stop a left wing candidate being elected, as it has with Corbyn and Miliband ( also Jewish ) before him.You do know that Murdoch and his media organisation has been accused of [ censored word]emitism too don’t you? What do you think Siddiq’s game is then? Is he a bare-faced liar in the pay of the Jews then?
As I have already said it would be ridiculous in a party of half a million members to claim that there is no [ censored word]emitism, or racism of any kind, we know the Conservatives have grave problems in this area , and we know too that both parties have questions to answer about their structures to deal with such incidences but let us be in no doubt that while Johnson was given an almost free pass on this issue Corbyn was held to a greater standard and you’d have to be absolutely stupid to suppose that, if [ censored word]emitism was the important issue in the election Khan claims it was, that that didn’t amount to an unacceptable bias by both the print and news media. It is hardly a coincidence that the only Labour government who has achieved power in the last 40 years has been backed by Murdoch.
You do know that Murdoch and his media organisation has been accused of [ censored word]emitism too don’t you? What do you think Siddiq’s game is then? Is he a bare-faced liar in the pay of the Jews then?
A very interesting interview as a whole but the part about Corbyn and [ censored word]emitism is especially pertinent in the context of this discussion.
https://youtu.be/-n5YiCRIujo
As is this article from the Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/18/the-rights-accusations-of-[ censored word]emitism-against-sanders-are-cynical-and-dangerous
A very interesting interview as a whole but the part about Corbyn and [ censored word]emitism is especially pertinent in the context of this discussion.Infamy, infamy, they’ve all got it infamy!! Nothing is our fault, we are pure as the driven snow! We are holier than thou in every respect.! There is no [ censored word]emitism in the Labour Party and if we want to say that Israeli government is like the Nazi Party then we should be allowed say it, despite signing up to the IHRA’s code on [ censored word]emitism! The IHRA is a load of Jewish old cobblers anyway! It’s all a Zionist conspiracy funded by Murdoch to keep us angels out and the Devil in power forever! Long Live Palestine! Down with Israel, America and Britain! Etc etc etc, ad infinitum. Yes it’s all very helpful in sorting out the party and getting it to a position where it may once again be appealing to enough of the electorate to form a government.
https://youtu.be/-n5YiCRIujo
As is this article from the Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/18/the-rights-accusations-of-[ censored word]emitism-against-sanders-are-cynical-and-dangerous
So you wouldn’t have described Hitler and the Nazis as [ censored word]emites then? Just people who didn’t like Jews for religious/cultural reasons. I see. And do you think that Israel, with its 20% Arab population looks upon these people in the same way the Nazis looked upon the Jews and wishes to liquidate them in the same manner?
That is very true of that Guardian report. Politicians are using 'hate' words to discredit their opponents and they do not care who gets caught in the crossfire. there is no such thing as Islamophobia or anti semite. just a set of people who prefer not to live among another set of people for mainly religious/cultural reasons. is anyone anti Amish? anti Mormon? There is only a problem when that dislike becomes hampered by looking upon others as less than human and can be liquidated! There is a HUGE difference.
To call Bernie Sanders anti Semite is an absolute disgrace. I don't agree with all he says either on some issues. But I certainly stand by his right to say it.
And on that subject where was Khan during the London scene out side a mosque with a gang of angry men burning the British flag. Was he there on a huge platform calling his 'people' names?
It is those who claim to be very tolerant who are the most intolerant and get called out every time!
Infamy, infamy, they’ve all got it infamy!! Nothing is our fault, we are pure as the driven snow! We are holier than thou in every respect.! There is no [ censored word]emitism in the Labour Party and if we want to say that Israeli government is like the Nazi Party then we should be allowed say it, despite signing up to the IHRA’s code on [ censored word]emitism! The IHRA is a load of Jewish old cobblers anyway! It’s all a Zionist conspiracy to keep us angels out and the Devil in power forever! Long Live Palestine! Down with Israel, America and Britain! Etc etc etc, ad infinitum. Yes it’s all very helpful in sorting out the party and getting it to a position where it may once again be appealing to enough of the electorate to form a government.
You still haven’t explained that if [ censored word]emitism and racism as a whole is such an emotive issue for the electorate why the Conservatives, who have several MPs who were investigated for [ censored word]emitism and who one of their leading members have described as institutionally Islamophobic, were elected ?Uncritical and unswerving support of Palestine and terrorist organisations within Palestine that wish to see the complete annihilation of Israel is always going to be a hard sell, particularly to the Jewish community, either in the UK or thr US. Was it really Jezbollah’s number one priority on becoming PM? Maybe that’s why Boris seemed the better bet: more of a priority given to domestic issues than Middle Eastern ones.
And why have Bernie Sanders and Ed Miliband, both Jewish, been accused of [ censored word]emitism due to their support of the Palestinians?
Further why was Gerald Kaufman, Jewish himself, deemed [ censored word]emitic for accusing the IDF of acting like Nazis ?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/britains-oldest-mp-jewish-and-vociferously-anti-israel-dies-aged-86/
And do you really, truly think that Corbyn claiming that one of his first acts in government would be to give Palestine statehood has nothing to do with all of this ? Really ?
Uncritical and unswerving support of Palestine and terrorist organisations within Palestine that wish to see the complete annihilation of Israel is always going to be a hard sell, particularly to the Jewish community, either in the UK or thr US. Was it really Jezbollah’s number one priority on becoming PM? Maybe that’s why Boris seemed the better bet: more of a priority given to domestic issues than Middle Eastern ones.
Excellent article here, about the [ censored word]emitism of the far left and how it hurts Palestine
https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/18/corbyn-[ censored word]emitism-left-is-hurting-palestine/
"Anti-Zionism has become the most dangerous and effective form of anti-Semitism in our time, through its systematic delegitimization, defamation, and demonization of Israel. Although not a priori anti-Semitic, the calls to dismantle the Jewish state, whether they come from Muslims, the Left, or the radical Right, increasingly rely on an anti-Semitic stereotypization of classic themes, such as the manipulative 'Jewish lobby,' the Jewish/Zionist 'world conspiracy,' and Jewish/Israeli "warmongers".[107] Nevertheless, I believe that the more radical forms of anti-Zionism that have emerged with renewed force in recent years do display unmistakable analogies to European anti-Semitism immediately preceding the Holocaust.... For example, 'anti-Zionists' who insist on comparing Zionism and the Jews with Hitler and the Third Reich appear unmistakably to be de facto anti-Semites, even if they vehemently deny the fact! ... For if Zionists are 'Nazis' and if Sharon really is Hitler, then it becomes a moral obligation to wage war against Israel. ... Anti-Zionism is ... also the lowest common denominator and the bridge between the Left, the Right, and the militant Muslims; between the elites (including the media) and the masses; between the churches and the mosques; between an increasingly anti-American Europe and an endemically anti-Western Arab-Muslim Middle East; a point of convergence between conservatives and radicals and a connecting link between fathers and sons." - Prof of European and Jewish History Robert Wistrich
And you posted this why?Why not? It reinforces my point, same reason you post the guff you post.
Yes, interesting article especially these snippets.Oh dear, you missed this bit that followed directly after the bit you quoted:
‘Palestine has been brutalized by decades of occupation, and the suffering of Palestinians raises natural sympathy. Many left-wing Jews share this justified anger at Israel’s policies.’
And
‘The Labour Party Member of Parliament Rosena Allin-Khan, who worked as a medical doctor, visited some hospitals in Jerusalem and the West Bank in early 2019 and was shocked to see so many sick and dying children on their own, separated from their parents. One reason for this is the collapse of the Palestinian medical system under the pressure of Israeli sanctions and the extent to which it has become focused on dealing with trauma injuries, in response to urgent needs among Palestinian patients. Palestinian hospitals are unable to deal with sick children, so they are often transferred to hospitals in Israel. However, Israeli policy then leads to the separation of children and parents, as the government choose to issue 7,000 travel permits for children from Gaza in 2018 but less than 2,000 for accompanying parents.
However, Allin-Khan made the mistake of trying to do something about the problem. She lobbied the British Conservative Party foreign secretary and spoke to the Israeli deputy ambassador to the U.K. about increasing the number of parental visas. This should be seen as a sensible humanitarian response to a cruelty created by state policy’
Disgraceful.
You really ought to stop misinterpreting my sentences...number one priority v one of his first acts...mmmm.Why is recognising Palestine as a state one of the very first things that needs addressing by a newly elected British PM? Please explain.
Why not? It reinforces my point, same reason you post the guff you post.
It doesn’t reinforce your point. We were talking about [ censored word]emitism not anti-ZionismThe article I quoted makes the case that often they are the same thing. Jeremy is Anti-Zionist, is he not? I don’t think you could have read past the first word.
Why is recognising Palestine as a state one of the very first things that needs addressing by a newly elected British PM? Please explain.
I quoted Corbyn. You would have to ask him why this was a priority for him.Is “tropes” the mot du jour? Perhaps you can point to my uncritical love of Boris Johnson with a cite or two? In case you hadn’t noticed this thread is not about him however, so best you start a new one to discuss his MPs “tropes” in greater detail.
It’s curious...you seem to have a virulent hatred for Corbyn for what you see as his [ censored word]emitism yet accept with aplomb that Johnson has allowed at least three MPs to remain in his party even though they have posted [ censored word]emitic tropes...not only this but has used the same tropes himself in one of his book. Why is that ?
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/opinion/the-conservative-party-anti-semitism-crisis-nobody-talks-about/06/12/
Is “tropes” the mot du jour? Perhaps you can point to my uncritical love of Boris Johnson with a cite or two? In case you hadn’t noticed this thread is not about him however, so best you start a new one to discuss his MPs “tropes” in greater detail.
Meanwhile a Deliveroo driver is attacked and killed in a road rage incident in Corbyn’s constituency on Friday night and Corbyn uses it to score a political point about zero hours contracts. Just what is wrong with this man?
Incidentally, II don’t have virulent hatred for the man, I used to think he was a joke, now I just feel sorry for him. I wish him a long and happy retirement.
Where did I claim you ‘loved Johnson uncritically ‘ because I don’t think I did. However if not expelling Livingston from the Labour Party for voicing [ censored word]emitic comments makes Corbyn a ‘danger to Jewish people’ surely Johnson not expelling three MPs for also using [ censored word]emitic language must also make him a danger....yet not a word of censure from you.I have absolutely no problem with people or political parties criticising Israel’s government, just don’t bring the Nazis into it, and if you don’t want to look completely partisan and [ censored word]emitic then don’t only suck up to the side that is resolutely anti-Israel and anti-Jew for the entirety of your political career. I have nothing further to add, and consider any further comment from you to be bordering on stalking.
The only difference really is Corbyn’s condemnation of Israeli actions against the Palestinians and that’s the real rub for you, isn’t it ? Your abhorrence of [ censored word]emitism only manifests itself when it can be used to deflect criticism of Israeli government policy and actions. That ordinary Jewish people in the UK suffer real prejudice as a result of the current government, it would appear, is unimportant . Johnson’s established liking for [ censored word]emitic tropes for you is secondary to his support for Israel I imagine and belies your real motivation.
I have absolutely no problem with people or political parties criticising Israel’s government, just don’t bring the Nazis into it, and if you don’t want to look completely partisan and [ censored word]emitic then don’t only suck up to the side that is resolutely anti-Israel and anti-Jew for the entirety of your political career. I have nothing further to add, and consider any further comment from you to be bordering on stalking.
It seems that Faithlilly’s tip for the top Ian Lavery has a conviction for a breach of the peace, has complained of police brutality and says that as a result he has “absolutely no respect for the police”, not a great position to hold for a prospective prime minister. He also has a dodgy track record where his finances are concerned. Let’s hope Labour Party members have more sense than to elect him.
Lavery was targeted for his politics....and when he says he’s got no respect for the police who can really blame him after Hillsborough and Orgreave ? This is the same police who during the miners strike waved pay packets in striking miners faces and boasted about their overtime when miners were losing their homes and living hand to mouth.You think a candidate for PM with “no respect for the police” is a tenable position to hold. Get real. This guy is unelectable, and this is just one of the reasons. Mind you, he hasn’t put himself forward yet. Let’s hope he realises he would be another millstone round Labour’s neck.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/15/thirty-five-years-on-orgreave-campaigners-still-seek-answers
You think a candidate for PM with “no respect for the police” is a tenable position to hold. Get real. This guy is unelectable, and this is just one of the reasons. Mind you, he hasn’t put himself forward yet. Let’s hope he realises he would be another millstone round Labour’s neck.
I think it’s a platform from which he can make the police more accountable.Oh god she’s awful. I watched her in a tv debate and she was such a gobshite I was throwing cushions at the screen.
I also think Angela Rayner will be a fantastic deputed leader...now run along and see what dirt you can dig up on her
Oh god she’s awful. I watched her in a tv debate and she was such a gobshite I was throwing cushions at the screen.
TBF if being a gobshite ruled you out of being a political leader then Johnson wouldn’t be PM.TBF, an actual fridge would have won the election versus Corbyn’s Labour.
I see hiding in a fridge and from Andrew Neil isn’t enough humiliation for one leader or party and CO is now refusing to have their ministers interviewed on Newsnight as their new editor Lewis Goodall is ‘too left-wing’. @)(++(*
TBF, an actual fridge would have won the election versus Corbyn’s Labour.
I think it’s time to move on now Alfie and address the real danger to our country. Corbyn is, as you say, yesterday’s man so perhaps best to let go of that visceral hatred and focus on something more calming to you mental state.@)(++(* you are funny.
I see Ian Lavery has sensibly decided not to stand and has thrown his weight behind Wrong-Daily. I hope the Labour Party takes heed of Einstein’s definition of insanity and don’t elect Corbyn in a skirt as their next leader.
YAWN !It’s early to bed for you this evening, young lady.
A man of true integrity.An idealist, and one to whom no one is listening (apart from his fanclub).
https://www.facebook.com/stopthewarcoalition/videos/686089401795492/
An idealist, and one to whom no one is listening (apart from his fanclub).
Fan club? I haven’t used that insult since I was a teenager @)(++(*Have you been waiting all afternoon for me to respond? Bless you.
Have you been waiting all afternoon for me to respond? Bless you.
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/opinion/media-smear-cost-labour-the-election-mcdonnell-is-right-to-point-that-out/15/12/#.XhnnICs8RMw.facebookCry, cry, blame everyone and everything else for their defeat except themselves.
Whatever makes you think that ? It was you who answered my post.3 hours later. You replied within 6 minutes, having posted nothing else in the interim.
3 hours later. You replied within 6 minutes, having posted nothing else in the interim.
Why can't we have a looker like Justin Trudeau?
Who wants to look at a weasel and Michelin man?
No wonder Meg wants to relocate to Canada.
These people must know they are going to come under intense media scrutiny so why do they made so many school girl errors like this?
Rebecca Long Bailey, the Labour leadership candidate, made inaccurate statements about her legal career while standing as an MP.
On being unveiled as the Labour candidate for Salford and Eccles in 2014, she declared: “I have been working as a solicitor with the NHS in Manchester for the past 10 years.” However, Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) records reveal she qualified in November 2007.
When she spoke of her decade-long career, she had practised for 6½ years as a solicitor.
During the 2015 general election, Long Bailey also distributed leaflets stating: “I studied law and became a solicitor for the NHS to help defend our health service.” She added that she became a lawyer to “give something back”.
Yet she spent almost all of her career as a solicitor at Hill Dickinson, a commercial law firm, and was never employed by the NHS
Taking her queue from Boris ? Lying to his back teeth didn’t seem to hinder his quest for power.Don’t look over here, look over there.
The most hilariously audacious lie ? Telling the father of a sick child that there was no press present on a visit to a hospital...while the press were filming the incident.
Don’t look over here, look over there.
If all you want is someone who looks good then Trudeau is certainly your man.Especially when he's slapped on some black greasepaint... https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/47218511 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/47218511)
Or are you simply being a massive hypocrite?No I’m not being a massive hypocrite, I’m simply pointing out your pathetic and ceaseless whataboutery. Your behaviour mirrors that of your failed party heads and is one reason why they will keep on and on failing. Is that what you want?
No I’m not being a massive hypocrite, I’m simply pointing out your pathetic and ceaseless whataboutery. Your behaviour mirrors that of your failed party heads and is one reason why they will keep on and on failing. Is that what you want?
Yes you are a massive hypocrite as you seem to be hellbent on disregarding the background and behaviour of Johnson while picking mercilessly over Corbyn’s past...and no your post was not discussing Corbyn but Long-Bailey so your usual argument that ‘ we’re discussing Corbyn’ doesn’t hold water either.I take exception to being described as a massive hypocrite. My posting history has made my position on Boris quite clear over the months but because I will not be distracted into picking over HIS faults in your shameless attempt of whataboutery on the Corbyn thread you choose to have a personal dig at me.
BTW I have posted ( awaiting approval) a new topic on the subject of Johnson’s dishonesty. I look forward to you getting stuck in there too.
I take exception to being described as a massive hypocrite. My posting history has made my position on Boris quite clear over the months but because I will not be distracted into picking over HIS faults in your shameless attempt of whataboutery on the Corbyn thread you choose to have a personal dig at me.
Kindly do not insult my integrity again or I will cease any further debate with you - as I'm the only person on this forum you seem interested in engaging with that would bring your entertainment to an end.
You are the only one who is posting atm on this thread so, to be fair, I don’t have much choice....and if you cease further debate I’m sure I’ll lose no sleep over it ....but that will not stop me calling you a massive hypocrite. You changed the parameters of the debate by including Long-Bailey so you can’t baulk at me for reciprocating.Right, so you'd be cool with me going over to the Boris thread and saying "what about Long-Bailey's lies" then? Like you've done in reverse on here? No matter, you've just insulted my integrity again so you can do one, you massive xxxx
Right, so you'd be cool with me going over to the Boris thread and saying "what about Long-Bailey's lies" then? Like you've done in reverse on here? No matter, you've just insulted my integrity again so you can do one, you massive xxxx
RBL on Andrew Marr this morning:
“I wasn’t happy with the way our process was being run, I’ll be honest, I don’t think we were dealing with complaints quickly enough and I think that’s quite clear, I’ve been quite vocal about that,” she said. “I spoke to Jeremy about it, I spoke to the various members of the team, I spoke to various members of the NEC (national executive committee) about that.”
Asked if Mr Corbyn bore personal responsibility, she said: “He does and he’s apologised.
“I think any Labour politician that leads the Labour Party should apologise again for what has happened because it has been unacceptable.”
Well she’s changed her tune! Does that mean she’s downgraded Mr C from 10/10 to 9/10 now? What a massive hypocrite.
If all you want is someone who looks good then Trudeau is certainly your man.
It’s going to look really bad for Labour IMO if, out of a selection of 4 women and a man for the job of leader, they choose the man!
Alistair Campbell: OK. Another hypothetical. If he were to lose another election, is it possible for him (Corbyn) to stay on?
John McDonnell: I can't see... I think it is the same for my own personal position, I can't see so. What we'd do is as the tradition, which is have an election for a new leader. I'm still of the view now that whoever comes after Jeremy has got to be a woman. We've got to have a woman leader. If you look at the new youngsters that have come through, they are fantastic.
AC: I get that, on one level... but tell me why it has to be a woman if there might be men there that people could look at and say, “That is the next prime minister”?
JM: OK. On these equality issues you work on the basis that if there are two people that are roughly the same then actually what you need to do is discriminate in favour of those groups that have been discriminated against in the past.
AC: I think people get that for most jobs, but when you talk about leading the party or prime minister?
JM: I think we are in that situation now where we've got such a range of talented women in the shadow cabinet that it’s obvious it’s going to be a woman next time.
AC: So, it’s Emily Thornberry, Rebecca Long-Bailey...
JM: There is a whole range of women. Angela Rayner... There is a whole range of women and it's fantastic.
Well yes John, a whole “bunch” of fantastic women but none is likely to be the next Labour leader, despite Labour’s championing of equality and positive discrimination. If Keir wins, Labour will be the only major political party never to have had a female at the helm. How peculiar...
I agree, it’s just supremely ironic in my view that the supposedly most progressive party and champion of equal opps should itself always opt for the white male leader option.
Fair enough. However, my own feeling (for what it's worth) is that it doesn't matter whether the new leader is a man or a woman, so long as he or she is a much better leader than Corbyn.
If Labour doesn't get a female leader this time, I'm sure it will eventually.
I agree, it’s just supremely ironic in my view that the supposedly most progressive party and champion of equal opps should itself always opt for the white male leader option.
Historically Labour has had almost double the number of female MPs of the Conservatives. Further there wasn’t one female in the final selection for their leadership and Theresa May was only PM because there was no one in the end standing against her. BTW when was the last leader of the Conservative party from an ethnic minority?The Conservatives have had two female leaders, both of whom have been prime minister. Labour has never had a female leader and doesn’t look likely to this time despite four-fifths of the candidates running being female. Not only that, but the SNP, the DUP, the Liberals and the Greens have all had female leaders. The Tories have yet to elect a leader from an ethnic minority but both the Chancellor and the Home Secretary are,and it wouldn’t surprise me if they eventually beat Labour on that score as well. Also, this is the gayest government ever, with the highest percentage of LGBT members of parliament. As I say, it’s all rather ironic.
The Conservatives have had two female leaders, both of whom have been prime minister. Labour has never had a female leader and doesn’t look likely to this time despite four-fifths of the candidates running being female. Not only that, but the SNP, the DUP, the Liberals and the Greens have all had female leaders. The Tories have yet to elect a leader from an ethnic minority but both the Chancellor and the Home Secretary are,and it wouldn’t surprise me if they eventually beat Labour on that score as well. Also, this is the gayest government ever, with the highest percentage of LGBT members of parliament. As I say, it’s all rather ironic.
The Conservatives have had two female leaders, both of whom have been prime minister. Labour has never had a female leader and doesn’t look likely to this time despite four-fifths of the candidates running being female. Not only that, but the SNP, the DUP, the Liberals and the Greens have all had female leaders. The Tories have yet to elect a leader from an ethnic minority but both the Chancellor and the Home Secretary are,and it wouldn’t surprise me if they eventually beat Labour on that score as well. Also, this is the gayest government ever, with the highest percentage of LGBT members of parliament. As I say, it’s all rather ironic.
I really think leaders should be elected on the basis that they'd be good in the job, it shouldn't matter in the slightest what colour skin they have or what is or isn't between their legs.I agree with your first point, however my point is that the party of political correctnessand positive action is also the party lagging behing behind in the leader diversity stakes.
I am strongly opposed to all this pandering to the politically correct nonsense.
That being said, I think history shows that the best world leaders are undoubtedly white & male, just look at Trump, Hitler & Stalin.
I agree with your first point, however my point is that the party of political correctnessand positive action is also the party lagging behing behind in the leader diversity stakes.
As for your second point, well that’s just childish troll talk of course.
Great news ! RLB is now overtaking KS in the leadership polls so Labour may be about to have their first leader ever....and it looks as if she’ll be carrying the socialist baton forward....so goodnew all round ?{)(**
Fantastic news about RLB then....even if you were the first to put the boot in.What’s fantastic about it? Please explain.
Won't make a whisper of difference for the next four years plus.
So forgive my indifference to whoever is elected to be the next leader of the Labour party.
I wish her well.
Perhaps if she had been the leader of the party instead of Jeremy Labour would have not been so thoroughly beaten at the election.
What’s fantastic about it? Please explain.
Well with you being so worried about Labour never having had a female leader I thought you’d be overjoyed that RLB was now the front runner.Worried?? No, not worried. @)(++(*. TBH, RLB semsems to be the preferred candidate of those who hope Labour don’t win the next election either, so if anyone should be worried it’s people who are looking forward to a Labour Government in their lifetimes, IMO.
Worried?? No, not worried. @)(++(*. TBH, RLB semsems to be the preferred candidate of those who hope Labour don’t win the next election either, so if anyone should be worried it’s people who are looking forward to a Labour Government in their lifetimes, IMO.
So it wasn’t Corbyn to blame for Labour’s defeat. That’s refreshingly honest of you.I’m really not sure how you extrapolated that from what I wrote. Corbyn and Corbynism was to blame for Labour’s defeat and I fear his little protégée will follow in Jeremy’s failed footsteps. One of my employees, a lifelong Labour voter joined the party for the first time in his life late Tuesday afternoon specifically so he could vote against her. Let’s hope many others did too, otherwise we may as well resign ourselves to a one party state for the foreseeable future IMO.
I’m really not sure how you extrapolated that from what I wrote. Corbyn and Corbynism was to blame for Labour’s defeat and I fear his little protégée will follow in Jeremy’s failed footsteps. One of my employees, a lifelong Labour voter joined the party for the first time in his life late Tuesday afternoon specifically so he could vote against her. Let’s hope many others did too, otherwise we may as well resign ourselves to a one party state for the foreseeable future IMO.
Corbynism ? Don’t you mean socialism ?you brought Corbyn back into it by falsely representing my views about his culpability in the election. I’m quite happy never to mention his name again. Are you?
You have posted again and again that Corbyn and his past were to blame for Labour’s loss...well Corbyn’s gone and yet you’re still banging the same old drum that Labour’s doomed. It’s all getting rather same old, same old.
As to friends joining taking actions due to the political situation, I know of at least 4 friends who, terrified of what five more years of a zealous right wing Tory government could do to this country, are thinking of emigrating.
Caroline Flint (who I think would have made a great Labour leader) is interviewed in today’s Times. Here’s an excerpt:
“She’s fond of Corbyn personally, recalling with amusement how excited he got visiting a Doncaster green gas farm that turned silage into energy. “But it’s very hard on the doorstep when people are saying to you, ‘It’s not about you, Caroline. I want you as MP, but I don’t want that man being prime minister. And if I vote for you, I’m helping him.’ ”
Flint says Jess Phillips’ suggestion that she will fight to rejoin the EU is ‘ridiculous’
Corbyn’s perceived lack of patriotism played badly with South Yorkshire’s many families with army or RAF connections. Also, she says, Labour’s manifesto, “which offered free dental, free transport, free tuition fees, free broadband, free everything”, was ludicrous. “People here are savvy; they’re used to managing money. They know you can’t have all your Sundays at once. They felt they were being treated like idiots. And a lot of them felt they’d been already called idiots for voting Leave.”
you brought Corbyn back into it by falsely representing my views about his culpability in the election. I’m quite happy never to mention his name again. Are you?
Is glory hunter Starmer any better?He's bet on himself winning, that's for sure.
I falsely represented nothing and it’s time you owned your postings.You claimed I said that Corbyn was not to blame for Labour’s defeat. That is a blatant lie. Why did you say it?
Said the woman who has just lost her job as an MP. Of course they did Caroline...course they did ( BTW she didn’t like Gordon Brown either ) Indeed it must have smarted to have been rejected by the membership in favour of Corbyn in the 2015 leadership election.Would you describe Corbyn as a patriot? Why do you think RBL is making a big deal of emphasising “progressive paatriotism”? Whether you like it or not, Corbyn was perceived by many in the electorate as someone who despises his country and our allies and who sucks up to our enemies. Flint is absolutely right. Apart from being too kind, too honest and too saintly diid you not think Jeremy had any faults as a leader at all?
Corbyn’s ‘perceived’ lack of patriotism...hmmmm.
Is glory hunter Starmer any better?It’s a poor field that’s for sure.
You claimed I said that Corbyn was not to blame for Labour’s defeat. That is a blatant lie. Why did you say it?
Would you describe Corbyn as a patriot? Why do you think RBL is making a big deal of emphasising “progressive paatriotism”? Whether you like it or not, Corbyn was perceived by many in the electorate as someone who despises his country and our allies and who sucks up to our enemies. Flint is absolutely right. Apart from being too kind, too honest and too saintly diid you not think Jeremy had any faults as a leader at all?
You said RLB’s accession to the leadership position would mean Labour would be out of government for a generation thereby admitting that Corbyn wasn’t the problem....his socialist policies, carried forward by RLB, I presume you think, are.Corbyn had the lowest personal rating of any labour leader in recent history. Why is that do you think? RLB may well be tainted by association and imo will prove equally as ineffectual as a leader as Corbyn if she wins it, and yes the crazy “promise you the Earth with a cherry on top” socialist policies are all part of it. Britian doesn’t really embrace Corbyn’s version of socialism in case you hadn’t noticed.
Why do you think Corbyn was perceived in this way ? And why going forward will RLB get exactly the same treatment by our press.....those are the real questions that need to be asked ?So why did you “hmmmmm” at Flint’s statement about Corbyn’s lack of patriotism then? Obviously he is perceived as not patriotic and Flint is right, isn’t she? Tell us all the ways in which Corbyn demonstrated his love of his country, its history and its place in the world then. And what was “his own path on Brexit” - did anyone ever find out? Not that it matters a jot now, but what a wimp out for a so-called leader that was!
Corbyn’s faults as leader....not following his own path on Brexit and not being tough enough on dissenters like Flint ( whose support of Labour Friends of Israel is coincidental to your support for her I’m sure)
Corbyn had the lowest personal rating of any labour leader in recent history. Why is that do you think? RLB may well be tainted by association and imo will prove equally as ineffectual as a leader as Corbyn if she wins it, and yes the crazy “promise you the Earth with a cherry on top” socialist policies are all part of it. Britian doesn’t really embrace Corbyn’s version of socialism in case you hadn’t noticed.
Mmmmm...why did he had the lowest personal rating of any Labour leader in recent history....let me think....could it be that he’s faced the most aggressive campaign of vilification by the, mostly, right wing British media in recent times ? Naahhh...it must be that this man of integrity, who was awarded the McBride International Peace Prize for his work https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/12/why-no-beano-about-corbyn-peace-award....truly is as evil as we are lead to believe.Of course, I should have known. St Jeremy is practically perfect in every way and cannot be blamed for anything at all. Boris and Jo Swinson meanwhile were uncritically praised to the hilt by the media, Ed Miliband too, as I recall, was not remotely mocked, derided or scorned by the press when he was labour leader, oh and Mrs May was held aloft by the press, wasn’t she?. No, only poor old victimized Jeremy. Whoever claimed he was evil btw? Misguided, yes, unpatriotic, yes, more interested in the plight of the Palestinians than the interests of the poor working class of his own country, yes. But shush, behold the blessed Peacegiver and his prize who achieved precisely nothing of any lasting worth that I can discern.
Of course, I should have known. St Jeremy is practically perfect in every way and cannot be blamed for anything at all. Boris and Jo Swinson meanwhile were uncritically praised to the hilt by the media, Ed Miliband too, as I recall, was not remotely mocked, derided or scorned by the press when he was labour leader, oh and Mrs May was held aloft by the press, wasn’t she?. No, only poor old victimized Jeremy. Whoever claimed he was evil btw? Misguided, yes, unpatriotic, yes, more interested in the plight of the Palestinians than the interests of the poor working class of his own country, yes. But shush, behold the blessed Peacegiver and his prize who achieved precisely nothing of any lasting worth that I can discern.
You are far too clever to use those factious arguments.If you truly believe that Corbyn’s personality, historical affiliations, etc were not in any way to blame for him being the least popular Labour leader in recent times, and that it was all because the right wing media vilified him, then you will also have to accept that Long Bailey doesn’t stand a chance of ever being elected, not any other labour leader who champions far left policies. In fact Labour may as well all pack it in now, if that is what you truly believe.
https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/the-vilification-of-jeremy-corbyn
https://renegadeinc.com/for-how-long-will-corporate-media-vilify-mr-corbyn/
If you truly believe that Corbyn’s personality, historical affiliations, etc were not in any way to blame for him being the least popular Labour leader in recent times, and that it was all because the right wing media vilified him, then you will also have to accept that Long Bailey doesn’t stand a chance of ever being elected, not any other labour leader who champions far left policies. In fact Labour may as well all pack it in now, if that is what you truly believe.
I think you may very well be right, unfortunately. The only Labour government we have had in the last 40 years is the only Labour government in the last 40 years who have had the unqualified support of Murdoch and the ring-wing press....that says it all.Fortunately the people of Great Britain are just too darned sensible to vote for a truly socialist government, having seen the damage it can cause both here and in other countries around the world. That is why if you do want a Labour government ever again you should be pushing hard for a return to the centre ground pdq.
Fortunately the people of Great Britain are just too darned sensible to vote for a truly socialist government, having seen the damage it can cause both here and in other countries around the world. That is why if you do want a Labour government ever again you should be pushing hard for a return to the centre ground pdq.
Or too susceptible to propaganda ?Of course parts of the Labour manifesto were popular, it promised freebies for everyone with cherries on top(hell, they nearly got my vote with the free internet thing (joke)), but as a whole people could see what a fantastical manifesto it was that would not have been economically sustainable, IMO.
Many of Labour’s policies were very popular...the four day week pledge was greatly derided yet we now we have the prime minister of Finland, not the most socialist of countries, suggesting the very same. Poles have also shown that the public on the whole support the re-nationalisation of our public services, another Labour policy. In parts of the Labour manifesto were so popular that Johnson has nicked them.
On Friday evening we had a discussion with friends about the election results.
We all agreed that never, ever in our wilder dreams could we imagine a time when there would be only one Labour MP from Scotland in Westminster.
The idea of such a turn around in the fortune of the Labour party here would have been thought of as ridiculous!
I'm afraid Jeremy must shoulder the blame.
Of course parts of the Labour manifesto were popular, it promised freebies for everyone with cherries on top(hell, they nearly got my vote with the free internet thing (joke)), but as a whole people could see what a fantastical manifesto it was that would not have been economically sustainable, IMO.
The rot in Scotland for Labour set in long before Corbyn became leader. In fact I believe in the 2017 election Labour regained some of the seats that were lost. Look at the statistics and when Labour’s downward spiral in Scotland becomes abundantly clear.
I agree that the manifesto may have been too far ranging for people to believe but dramatic action was, and is, needed in this once great nation. One in five children in poverty....what an absolute disgrace in the 5th richest company in the world.Probably best not to describe them as socialist policies then or wave Mao’s little red book around in the HoC, it doesn’t help. How’s child poverty doing in Venezuela btw?
However that doesn’t take away from the fact that many of what would be considered ‘socialist ‘ policies were very popular.
Faithlilly - Answering your question on the appropriate thread. You provided the names of 200 British Jews who had signed a letter in support of Corbyn. My contention is that they were in a minority, and here is support for that contention:
British Jews
In 2017, a poll commissioned by Campaign Against [ censored word]emitism of 1,864 British Jewish adults[391] found that 83% (in 2016, 87%) felt that the Labour Party was too tolerant of [ censored word]emitism among its MPs, members, or supporters.[392]
A Survation poll by The Jewish Chronicle prior to the 2017 general election found that 13% of Jews intended to vote for Labour, an increase from the 8.5% in May 2016. When asked to rank the degree of "[ censored word]emitism among the political party's members and elected representatives" between 1 (low) to 5 (high), Jews ranked Labour at 3.94, compared with 3.64 for UKIP, 2.7 for the Liberal Democrats, and 1.96 for the Conservatives.[393][non-primary source needed]
In September 2018, a Survation survey conducted for The Jewish Chronicle found that 85.9% of British Jews considered Jeremy Corbyn [ censored word]emitic, and 85.6% considered the Labour Party to have "high" or "very high" levels of [ censored word]emitism within the party's members and elected representatives. This compares to 1.7% and 6.1% for Theresa May and the Conservative Party respectively. This was an increase from 69% who considered the party to have "high" or "very high" levels of [ censored word]emitism in 2017.[394][non-primary source needed]
A poll conducted for The Jewish Chronicle by Survation in October 2019 showed that 87% of British Jews believed that Corbyn was [ censored word]emitic, with 47% "seriously considering" leaving the country if Corbyn became Prime Minister.
Probably best not to describe them as socialist policies then or wave Mao’s little red book around in the HoC, it doesn’t help. How’s child poverty doing in Venezuela btw?
I posted the names of members and supporters of Labour, people with real experience of life within the party. Not being picky but you have posted polls carried out within the general public who have no real knowledge, or experience, of [ censored word]emitism within the party outside of what they have read or heard in the media.See, I told you that you’d rubbish my reply and true to form you did. What were were we debating again?
Off topic but the lies that were told by the Express about the McCanns are still doing the rounds on forums. They were not true to begin with, the parents sued and the Express apologised and admitted that they had no basis in fact for the stories but still the lies persist. People intimate with the McCanns know that most of what was printed was lies but some of the public still believe them and form an opinion because of them.
You suggested that the hundreds of people whose names I posted in support of Corby are simply deluded but fail to countenance that, with their lack of knowledge of the internal workings of the Labour Party and the smears of the right wing media, it is actually the public who are, through no fault of their own, being misled.
But I thought we were better than Venezuela? Is it worth pointing out that we have obtained these shocking levels of child poverty under a capitalist system ?Did Corbyn think we were better than Venezuela or did he think Venezuela was a model worth adopting? Capitalism is not perfect but it works, which is more than can be said for the sort of socialism Jeremy so admires.
See, I told you that you’d rubbish my reply and true to form you did. What were were we debating again?Ah yes, I remember.
See, I told you that you’d rubbish my reply and true to form you did. What were were we debating again?
Did Corbyn think we were better than Venezuela or did he think Venezuela was a model worth adopting? Capitalism is not perfect but it works, which is more than can be said for the sort of socialism Jeremy so admires.
Interesting comment in today’s Times
“Karie Murphy's proposed elevation is deeply offensive, and not only to Jews. Running Corbyn's office, she was primarily responsible for ensuring that allegations of [ censored word]emitism by valued comrades gathered dust - a deliberate policy decision, including demanding that all such complaints went across her desk first.
A personal friend of Len McCluskey, in 2012 and 2013 she was intimately involved in a vote-rigging scandal, orchestrated by Scottish Unite officials, surrounding her proposed candidacy for the vacant Falkirk seat. She resigned the candidacy in disgrace and was suspended from the party. She also failed to be selected as PPC for Halifax in 2015, ending her Parliamentary aspirations for good.
Subsequent evidence emerged (in 2019) suggesting that she had personally forged 39 membership applications in the Falkirk scandal. (Times report, 3 November 2019).
Corbyn's personal wish to ensure she has a job (which none of his successor candidates will give her) is understandable. His hypocrisy in using a system of establishment patronage he pretends to despise is sickening.
If Karie Murphy were an honourable person - which she is not - she would not accept a peerage anyway. Instead she will join Two Jags Prescott on the leather upholstery bemoaning the privilege of the toffs and aristocrats”.
Ah yes, I remember.
I wrote re: Corbyn’s performance on dealing with [ censored word]emitism “
“Yes, turned a blind eye, didn’t act fast enough or firmly enough. Dilly-dallied. Weak, ineffectual leadership but, hey, this thread is about Boris isn’t it? I don’t have to deal with anything, Labour do. Sort it out!!”
you wrote
“Mmmmmm....not according to many Jewish members of the U.K.”
and then presented a list of 200 British Jews who supported Corbyn back in 2018 I believe.
So do those 200 Jews constitute the many, or even the majority of British Jews, or does the information I provided tend to suggest the opposite?
Mmmmm....
As I said the names I posted were members and supporters of the Labour Party, with personal knowledge of the truthfulness of the claims of [ censored word]emitism within the party. Your polls represent the general Jewish population of the U.K. who have no direct knowledge of the above.It’s not a simply aquestion of reliability, it’s a also a question of perception. In any case there were many members and supporters of the Labour Party that left the party or did not vote for it this time because of [ censored word]emitism. I can’t rustle up 200+ names because as far as I know they didn’t conveniently all sign one letter, but does that mean that their views and experiences don’t count?
Now whose opinion do you think would be more reliable?
As I said I don’t agree with the HoL but why does Corbyn’s ‘hypocrisy’ or a less pejorative assessment simply using the system that’s in place rankle less than Johnson giving peerages to Goldsmith ( kicked out of his constituency) and Morgan ( resigned) so they can stay in the cabinet or Duncan-Smith who’s disastrous UC has contributed to the deaths of over 100,000 of the UKs most vulnerable citizens ? Why have elections when the ousted can simply be brought back via the back door ? Karrie Murphy is small fry compared to that.Because we were all lead to believe that St Jeremy, a principled man and one who despises the present politcal system, was above such cronyism and shenanigans. We expect it of tarts like Boris of course!
Is it worth pointing out that capitalism doesn’t work for those children living in poverty or indeed the working poor whose wages are so low that they have to be subsided by the taxpayer....a socialist solution....or foodbanks...another socialist solution.There’s nothing wrong with that. Caring capitalism is probably the best compromise there is.
It’s interesting that when capitalism doesn’t work and doesn’t meet the basic needs of its citizens it always looks to socialism for a solution.
As I said the names I posted were members and supporters of the Labour Party, with personal knowledge of the truthfulness of the claims of [ censored word]emitism within the party. Your polls represent the general Jewish population of the U.K. who have no direct knowledge of the above.Incidentally even John Healey Shadow Housing Secretary agreed with my assesment
Now whose opinion do you think would be more reliable?
It’s not a simply aquestion of reliability, it’s a also a question of perception. In any case there were many members and supporters of the Labour Party that left the party or did not vote for it this time because of [ censored word]emitism. I can’t rustle up 200+ names because as far as I know they didn’t conveniently all sign one letter, but does that mean that their views and experiences don’t count?
In what way perception ? There is either a claim, supported by evidence or there is a claim where no evidence has been presented....perception has nothing to do with it.Oh well you win then. Because I can’t provide 201 names, then [ censored word]emitism does not exist within the Labour Party and was simply invented by Corbyn’s enemies. Nice one, enjoy your victory. 8@??)(
And no, if you can’t provide empirical evidence of something as serious as [ censored word]emitism, then those you ‘assume’ suffered is not enough.
Because we were all lead to believe that St Jeremy, a principled man and one who despises the present politcal system, was above such cronyism and shenanigans. We expect it of tarts like Boris of course!
There’s nothing wrong with that. Caring capitalism is probably the best compromise there is.
Were we all lead to believe that ? By whom ?By him and his supporters of course! You’re always telling us about what a principled man he is aren’t you?
So ‘caring capitalism ‘ is one in five children living in poverty, is it ? Or your nan lying in her own urine for hours due to the cuts in social care ? Or nurses being taught ‘ corridor medicine’ because so many patients are treated there ? That kind of ‘ caring capitalism ‘ ?Oh please Faithlilly, spare me the sanctimonious, emotive claptrap.
Incidentally even John Healey Shadow Housing Secretary agreed with my assesment
Challenged on whether every case of anti-Semitism in Labour was being dealt with, he told the Today programme: "Having been too slow and too weak at the start, the action being taken now has been toughened up
Which is precisely what I said (“turned a blind eye, didn’t act fast enough or firmly enough. Dilly-dallied. Weak, ineffectual leadership“), and which you seem unwilling to accept.
By him and his supporters of course! You’re always telling us about what a principled man he is aren’t you?
Oh please Faithlilly, spare me the sanctimonious, emotive claptrap.
So which of those things aren’t happening ?Well for a start my “nan” isn’t lying in her own urine, she’s kicking up the daisies. Of course the NHS is in crisis and social care is a massive and growing problem, everyone recognises that. Both the Tories and Labour committed to spending huge amounts of money on the NHS in their manifestos, Labour were also committed to freedom of movement for all if Diane Abbott was to be believed, which could only have meant an even greater strain on the NHS as anyone could have come to Britain to make use of our NHS for free.
Oh well you win then. Because I can’t provide 201 names, then [ censored word]emitism does not exist within the Labour Party and was simply invented by Corbyn’s enemies. Nice one, enjoy your victory. 8@??)(
Well for a start my “nan” isn’t lying in her own urine, she’s kicking up the daisies. Of course the NHS is in crisis and social care is a massive and growing problem, everyone recognises that. Both the Tories and Labour committed to spending huge amounts of money on the NHS in their manifestos, Labour were also committed to freedom of movement for all if Diane Abbott was to be believed, which could only have meant an even greater strain on the NHS as anyone could have come to Britain to make use of our NHS for free.
I advocated “caring capitalism” but I did not claim that the Tories were advocates of same did I?? You seem to be convinced that I am a Tory simply because I think Jeremy is a useless leader.
And while free movement ceases those NHS and social care jobs won’t be filled which compounds the crisis in understaffing that already exists.Please supply the data that proves a caring capitalist society (which is what I have advocated) directly causes poverty. Meanwhile, please look at this list of socialist states and pick the ones you feel have eradicated poverty in their countries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states
Are you really suggesting that there isn’t a direct connection between the capitalist system we are following atm and the shocking poverty and lack of resources afflicting our public services ?
Please supply the data that proves a caring capitalist society (which is what I have advocated) directly causes poverty. Meanwhile, please look at this list of socialist states and pick the ones you feel have eradicated poverty in their countries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states
Incidentally what exactly was Labour’s position of freedom of movement? That anyone who wanted to live here from anywhere in the world could do so?
A caring capitalist society.....isn’t that an oxymoron?No, but it is your contention is it not that capitalism is directly responsible for poverty, and that the answer is socialism, so it stands to reason that socialist states should have lower levels of poverty. Kindly point to those socialist states on the list that you believe have succeeded in significantly reducing poverty in their countries.
There is no state, capitalist or socialist, that has completely eradicated poverty.
No, but it is your contention is it not that capitalism is directly responsible for poverty, and that the answer is socialism, so it stands to reason that socialist states should have lower levels of poverty. Kindly point to those socialist states on the list that you believe have succeeded in significantly reducing poverty in their countries.
Meanwhile, back in the real world
“Indeed, capitalism – in the form of enterprise and trade – has been the driving force behind the most remarkable decline in global poverty ever witnessed in human history. In the past 200 years, extreme poverty has collapsed from a whopping 94% of the entire world population to less than 10% today.
This is even more remarkable when you remember the global population has ballooned from one billion to over seven billion in that time, largely due to better life expectancy. Even now, more than 60,000 people on average are escaping extreme poverty every single day”
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/04/capitalism-is-having-an-identity-crisis-but-it-is-still-the-best-system
I couldn’t have put it better myself. I’m also not interested in a long drawn out argument about which system is better, I have my views and you have yours, arguing about it won’t change a thing. And that’s my last word on the subject.
.
Absolutely but you have to agree that under this particular government brand of capitalism has been used to enrich the few while driving more and more families into poverty ?My views have been very clear, I have repeatedly said I am not a supporter of Tory policy, I have nothing further to add.
My views have been very clear, I have repeatedly said I am not a supporter of Tory policy, I have nothing further to add.
So if not here, where do you think what you call ‘caring capitalism’ is working ?
You would have to define working... Do you think the UK would be better off under a Marxist govt.
Could it be much worse ?
So if not here, where do you think what you call ‘caring capitalism’ is working ?I’ll tell you though I did think I’d made it clear I had nothing more to say on the subject, but first perhaps you could answer the question I asked you twice yesterday which you ignored, concerning the list of socialist states I posted a link to. Pick all the ones where the introduction of socialism has resulted in a dramatic drop in poverty. When you have supplied me with the answer I may feel inclined to continue the discussion, meanwhile....
Ask those those in the Gulag archipelago
I’ll tell you though I did think I’d made it clear I had nothing more to say on the subject, but first perhaps you could answer the question I asked you twice yesterday which you ignored, concerning the list of socialist states I posted a link to. Pick all the ones where the introduction of socialism has resulted in a dramatic drop in poverty. When you have supplied me with the answer I may feel inclined to continue the discussion, meanwhile....
If only &%54%If only you could find an example of a socialist country on the list that has managed to address the issue of poverty through its policies you mean?
At the get fed...no depending on food banks for them.???
If only you could find an example of a socialist country on the list that has managed to address the issue of poverty through its policies you mean?
Listen love, if you ask me a question whilst simultaneously praying that I don’t reply what does that make you exactly?
Bolivia which has drastically cut extreme poverty and has the highest GDP growth rate in South America.Not on the list of socialist states.
Not on the list of socialist states.
“By definition, socialism is state control of the means of production. In Venezuela, between 2002 and 2012, 1,168 private companies were expropriated, or taken over by the state. In Bolivia, between 2005 and 2015, only 20 private companies had been commandeered by the government. Sure, neither of these numbers are admirable, but a lot less damage can be done to a country when it chooses socialism-lite over the full-blown variety.
True, Bolivia does have a generous welfare state, but while this may be an aspect that comes with socialism, the redistribution of wealth is only a supporting feature and not a defining characteristic of this economic philosophy. This puts Bolivia in the same camp as Nordic countries, that, while praised for being examples socialist success stories, are actually using the fruits of basically capitalist economies to fund their welfare states”.
https://fee.org/articles/why-bolivia-is-not-a-socialist-success-story/
Fee.org.Thanks for the link which reveals
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/foundation-for-economic-education/
No surprise there then.
Thanks for the link which reveals
“A factual search reveals they have not failed a fact check”.
Bolivia has a mixed economy, it’s certainly got some socialist policies and is left leaning. It has not however rejected capitalism (yet) and has been successfully tackling some of its serious social issues (it is still however one of the poorest countries on earth). I seem to recall that Venezuela was successful for a while in this regard before it all went pear shaped. My examples of caring capitalism can be found in Scandanavia to which the article I mentioned likened Bolivia. In truth most successful countries have some social welfare policies but continue to embrace capitalism and a free market economy.
And that wasn’t what Corbyn was advocating in what way ?I
I
His manifesto was a complete fantasy that would certainly have bankrupted the country if it had been implemented imo, he was also an admirer of some extreme socialist states and therefore not to be trusted, and the electorate concurred. He is history, his persona and his politics roundly rejected, there’s really nothing more to say (though I’m prepared to place a small wager that you’ll find something).
At a conservative estimate HS2 will cost £108 billion pounds and some reports put it costing £160 billion, twice the Labour manifesto. Puts Corbyn’s manifesto into some perspective, doesn’t it.HS2 will never happen IMO, and as for Corbyn’s manifesto, his appetite for renationalising would not have stopped at the railways IMO. Taking public ownership of the internet was rather sinister as well. I can’t remember what else off the top my head. Of course manifestos are only ever full of the good stuff, they’re a marketing exercise full of good intentions, half truths and downright lies. I just didn’t trust him as far as I could fling him, and his position on Brexit was extremely disingenuous. Have you watched this?
Even you must agree that even though Corbyn might admire some aspects of some socialist states it’s rather simplistic to assume they would be copied here. Out of interest what aspects of Corbyn’s manifesto do you think were too ‘socialist’ for this country?
HS2 will never happen IMO, and as for Corbyn’s manifesto, his appetite for renationalising would not have stopped at the railways IMO. Taking public ownership of the internet was rather sinister as well. I can’t remember what else off the top my head. Of course manifestos are only ever full of the good stuff, they’re a marketing exercise full of good intentions, half truths and downright lies. I just didn’t trust him as far as I could fling him, and his position on Brexit was extremely disingenuous. Have you watched this?
https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/watch-jeremy-corbyn-describes-eu-as-massive-great-frankenstein-1-5879503
Well at time of writing it is going ahead with at an estimated cost that will eclipse the Labour manifesto.You asked for my opinion, then dismissed it as bias. You’re debating tactics are quite wearing. How could you support a leader who refused to lead on the biggest issue of a generation? Actually don’t answer that, I really don’t care, it’s done.
Your second point you have no evidence for, just your bias.
As to his position on Brexit was not his position but the party’s position. We are a democratic party. Do you really think it’s news that Corbyn wasn’t the biggest fan of the EU ?
You asked for my opinion, then dismissed it as bias. You’re debating tactics are quite wearing. How could you support a leader who refused to lead on the biggest issue of a generation? Actually don’t answer that, I really don’t care, it’s done.
Okay your second point was IMO....how could it possibly not be driven by bias ? It certainly wasn’t driven by evidence.Thankfully we’ll never find out the answer - he was a big fan of Castro though wasn’t he?
Further what don’t you understand about the term ‘democratic party’ ? Do you really think the Corbyn is some kind of autocrat ?
Incidentally
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-manifesto-general-election-hs2-rail-line-scotland-a9212821.html
Thankfully we’ll never find out the answer - he was a big fan of Castro though wasn’t he?
Yet again....you coming running to the table with some juicy bit of tittle tattle you read in the Mail or some such right wing rag, you’re shown your error and you change the subject.What error have I made? Is the Independent a right wing rag? Probably by Jeremy’s standards!
Too, too predictable.
And ?Was HS2 not in the Labour manifesto costings?
What error have I made? Is the Independent a right wing rag? Probably by Jeremy’s standards!
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/jeremy-corbyn-hails-fidel-castro-as-a-champion-of-social-justice-a7440696.html
The Castro comment was the deflection.In your opinion, in mine it demonstrates that Corbyn, a supposed democrat, is not averse to the odd communist dictator.
Or you....unless you decide on Israeli government policy.You’ve stopped making any sense now. This discussion all started when I informed you that comparing Israeli government policy to the Nazis was [ censored word]emitic. You weren’t having it and have been trying to defend your position ever since even though I have demonstrated that most western governments are in complete accord with what I said, and even the subject of this thread, your beloved JC says it’s wrong, don’t do it. Why are you, weeks later, still trying to defend the indefensible?
You’ve stopped making any sense now. This discussion all started when I informed you that comparing Israeli government policy to the Nazis was [ censored word]emitic. You weren’t having it and have been trying to defend your position ever since even though I have demonstrated that most western governments are in complete accord with what I said, and even the subject of this thread, your beloved JC says it’s wrong, don’t do it. Why are you, weeks later, still trying to defend the indefensible?
I point you again to the Al Jazeera article you got so heat up about a few weeks ago.Once again you are deflecting. Perhaps you can remind me where I made the claim that Israel’s actions were widely supported or indeed that I supported them? All I have ever said is that comparing Israeli government to the Nazis is [ censored word]emitic, which it is and which you apparently unable to come to terms with despite the fact that even Corbyn says that to do so is quite unacceptable and wrong. How much longer do you plan to keep on defending the indefensible or will you at long last concede that you were wrong to have ever championed Nazi name-calling of the Israelis?
There is not one credible world leader who publicly supports Israel’s actions towards the Palestinians and that tells you all you need to know.
This is the second time the Nazi issue has entered this thread, could we stay on topic please. TYJeremy Corbyn is never going to be PM so you may as well close the thread.
Jeremy Corbyn is never going to be PM so you may as well close the thread.
Following discussions with my friends* on the Madeleine McCann forum I thought it would be interesting to continue the discussion here. Anyone with an ounce of sense knows that pigs will sprout wings and fly before Corbyn gets his hands on the keys of Number 10, but putting that to one side - what do we think of his views, his ability to lead the Labour Party and the country, his beard and dress sense, etc?
* (friends in this instance is used in the same way as Corbyn claimed he used the word to describe the terrorist sympathisers he shared a platform with, ie: a bunch of people whose views I vehemently oppose but it's always good to talk!)
I think we took that for granted a long time ago.The Nazi issue arose out of a discussion about [ censored word]emitism, which was one of the main reasons for Corbyn’s downfall. He has a history of lending support to [ censored word]emites who like to draw parallels between Israel and the Nazis, but has since renounced such behaviour as “wrong”. Indeed making such comparisons is now proscribed by the Labour Party and any member found doing so is liable (auite rightly imo) to be kicked out of the party, yet still some members and supporters insist on doing so. Corbyn’s successor must stand firm and root out these individuals and let them go off and form their own anti-Israel party, where they can invoke Godwin’s Law until they are blue in the face. Only then will Labour be able to be free of the taint of [ censored word]emitism which has blighted them for the last few years.
I think we took that for granted a long time ago.
Three years on and Corbyn has failed to impress anyone.
Why make such a fatuous statement ? He is the most popular leader of the Labour Party in the last 100 years amongst its members and when you consider that we are the largest political party in Europe he most certainly has impressed many people.Why was his popularity rating with voters the lowest since Michael Foot then? Don’t tell me - the Jews brainwashed all the sheeple!
Why was his popularity rating with voters the lowest since Michael Foot then? Don’t tell me - the Jews brainwashed all the sheeple!
Why in heavens would anyone think that ?God knows but believe it or not some people think the media are to blame for Corbyn’s woeful lack of popularity and we all know who controls the media don’t we, nudge nudge wink wink.
I'm no expert on Israel or Palestine but I can see that there's a difference between being anti-Jewish and disapproving of how the Israeli government have treated the Palestinians.
God knows but believe it or not some people think the media are to blame for Corbyn’s woeful lack of popularity and we all know who controls the media don’t we, nudge nudge wink wink.
The Nazi issue arose out of a discussion about [ censored word]emitism, which was one of the main reasons for Corbyn’s downfall. He has a history of lending support to [ censored word]emites who like to draw parallels between Israel and the Nazis, but has since renounced such behaviour as “wrong”. Indeed making such comparisons is now proscribed by the Labour Party and any member found doing so is liable (auite rightly imo) to be kicked out of the party, yet still some members and supporters insist on doing so. Corbyn’s successor must stand firm and root out these individuals and let them go off and form their own anti-Israel party, where they can invoke Godwin’s Law until they are blue in the face. Only then will Labour be able to be free of the taint of [ censored word]emitism which has blighted them for the last few years.
Studies have shown the part media bias has played in Corbyn’s lack of popularityAnti-semites believe that the world’s media is controlled by a global elite and that the global elite is made up of powerful Jews, don’t pretend you were unaware of this anti-semite conspiracy theory?
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-media-bias-labour-mainstream-press-lse-study-misrepresentation-we-cant-ignore-bias-a7144381.html
As to your last comment, I’m not sure what you’re alluding to.
Anti-semites believe that the world’s media is controlled by a global elite and that the global elite is made up of powerful Jews, don’t pretend you were unaware of this anti-semite conspiracy theory?
https://ohpi.org.au/[ censored word]emitism-media-control/
I was but why is this relevant. Are you saying most Labour members are anti-semites ? Isn’t that just as ridiculous as the Jewish media conspiracy?How on earth did you come to that conclusion?
Anti-semites believe that the world’s media is controlled by a global elite and that the global elite is made up of powerful Jews, don’t pretend you were unaware of this anti-semite conspiracy theory?
https://ohpi.org.au/[ censored word]emitism-media-control/
How on earth did you come to that conclusion?
That’s what happens when you post information with no relevance to the subject at hand.
Why do you keep trying to shoehorn [ censored word]emitism into every political thread ? It certainly had no relevance to the fact that Corbyn is the most popular leader of the largest European political party for the last 100 years.
Popular with whom?
The Labour membership.But one of the least popular EVER with the people who really count - the electorate. I don’t think Jeremy or the Momentum branch of the Labour Party really cared about them, hence the situation we are now in.
But one of the least popular EVER with the people who really count - the electorate. I don’t think Jeremy or the Momentum branch of the Labour Party really cared about them, hence the situation we are now in.
My this right-wing tabloid nonsense really is pernicious....it’s politics for the hard of thinking.Yes actually, I do think that the electorate thought that Boris cared for their views and that he would deliver what they voted for in the referendum and that is why they voted for him. I also think that you believe the the British electorate are stupid, gullible, dimwitted and easily led by the media. I think that when you think like that, especially if you’re a politician who claims to represent the people, then the people don’t much care for that sort of attitude and it loses you votes. Labour needs to start listening to the people of this country, especially the northern working class that recently they have seemed somewhat contemptuous of, and reconnect with them. Jeremy’s biggest mistake was not having the courage of his convictions, standing up for Brexit (which let’s face it, he was an obvious supporter of) and persuading his party to support Theresa May’s deal when it was on the table. He might then have stood a chance at the next election, shame he wasn’t clever enough to work that one out.
Momentum branch of the Labour Party ?
Do you really think that the electorate thought that Johnson cared for them or simply that he’d ‘ get Brexit done’ .....and further don’t you think that that coupled with the shamefully dishonest British press is what lost Corbyn the election ?
Yes actually, I do think that the electorate thought that Boris cared for their views and that he would deliver what they voted for in the referendum and that is why they voted for him. I also think that you believe the the British electorate are stupid, gullible, dimwitted and easily led by the media. I think that when you think like that, especially if you’re a politician who claims to represent the people, then the people don’t much care for that sort of attitude and it loses you votes. Labour needs to start listening to the people of this country, especially the northern working class that recently they have seemed somewhat contemptuous of, and reconnect with them. Jeremy’s biggest mistake was not having the courage of his convictions, standing up for Brexit (which let’s face it, he was an obvious supporter of) and persuading his party to support Theresa May’s deal when it was on the table. He might then have stood a chance at the next election, shame he wasn’t clever enough to work that one out.
My this right-wing tabloid nonsense really is pernicious....it’s politics for the hard of thinking.
Momentum branch of the Labour Party ?
Do you really think that the electorate thought that Johnson cared for them or simply that he’d ‘ get Brexit done’ .....and further don’t you think that that coupled with the shamefully dishonest British press is what lost Corbyn the election ?
I actually think it is more deep rooted than that. I also do not believe the media have that much of an influence as some believe.
I do believe the wake up call to the politicians is clear. You represent what we want not what you tell us we are getting without being challenged. I predicted 10 years ago a civil war was looming- I still believe that we are heading in some direction- perhaps not with guns and swords,but the battle of the wills.
Even the labour candidates are all poor choice- I wouldn't vote for any of them. The idea that they must have a woman is positive discrimination - why not chose a candidate who has their own views and real ideas for the good of the country!
You are absolutely wrong if you think former Labour voters believed Johnson had their best interests at heart, they didn’t. What they did believe is that he was their only chance of pushing Brexit over the line so voted for him anyway, many many holding their noses as they did. I have heard many, many of those voters interviewed since and their shame at that decision, if not regret, is plain to see.Being a democratic party doesn’t mean the leader must abnegate their responsibility to lead, which is precisely what Corbyn did. You don’t seem to understand that many ex-Labour voters believe fervently that Brexit IS in their best interests and that’s why they voted for Boris. Labour and Corbyn let their traditional voting base down by not listening to them and by doing everything in their power to thwart Brexit, and their traditional voters felt played for fools. It seems none of Jeremy’s fanbase is prepared to accept this and instead can only blame the media and all the beastly people who ganged up on their saintly hero. You just don’t get it and you never will, nor it seems will you ever get over it or move on. Instead it seems you want to cry over spilt milk and stamp you feet about it until you browbeat us into submission.
Not sure how you come to the conclusion that Corbyn thought the electorate is stupid, gullible etc etc but only the truly dim witted could possibly deny that propaganda was used expertly in this election campaign and when 88% of Conservative posts have been deemed untrue to compared to almost zero for Labour you can see who was pushing the most dishonest campaign.
What part of ‘we are a democratic party ‘ don’t you get ? The decision was not his alone to make.
I have to disagree with you about the media. It is certainly no coincidence that the only Labour governments we have had in the last 40 years have been supported by Murdoch. We have both seen the way propaganda has been used very successfully in the McCann case. These are the very same strategies used in the politics of today.Bolded above - a perfect example of delusion and the contmpt in which people like you hold the general public. Brexit may be a terrible idea but one thing you cannot say in a democratic vote is that it was not “the will of the people”. It was, inarguably.
Further where is the challenge from the people ? Johnson wanted Brexit, it wasn’t brought about by the will of the people.....it serves his and his party’s interests not his electorate and we will see this disregard for their needs in the coming months and years. As to a looming civil war, it’s hard to wage war when you’re using all your energy just to keep a roof over your head and feed your children.
Your last point I’m afraid I agree with although if forced to be pragmatic I believe Starmer would be the strongest candidate when faced with Johnson.
Being a democratic party doesn’t mean the leader must abnegate their responsibility to lead, which is precisely what Corbyn did. You don’t seem to understand that many ex-Labour voters believe fervently that Brexit IS in their best interests and that’s why they voted for Boris. Labour and Corbyn let their traditional voting base down by not listening to them and by doing everything in their power to thwart Brexit, and their traditional voters felt played for fools. It seems none of Jeremy’s fanbase is prepared to accept this and instead can only blame the media and all the beastly people who ganged up on their saintly hero. You just don’t get it and you never will, nor it seems will you ever get over it or move on. Instead it seems you want to cry over spilt milk and stamp you feet about it until you browbeat us into submission.
Bolded above - a perfect example of delusion and the contmpt in which people like you hold the general public. Brexit may be a terrible idea but one thing you cannot say in a democratic vote is that it was not “the will of the people”. It was, inarguably.
You said that the voters could see that Johnson cared for them...not true. That they felt betrayed by the stalemate that Brexit had become, I absolutely agree. That they held their noses and voted for a conman and a liar because of this, absolutely true. Labour made the wrong call and we, as a country, will long live to regret it.You are continually misrepresenting what I have said. I said that those who voted for Boris believed he and not Corbyn could be trusted to deliver their will, ie Brexit. I never mentioned anything about a belief in caring, that was your word. How bloody awful Labour must be that the general public would prefer a “liar and a conman” (of course no such thing as anti Boris propaganda!) to St Jeremy. That must really have his acolytes scratching their heads in dismay. And for once can we be a bit more grown up and leave thr McCanns a(and the Nazis too, while we’re at it) out of the discussion?
As to the monstering of Corbyn in the MSM, also a factor in Labour’s defeat, it is interesting that while you wholeheartedly support the notion that the McCann’s continuing unpopularity is in part due to that same MSM and its monstering of them, you are blind to the very same strategies when directed at Corbyn.
Your posts seem to be more and more confused. Was it Corbyn’s unpopularity that lost him the election or that he supported a second referendum....or are you going to hedge your bets at a bit of both ?
That’s not what I’m saying but it’s worth remembering that with only 72% turnout, only 37% voted to leave. The rest either didn’t care or didn’t want to leave so hardly a resounding win for ‘the will of the people’.Oh right, so you don’t believe in the democratic process then, just so long as we’re clear about it. I think there is plenty of anti Boris propaganda which you seem to be spouting at the moment and as for his true intentions, well we shall know them in the fullness of time. My belief is that he is an opportunist who saw Brexit as a means to an end but Brexit is what the people wanted and if he delivers what they want then there’s not much more to be said about it. He did what they wanted.
Anyway back to the meat. Do you truly think that Johnson had the people’s will at heart when pushing for Brexit or merely that leaving the EU suited his own particular agenda ?
You are continually misrepresenting what I have said. I said that those who voted for Boris believed he and not Corbyn could be trusted to deliver their will, ie Brexit. I never mentioned anything about a belief in caring, that was your word. How bloody awful Labour must be that the general public would prefer a “liar and a conman” (of course no such thing as anti Boris propaganda!) to St Jeremy. That must really have his acolytes scratching their heads in dismay. And for once can we be a bit more grown up and leave thr McCanns a(and the Nazis too, while we’re at it) out of the discussion?
I really don’t understand why you continue to deny how deplorably maligned Corbyn has been for the last 5 years and how that pernicious drip, drip, drip of vitriolic propaganda would have coloured the electorates view of him. Taking one example....the Sun, a Murdoch monstrosity, printed a photograph of Corbyn making his way to the cenotaph, apparently upbeat and dancing. What the whole photograph really showed was Corbyn deep in conversation with a WW2 veteran.Deflecting in other words. I’m sure poor old Corbyn has been misrepresented and maligned in much the same way as the McCanns. As you seem keen to bring them into the discussion does that mean therefore that in your opinion the McCanns did nothing wrong, deserved no criticism in the press and that public perception of them was completely wrong and is only because the stupid GBP are just so thick and gullible they just lapped up every word the press printed?
https://www.joe.co.uk/news/the-sun-shamefully-doctor-image-to-suggest-jeremy-corbyn-was-dancing-on-remembrance-sunday-97629
And this
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/nov/08/jeremy-corbyn-cenotaph-bow-scrutinised-social-media-remembrance-sunday
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyns-coat-armistice-day-service-cenotaph-218346
Yet Johnson, this year at the cenotaph, appeared to have got dressed in the dark, walked forward to lay his wreath before protocol dictated and laid it upside down received very little censure. In fact the BBC chose to use 3 year old footage instead on a their main news programmes.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bbc-boris-johnson-brexit-wreath-laying-cenotaph-footage-wrong-old-tory-bias-a9198521.html
There are, off course, many, many, many more examples but I’m sure you’ll be able to access them for yourself.
As to the McCanns, the only reason I brought them into the debate is to point out the hypocrisy of you ability to believe that the public’s perception of the parents was coloured by the MSM but that it was laughable that Corbyn had suffered in the same way.
Deflecting in other words. I’m sure poor old Corbyn has been misrepresented and maligned in much the same way as the McCanns. As you seem keen to bring them into the discussion does that mean therefore that in your opinion the McCanns did nothing wrong, deserved no criticism in the press and that public perception of them was completely wrong and is only because the stupid GBP are just so thick and gullible they just lapped up every word the press printed?
Oh right, so you don’t believe in the democratic process then, just so long as we’re clear about it. I think there is plenty of anti Boris propaganda which you seem to be spouting at the moment and as for his true intentions, well we shall know them in the fullness of time. My belief is that he is an opportunist who saw Brexit as a means to an end but Brexit is what the people wanted and if he delivers what they want then there’s not much more to be said about it. He did what they wanted.
Anti-Boris propaganda? Please point out where anything I have posted about Johnson that is untrue ?Oh my god, that is such blatant bullshit and a twisting of the facts. Boris campaigned for Brexit, the public voted for Brexit in the largest ever democratic vote this country has ever seen and Boris delivered his promise. Boris was only given a mandate to “do what he wanted” because he got a huge majority from the electorate to do as they wanted too.
He did what he wanted, that 37% of the UK electorate agreed was coincidental.
It appears that it is you who is deflecting.....again.The people doing the malicious lie spreading on social media have conveniently overlooked the fact that the lies that were printed in the MSM nearly thirteen years ago were exposed as lies and the perpetrators punished in the form of large libel payouts.
As to the McCanns although I do believe that they had a hand in their daughter’s disappearance I think much of what is still doing the rounds of social media about them and the case is absolute nonsense perpetrated, in great part, by the MSM.
Oh my god, that is such blatant bullshit and a twisting of the facts. Boris campaigned for Brexit, the public voted for Brexit in the largest ever democratic vote this country has ever seen and Boris delivered his promise. Boris was only given a mandate to “do what he wanted” because he got a huge majority from the electorate to do as they wanted too.
The people doing the malicious lie spreading on social media have conveniently overlooked the fact that the lies that were printed in the MSM nearly thirteen years ago were exposed as lies and the perpetrators punished in the form of large libel payouts.
How about some IMOs in there? No facts, just opinion as far as I can see.
There are reams of columns dedicated to Johnson’s indecision over who to back in the Brexit debate. He plumped for Leave as it was best for his own private advancement. To his credit he read the British public much better than Cameron, or even Corbyn.
During the election he played the ‘little Englander’ card to perfection, widening an already huge fissure in the population, a fissure I fear that may never be healed.
But still the lies persist.But that is not down to the media, that is down to the mendacious little shits that hang about on twitter and elsewhere who know that what they are spreading is lies but who persist in doing it anyway. These incidentally a people that I have never once seen you condemn publicly.
But that is not down to the media, that is down to the mendacious little shits that hang about on twitter and elsewhere who know that what they are spreading is lies but who persist in doing it anyway. These incidentally a people that I have never once seen you condemn publicly.
Of course I condemn unconditionally anyone who lies about anyone in the MSM or on social media. The truth is a much sharper weapon.You sound just like JC. The problem is, I used to post on the #mccann tag, same as you, challenging the lies as they appeared on there, strangely I never saw you do the same. JC only ever condemns in the loosest possible sense and only when challenged to too.
You sound just like JC. The problem is, I used to post on the #mccann tag, same as you, challenging the lies as they appeared on there, strangely I never saw you do the same. JC only ever condemns in the loosest possible sense and only when challenged to too.
I have no idea who you are on Twitter and I have never publicised my true identity on any social media.....and you say that you aren’t stalking me....jeez that’s just odd.I’m not stalking you, I just happen to know who you are on twitter, nothing to do with stalking. I am not on twitter anymore fyi.
I’m not stalking you, I just happen to know who you are on twitter, nothing to do with stalking. I am not on twitter anymore fyi.
How do you know who I am on Twitter?Someone told me I think.
Someone told me I think.
No one knows.Anyone perceptive and observant who has followed this case for a long time can quite often work out who is who on different social media. There’s nothing sinister about it - we give ourselves away in many obvious ways. Don’t fret about it.
Anyone perceptive and observant who has followed this case for a long time can quite often work out who is who on different social media. There’s nothing sinister about it - we give ourselves away in many obvious ways. Don’t fret about it.
So no one told you...you ‘worked out it’ ? Do you accept that you could be wrong ?I honestly can’t remember if someone pointed it out or if I worked it out for myself, however I’m pretty certain I’m not wrong.
I honestly can’t remember if someone pointed it out or if I worked it out for myself, however I’m pretty certain I’m not wrong.
You say that I have never condemned anyone who was dishonest about the McCanns on Twitter yet you have simply guessed who I am. Not exactly scientific, is it ?What’s science got to do with it? I can only go on my own observations and from what I recall you never once condemned the blatant anti McCann propaganda, indeed you seemed quite chummy with some of the main protagonists at the time as I recall. You will of course deny but we both know the truth of it.
What’s science got to do with it? I can only go on my own observations and from what I recall you never once condemned the blatant anti McCann propaganda, indeed you seemed quite chummy with some of the main protagonists at the time as I recall. You will of course deny but we both know the truth of it.
Again...you have no idea who I am in real life. You obviously think you do but that’s quite another thing. BTW who do you think I am ?If you’re trying to get me to out you then I’m afraid that won’t work. You obviously believe I have no idea who you are, and that’s fine. Best drop it now.
If you’re trying to get me to out you then I’m afraid that won’t work. You obviously believe I have no idea who you are, and that’s fine. Best drop it now.
From Shahrar Ali of the Green Party.
NEWS EXCLUSIVE: 1 FEBRUARY 2020
CAMPAIGN AGAINST [ censored word]EMITISM UNDER INVESTIGATION BY CHARITIES COMMISSION FOLLOWING RAISING CONCERNS REFERRAL BY GREEN PARTY HOME AFFAIRS SPOKESPERSON
Shahrar Ali Green Party Home affairs spokesperson today confirmed that the Charities Commission is investigating the Campaign Against [ censored word]emitism (registered charity 1163790) following a six-page “Raising Concerns” Referral by him on 7 Jan 2020.
The focus of Dr Ali’s submission has been the CAA’s sustained attacks upon politicians during the general election 2019. In particular, he argued that Joe Glasman, CAA Head of Political Investigations, breached statutory charity regulations in a video of 25 Dec 2019 in which he described Corbyn as “The beast is slain,” alongside the caption, “Slaughtered!”.
The specific clauses in which Dr Ali argues the charity has been in breach of the Commission’s regulations are:
• Serious non-compliance in a charity that damages or has the potential to damage its reputation and/or the reputation of charities generally
• Material must be factually accurate and have a legitimate evidence base.
• Once an election has been called, charities that are campaigning will need to take special care to ensure their political neutrality. … A charity must never indicate to its supporters which candidate to support in an election. ... During an election period, the need for impartiality and balance is intensified, and charities must take particular care when undertaking any activities in the political arena.
• The independent nature of the charitable sector is of fundamental importance to society, and is greatly valued by the public. The guiding principle of charity law in terms of elections is that charities must be, and be seen to be, independent from party politics. Charities must not support or oppose a political party or candidate.
Shahrar Ali said, “Joe Glasman’s Christmas diatribe against Corbyn, in which he took organisational credit for frustrating his election victory, and referred to him as “beast is slain” was unconscionable. This in itself was also overt negative campaigning against a party political candidate and bringing the charitable sector into disrepute. Glasman’s statements also provide us with a strong example of the kind of unjust demonization of political figures which has no place in our political culture and is dangerous both to the target being attacked and the fight against racism itself.”
Dr Ali continued, “This is not the kind of misconduct that a registered charity should be engaging in, with impunity. We must clean up our political culture and these kind of negative campaigns must be rooted out, exposed and combatted. That is why I am pleased to report that the Charities Commission is treating my referral with the seriousness it deserves. They have confirmed that following initial assessment the matter has been escalated for further investigation. I have no doubt that the CAA should be deregistered as a charity and prevented from enjoying the unjust credibility which such status currently affords them and some seem to be hoodwinked by.”
Dr Ali said, “Having recently been cleared by the Green Party Disciplinary Committee of baseless allegations from the CAA which were turned into an official complaint by a prominent member of the Party, I would expect us to take a different approach towards this disreputable organisation, not only while the Charities Commission is investigating them for breach of charity law.”
ENDS.
An interesting article about Bywire’s owner, and source of the article above
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/unofficial-facebook-ads-blitz-voters-in-general-election-vw3gltctg
ELECTION 2019
Unofficial Facebook ads blitz voters in general election
Millions are being targeted by activists, whose influence is growing although they avoid official scrutiny
Michael O’Sullivan with Jeremy Corbyn
Michael O’Sullivan with Jeremy Corbyn
Share
Save
A former Vote Leave official who has spent almost £20,000 on political adverts on Facebook is among activists whose under-the-radar campaigns have targeted millions of voters ahead of the general election.
Michael O’Sullivan, an Irish national and campaigner for “Lexit” — left-wing Brexit — is today revealed to be behind an effort to harvest data on voters by posing as a polling company. He has also funded political adverts that have reached up to 500,000 people on Facebook in the past fortnight. His role, which emerged in an investigation by this newspaper, reignites the debate over transparency in politics.
Individuals or groups spending more than £20,000 in the run-up to an election must register with the Electoral Commission. Those who spend less do not have to meet the same standards of openness and accountability, but they wield growing influence.
O’Sullivan, 36, was a senior digital official at Vote Leave during the EU referendum. He runs Labour Future, a Facebook page that uses Labour’s logo but was previously forced to admit it has no formal links to the party. The stated goal of the page, which has 170,000 subscribers, is to reconnect with Labour’s working-class base and return to a manufacturing economy.
Since the election was called, Labour Future has disseminated 34 pro-Corbyn and anti-Liberal Democrat ads, mostly targeting men between the ages of 55 and 64. One viral advert, which has been viewed 60,000 times, uses “crying with laughter” emojis to ridicule Jo Swinson’s chances of winning the election.
Labour Future extracts data on voters by encouraging them to complete the “Big Election Survey”, which appears to be neutral and is hosted on a website called polling.org.uk. Those who click are asked their voting intention and views on Brexit and immigration. However, the survey is run by Labour Future Ltd, the sole owner of the data.
Labour Future’s Facebook page has put out anti-Lib Dem ads mostly targeting older men
Labour Future’s Facebook page has put out anti-Lib Dem ads mostly targeting older men
The legal owner of Labour Future is Brendan Chilton, 29, a Labour councillor from Kent and founder of Labour Leave, originally bankrolled by Tory and Ukip donors. He said this year that no deal was the “best possible outcome” for the UK.
Labour Future’s funding sources are unclear. It has spent thousands of pounds over the past year, but company records say it is dormant and has no assets. It is registered at a modest residential address in Ashford, Kent, thought to be Chilton’s.
O’Sullivan also owns Bywire, a website that produces flattering coverage of Corbyn and Julian Assange. It has spent £8,000 on political adverts this year.
Political campaigns that have reached millions of people in recent weeks include one by a Tory activist who has spent thousands on a Facebook page that initially seems non-political. “Right to Rent, Right To Buy, Right To Own” presents itself as a discussion board for property owners. It is run by Jennifer Powers, a pro-Brexit campaigner and corporate lobbyist.
The ‘Right to Rent, Right to Buy, Right to Own’ page has spent £1,800 on anti-Labour adverts
The ‘Right to Rent, Right to Buy, Right to Own’ page has spent £1,800 on anti-Labour adverts
The page has spent more than £1,800 on anti-Labour adverts since the election was called, including scare stories about higher taxes and landlords losing their livelihoods “overnight” under Corbyn. Two ads targeted at men aged 25-34 have been viewed by 277,000 and 347,000 users, according to Facebook data.
Working4UK, which presents itself as a business-themed page, has put out 15 ads critical of Labour aimed at older men that have been seen between 613,000 and 734,000 times. It is run by Suraj Sharma, a Tory councillor in Bromley.
Last week a minister from the Thatcher era was found to be involved in similar practices. Richard Tracey, 76, a former sports minister, runs a page called Parents’ Choice, which has posted nine ads since the election was called. His attacks on Labour’s plans to nationalise private schools have reached more than 290,000 people.
There is no suggestion that any of the pages is co-ordinated with the main parties. But they play a role in amplifying their message, with Labour and the Conservatives restricted by spending limits.
Best for Britain, a pro-EU group, has spent £84,000 in the past week, outgunning the Conservatives on £55,000 and Labour on £43,000. According to a leaked memo, the group will spend more than £200,000 on adverts in 75 seats over the coming weeks, most of them Labour-held marginals in the northwest.
Labour Future said its adverts were paid for by small donors. “These are local activists who — like us — are passionate about seeing a Labour government . . . ByWire is Mike’s personal project and all ads are paid [for] by him.”
On the subject of the Big Election Survey, it added: “Labour Future hosts polls on a neutral website address so it does not bias respondents.”
Finally, it’s worth noting that newspapers are under no obligation to be impartial, and if they want to throw their weight behind a politcal party then that is their right to do so. Presumably consumers choose their newspapers based on how closely they represent their own views which is why Faithlilly doesn’t subscribe to the Telegraph and I am not a Morning Star reader.
A rather simplistic interpretation.
A rather simplistic interpretation.Do elaborate please.
Do elaborate please.
Many, many people never lift a newspaper and get their news either from television....who do have a duty to remain impartial...or social media. Some, like myself, embrace all three when formulating my opinions.
And while there is no imperative for newspapers to remain neutral, we shouldn’t be surprised then that those very same newspapers print stories that support their owners interests, especially financially.
Many, many people never lift a newspaper and get their news either from television....who do have a duty to remain impartial...or social media. Some, like myself, embrace all three when formulating my opinions.Exactly, it’s a non story. We all know the print media is biased, we pays our money and we takes our choice. As for the Beeb and ITV, if they are biased in favour of the Tories then I simply can’t understand why they both (the Beeb in particular) manage to make my Tory voting mum froth with rage at the appalling bias she perceives in every news programme she watches.
And while there is no imperative for newspapers to remain neutral, we shouldn’t be surprised then that those very same newspapers print stories that support their owners interests, especially financially.
Exactly, it’s a non story. We all no the print media is biased, we pays our money and we takes our choice. As for the Beeb and ITV, if they are biased in favour of the Tories then I simply can’t understand why they both (the Beeb in particular) manage to make my Tory voting mum froth with rage at the appalling bias she perceives in every news programme she watches.
Yes I agree, the print media is biased.Yep, most Tories do, which makes me think ardent Jezza / Labour supporters are stricken with the same problem.
As to your second point, I’ve no idea....perhaps your mum sees bias in anything less than a Tory love-in
Yep, most Tories do, which makes me think ardent Jezza / Labour supporters are stricken with the same problem.
Nah *&^^&No, of course not, silly me. It’s only Tories who perceive bias where none exists, probably because they are all intellectually challenged and deluded, whilst all Labour supporters are brilliantly perceptive and highly intelligent but horribly wronged by the entire British media. It must be very hard for you.
Exactly, it’s a non story. We all no the print media is biased, we pays our money and we takes our choice. As for the Beeb and ITV, if they are biased in favour of the Tories then I simply can’t understand why they both (the Beeb in particular) manage to make my Tory voting mum froth with rage at the appalling bias she perceives in every news programme she watches.
Is English not your first language?You’re quite right, thanks for that. I’ve had a long day, been up since six and full of cold, my mentally faculties are not tip top tonight.
We all no the print media is biased
should be : Know not no.
I love not being a party supporter!
I can do this with many of you and Davels posts but I don't want to stoop to your level ,however on this occasion I thought I would just slip this in.
You may also want to keep a check on>>>> there their and they're
No, of course not, silly me. It’s only Tories who perceive bias where none exists, probably because they are all intellectually challenged and deluded, whilst all Labour supporters are brilliantly perceptive and highly intelligent but horribly wronged by the entire British media. It must be very hard for you.
You’re quite right, thanks for that. I’ve had a long day, been up since six and full of cold, my mentally faculties are not tip top tonight.
Did a certain Loughborough University’s study find that media reports regarding the Conservatives had a substantially more negative slant than that media reporting regarding Labour ?I was, but then I cancelled my membership in disgust. I am now entirely disenfranchised. My name is Vertigo Swirl now btw, so perhaps you could drop the “Alfie” schtick? There’s a dear.
BTW Alfie you’re not something ghastly like a LibDem are you ?
I was, but then I cancelled my membership in disgust. I am now entirely disenfranchised. My name is Vertigo Swirl now btw, so perhaps you could drop the “Alfie” schtick? There’s a dear.
Did a certain Loughborough University’s study find that media reports regarding the Conservatives had a substantially more negative slant than that media reporting regarding Labour ?
BTW Alfie you’re not something ghastly like a LibDem are you ?
I’m not giving anything away....everyone knows who you were in past lives.Of course they do but that’s beside the point. I have asked you politely to call me by my forum name, now are you going to comply or not?
Of course they do but that’s beside the point. I have asked you politely to call me by my forum name, now are you going to comply or not?
Hand bags at the ready....
Are you going to tell teacher ?I thought you were a grown up? I think you are only aspiring to be one by the sound of it.
Are you kidding !!!!! This handbag cost an arm and a leg !You could have fed a family in poverty for a month or more instead, shame on you.
You could have fed a family in poverty for a month or more instead, shame on you.
You could have fed a family in poverty for a month or more instead, shame on you.
No I mean a literal arm and leg !Oh, did your handbag get caught in a ski lift mechanism? Sorry for your loss of limbs.
Oh, did your handbag get caught in a ski lift mechanism? Sorry for your loss of limbs.
Not to worry, they came as a pair.
Not to worry, they came as a pair.So please tell me more about how this inexpensive handbag deprived you of two limbs, I’m intrigued. Was it a (wo)man-eating handbag?
So please tell me more about how this inexpensive handbag deprived you of two limbs, I’m intrigued. Was it a (wo)man-eating handbag?
What can I say...it was crocodile skin and they’d left the teeth in !Right so it WAS expensive then. Thanks for clarifying #champagnesocialist
Right so it WAS expensive then. Thanks for clarifying #champagnesocialist
Course it was....plastic is sooooo bad for the planet !!!So we go full circle. You’re someone who despairs at poverty, and at the entitled rich but who boasts of owning a hugely expensive handbag. FYI my handbag is a small nylon rucksack that cost £15. Who is the true socialist here?
So we go full circle. You’re someone who despairs at poverty, and at the entitled rich but who boasts of owning a hugely expensive handbag. FYI my handbag is a small nylon rucksack that cost £15. Who is the true socialist here?
Oh you are.....definitely.....I mean look at the cost of your handbag !You actually think I believe you have a crocodile handbag, with teeth. Oh dear, bless you and your excitement at your little funny.
BTW I don’t believe in killing animals to feed myself or to further my own vanity.....but it was soooo worth watching your reaction to my rather obvious wind up.
You actually think I believe you have a crocodile handbag, with teeth. Oh dear, bless you and your excitement at your little funny.
Gosh no....but a very expensive handbag....and me being a socialist and all....absolutely.You're floundering dear, best to have a lie-down now.
You really are the gift that keeps giving V.
You're floundering dear, best to have a lie-down now.
Talking about lying down...hope you’re feeling a tad better today.Thank you, truth be told I feel fairly crap, but I am at home today so can wrap up warm and drink lots of tea and chat about handbags with you so it's all good.
Thank you, truth be told I feel fairly crap, but I am at home today so can wrap up warm and drink lots of tea and chat about handbags with you so it's all good.
Seeing as how the MSM is apparently so biased in favour of Boris and the Tories it makes you wonder why their tousle-haired blonde bombshell won’t appear on two of the Beeb’s flagship current affairs programmes and why they have banned certain media outlets from attending their press conferences. Why would they do that if the media was resolutely biased in their favour?
Telling it like it is
In his acceptance speech when recently being awarded the Olof Palme prize in Stockholm, my good friend John le Carré noted that the shabbiest trick in the Brexiters’ box was to make an enemy of Europe.
He added: “Don’t blame the Tories for their great victory. It was Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party, with its unpolicy on Brexit, its [ censored word]emitism and student-level Marxism-Leninism, that alienated traditional Labour voters and left them nowhere to go.”
There is much discussion in innumerable postmortems about what went wrong: Labour’s loss of touch with its heartlands and so on. But Le Carré has captured it in that one sentence. Labour lost because it had disastrous leadership; and, alas, from what the people in control of the party machine still seem to believe, there is a danger that, like the Bourbons, they have learned nothing and forgotten nothing.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/feb/09/brexit-crisis-not-opportunity-see-that-too-late?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
You do know that Le Carré thought Blair was a socialist, don’t you ?So what! He has many views, some of which even appear to concur with yours. Not the ones about Jeremy though, obviously.
So what! He has many views, some of which even appear to concur with yours. Not the ones about Jeremy though, obviously.
The point is it’s simply opinion....and as we know, opinions are like noses, everyone has one.
“I thought Blair was lying when he denied he was a socialist. The worst thing I can say about him is that he was telling the truth.” - John Le Carre.
And your point is...
You do know that Le Carré thought Blair was a socialist, don’t you ?
Blair was a lot of things, a socialist wasn't one of them. Just look at the capitalist life he and his family have now.
Lovely property portfolio darling.
To be fair I hated Blair but if it was between him and the bunch of mongrels we have now I’d gladly have him back.
You have been blessed with an ability to see the difference. I, on the other hand, can only see blue and blue, greedy- self only self worshiping fk the people.
There is a fag paper difference but I’d settle even for that ATM.
To be fair I hated Blair but if it was between him and the bunch of mongrels we have now I’d gladly have him back.That’s no way to talk about the shadow cabinet!!
That’s no way to talk about the shadow cabinet!!
8@??)(No, it took less than five seconds, but thanks for the applause.
I’ll applaud because I know that will have taken you some time to come up with that pithy aside.
Oh, we were doing so well just sharing different views and opinions without sniping...No sniping from me.
No sniping from me.
Ahem.. You attention please. a wee goad me thinks. 8)-)))Twas a humorous aside, sorry if it has caused upset.
That’s no way to talk about the shadow cabinet!!
Twas a humorous aside, sorry if it has caused upset.
Is Corbyn right to put forward Tom Watson for a peerage, a man who caused no end of misery and despair for the individuals who stood accused of child sex abuse (as a result of his campaign to investigate an alleged Tory paedo ring, an investigation which confirmed no such sex ring ever existed, and which cost the tax payer £120 million)?
No fan of Watson but, to be fair, how was he to know ? It was the police who decided to progress the investigation.So he was a poor little politician duped by the nasty man, who deserves a peerage now does he, in your view?
So he was a poor little politician duped by the nasty man, who deserves a peerage now does he, in your view?
I don’t believe in the honours system but I was making a broader point. Do you really think Watson would have jeopardised his reputation if he didn’t believe that a crime had been committed?who knows? I do know that Corbyn doesn’t believe in the honours system either so why has he chosen to reward Tom Watson who has cost this country millions and achieved little apart from ruining lives?
who knows? I do know that Corbyn doesn’t believe in the honours system either so why has he chosen to reward Tom Watson who has cost this country millions and achieved little apart from ruining lives?
I’m afraid you’d have to ask him that but I’d hazard a guess that it was the same motivation as Johnson used when bestowing a knighthood on the individual who through his cruel Universal Credit policy contributed to the deaths of 160000 of some of this country’s most vulnerable individuals.Oh right, you’re equating St. Jeremy’s motivations with that evil Nazi clown Boris now. Interesting...
Oh right, you’re equating St. Jeremy’s motivations with that evil Nazi clown Boris now. Interesting...
Why are you so interested in my opinion of Corbyn ? It seems to irk you more than is actually healthy. Serious question....apart from your admiration that he got Brexit over the line, what is your opinion of Johnson?It’s called having a debate. Your position is full of odd contradictions which amuse rather than irk me. As for Boris I have already made my opinion of him quite clear in the past. Not a fan.
It’s called having a debate. Your position is full of odd contradictions which amuse rather than irk me. As for Boris I have already made my opinion of him quite clear in the past. Not a fan.
Odd contradictions ? I’m afraid if anyone had only read this thread they would definitely think you were a fan. That’s the contradiction.Then they would not be very perceptive at all. Perhaps you can point to any post in which I give the impression of being a fan of Boris in the same way that you are clearly a fan of Corbyn's?
Then they would not be very perceptive at all. Perhaps you can point to any post in which I give the impression of being a fan of Boris in the same way that you are clearly a fan of Corbyn's?
Perhaps it was this post that gave you the impression that I was a Boris fan?
"I can’t stand Boris personally, but as he is now in charge we have to hope he does a reasonably good job, and if he does that means his popularity is likely to wane later rather than sooner. The last thing this country needs now is more poliitcal turmoil and upheaval imo".
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7436.2280
Please read properly what I posted “I’m afraid if anyone had only read this thread they would definitely think you were a fan.“Oh, so I’m only to be judged by my comments on one thread am I? In which case it will be very easy for you to find all my expressions if Boris Fandom to prove your point. *watches the tumbleweed blow though*
It’s the general impression your posts give and I’m ‘a fan’ of Corbyn’s policies and if Starmer/Long-Bailey/Nandy carry those policies forward I’ll be ‘a fan’ of theirs too. I’m not ashamed for wanting better for the poorest and most vulnerable in this country.
Have their policies been tried and tested?
It was the Labour government who began the austerity by leaving a note for the Tory government saying the purse was empty- Brown sold off the gold in reserve. Tony Blair forced more tax increases and the people saw no benefit to them- hence the Tory government! His open arms immigration caused a lot of hurt in many communities up and down the country.
I’m sorry but once you bring up the old ‘there is no money’ note you’ve lost me...what is it they say about telling a lie enough times ?
As to ‘have their policies been tried and tested....yes, in many countries.
Would a civil servant who has no vote lie about that?What is it with these ranty Lefties and their lazy Nazi comparisons? They’re absolutely obsessed by them. Perhaps it’s projection.
Can you name the countries or some of them for me?
Jeremy Corbyn for PM!!
I would vote for his brother!
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1249566/jeremy-corbyn-news-greta-thunberg-latest-piers-corbyn-climate-change-global-warming
What is it with these ranty Lefties and their lazy Nazi comparisons? They’re absolutely obsessed by them. Perhaps it’s projection.
Would a civil servant who has no vote lie about that?
Can you name the countries or some of them for me?
Jeremy Corbyn for PM!!
I would vote for his brother!
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1249566/jeremy-corbyn-news-greta-thunberg-latest-piers-corbyn-climate-change-global-warming
Liam Byrne the gentleman who wrote the note was an MP not a civil servant. This was what he said about the note :
“Those negotiations were tough and bruising. And so in my final hours of office, I was writing thank-you notes to my incredible team of civil servants. And then I thought I’d write one letter more to my successor. Into my head came the phrase I’d used to negotiate all those massive savings with my colleagues: “I’m afraid there is no money.” I knew my successor’s job was tough. I guess I wanted to offer them a friendly word on their first day in one of government’s hardest jobs by honouring an old tradition that stretched back to Churchill in the 1930s and the Tory chancellor Reginald Maudling, who bounced down the steps of the Treasury in 1964 to tell Jim Callaghan: “Sorry to leave it in such a mess, old cock.”
So certainly a disingenuous painting of the note, if not a downright lie.
As to the policies offered by Labour, just look at any social democracy and you’ll see just such policies in action.
“Not all Nazis were evil”? Who were the good guys then? I posted links showing how Hitler and Nazis enjoy some popularity in Palestine, on account of their Jew murdering ways you see.
I am very well aware some Palestinians hate the Jews in Israel. But you would be wrong to call them Nazis and you would also be wrong to say ALL Palestinians hate Jews. Many Jews in Israel are not happy with their governments behavior. As faith has pointed out to you. Some Palestinians hate ARABS and terrorists like many other people...1) I did not call Palestinians Nazis
I am sure you already know that not all those who joined the NAZI party were jew [ censored word ] and killers!
Not everyone who is a member of the labour party or Tory party all think the same and behave the same.
Many Germans risked their lives saving Jews and political prisoners who wore the party badge merely as it was a good way to get business, or protection. Many German military were not Nazis, The hard core murderers were the gestapo and the SS.
Hitler was a vegetarian and liked young girls. Two committed suicide... not someone I would salute ew. Mind you a jack boot... u t a
Liam Byrne the gentleman who wrote the note was an MP not a civil servant. This was what he said about the note :That gentleman Liam Byrne also said
“Those negotiations were tough and bruising. And so in my final hours of office, I was writing thank-you notes to my incredible team of civil servants. And then I thought I’d write one letter more to my successor. Into my head came the phrase I’d used to negotiate all those massive savings with my colleagues: “I’m afraid there is no money.” I knew my successor’s job was tough. I guess I wanted to offer them a friendly word on their first day in one of government’s hardest jobs by honouring an old tradition that stretched back to Churchill in the 1930s and the Tory chancellor Reginald Maudling, who bounced down the steps of the Treasury in 1964 to tell Jim Callaghan: “Sorry to leave it in such a mess, old cock.”
So certainly a disingenuous painting of the note, if not a downright lie.
As to the policies offered by Labour, just look at any social democracy and you’ll see just such policies in action.
That gentleman Liam Byrne also said
“Many people on the doorstep at the last election felt that too often we were for shirkers not workers”
and
“Labour is the party of hard workers not free-riders. The clue is in the name. We are the Labour party. The party that said that idleness is an evil. The party of workers, not shirkers”.
1) I did not call Palestinians Nazis
2) I know that not all Germans including members of the miliary were Nazis. There might have been the odd Nazi Party member (eg Schindler) who wasn’t so bad but on the whole I think there can be little doubt that they were a pretty evil bunch.
Which only goes to show that the skivers and shirkers narrative works.
I disagree with on the whole-as in the great many. There was more than the odd party member, lay person, Who's main crime was to wear a badge and fling the odd salute to pacify the evil doers in public or for self preservation.You seem to be under thr misapprehension that I have tarred a whole nation by stating that all Germans were Nazis. As I’ve never said anything remotely like that I am wondering where you got this idea from? Nor have I implied at any point that you like Nazis and totally agree that it is beyond the pale to label anyone who suffered under their regime (including their descendants) Nazis.
To tar a whole nation as evil is never a good idea. Should we mention the attempts on Hitlers life by his 'own people' and the fact that any dissenting voices was eliminated/liquidated and treated to the same conditions in Dachau concentration camp with others like Jews ,Bolsheviks etc. You will be asking for their names.... sadly the Germans have the records unless they were lost.
I really don't appreciate anyone trying to infer I like 'Nazis' or in any way support their ethics or lack of them. I believe it only fair , that those who suffered under that murderous regime, are not painted with that BRUSH. That is adding insult to injury
I don't think it is a narrative. People know their own families and neighbours,communities and see for themselves, how their hard earned cash is being spent. They are not happy. They have a right to demand a refund or accountability where the money goes. It was the governments of Blair and Cameron who sent modarate people to look at the henious BNP party. who were saying what was being ignored. Thus we have Brexit.
AND the labour party was punished badly in Scotland- at least they had a shite SNP PARTY to vote for other wise it would have been liberal and Tory!
Affiliation Members
Scottish National Party 48
Scottish Conservatives 6
Scottish Liberal Democrats 4
Scottish Labour Party 1
We are not a rich country anymore. well not rich enough to provide education/health care and housing to millions of illegal immigrants from the middle east and Africa. While they clog up our over crowded prisons awaiting deportation, for those who committed crimes, and clogg up the courts with their many appeals for asylum. billions we don't have or would be better spent on those who are in real need.
Who can honestly claim they want this influx to show compassion- and to help with UK poverty is confused as the maths does not compute.
Poor people and politicians do not help the blind man see, or the deranged become sane or the hungry to be fed. It is wealth creators who provide the funds for such achievements.
I’m sorry MTI but you’re beginning to sound like a UKIP pamphlet.Perhaps you could explain how offering freedom of movement to the entire world (a Labour pledge according to Dianne Abbott I believe) would benefit this country?
Perhaps you could explain how offering freedom of movement to the entire world (a Labour pledge according to Dianne Abbott I believe) would benefit this country?
I’m sorry MTI but you’re beginning to sound like a UKIP pamphlet.
You seem to be under thr misapprehension that I have tarred a whole nation by stating that all Germans were Nazis. As I’ve never said anything remotely like that I am wondering where you got this idea from? Nor have I implied at any point that you like Nazis and totally agree that it is beyond the pale to label anyone who suffered under their regime (including their descendants) Nazis.
Why should I explain it ? Perhaps you should drop Miss Abbott a tweet when you have a minute expressing your concern ?Hang in a minute. I thought you supported Corbyn and his socialist policies? Is this one policy you don’t support? It’s rather an important one.
It is what you want to see Faith. I support no party, I have no victory or loss to claim. I follow no one. I only say what I see and observe in my own community and in third world countries, and comment on them.
I have no agenda to push, no power to chase or recognized monarchy to bow to. I believe in free thought and free speech, what makes you think I should not have these. Or hand them over to other people?
Many millions of moderate Germans in the beginning joined the Nazi party- they were swept away with a tide that for many became a tsunami and this over whelmed them. You are claiming only a few Nazis were ok and the rest were evil. I disagreed.I think when one talks about “The Nazis” one is not referring to ordinary Germans who got swept along in the beginning. One is referring to the political party, its leadership, its aims, objectives, policies and actions.
Hang in a minute. I thought you supported Corbyn and his socialist policies? Is this one policy you don’t support? It’s rather an important one.
I refer you to my previous answer.A non answer. You can’t even say whether or not you support though you were quick to label Miss Taken a Ukipper for suggesting it wasn’t a great idea. It’s clearly one area of Corbyn policy that made absolutely no sense and contributed to Labour’s unelectability.
I don’t. You have every right to say what you like....but, likewise, I have every right to comment on it
Of course you do, I welcome that completely. But it is driving towards name calling and popping me into a political box. which isn't commenting.
If you disagree with what I say, I have no issue with that at all.
Much of what you write wouldn’t look out of place on a UKIP pamphlet but there is also much of what you write that would. My comment was an observation, no more than that.
I think your observations are limited if you don't mind me saying.
I agree with many things from all political partys: Labour, Tory, SNP, and even the green party! However I don't buy into their whole agenda and stick with it and defend the indefensible- all have skeletons in their cupboards.
All partys are corrupt, self serving with their own agenda. I have none. To simple pick the sores of others without looking at your own scabs is pointless ,embarrassing and doesn't win votes. IMO
The point scoring,shouting in the chambers is a disgrace.
It’s an imperfect system but it’s the only system we have and all we can do is chose who we feel will deliver the best outcome for the least pain.
It’s an imperfect system but it’s the only system we have and all we can do is chose who we feel will deliver the best outcome for the least pain.Why did you not use your vote for many years if that is what you truly believe?
Why did you not use your vote for many years if that is what you truly believe?
Absolutely none of your business.Right, either you were in prison or you were lying about not voting during the Blair years or you don’t believe in practicing what you preach. Thanks for the reply.
Right, either you were in prison or you were lying about not voting during the Blair years or you don’t believe in practicing what you preach. Thanks for the reply.
I wouldn’t lose any sleep over it.I can assure you I did not.
I can assure you I did not.
Good news.Unlike this. If there was any doubt that Labour have completely lost the plot, this should dispel it:
Unlike this. If there was any doubt that Labour have completely lost the plot, this should dispel it:
Labour suspends race pioneer Trevor Phillips over Islamophobia claims
Trevor Phillips, the first chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, says Labour was becoming a “brutish, authoritarian cult”
Trevor Phillips, the first chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, says Labour was becoming a “brutish, authoritarian cult”
FRANCESCO GUIDICINI FOR THE SUNDAY TIMES
Trevor Phillips, the former head of Britain’s equalities watchdog, has been suspended from the Labour Party over allegations of Islamophobia, The Times can disclose.
A pioneering anti-racism campaigner, Mr Phillips, 66, now faces expulsion from the party for alleged prejudice against Muslims. He first alerted Britain to the problem of Islamophobia in the 1990s but is now being investigated for public statements that include expressing concerns about Pakistani Muslim men sexually abusing children in northern towns such as Rotherham.
Comments by Mr Phillips about the failure by some Muslims to wear poppies for Remembrance Sunday and the sympathy shown by a substantial proportion in an opinion poll towards the “motives” of the Charlie Hebdo killers also form part of the complaint.
PROFILE
A free thinker since school
Few Britons can claim so many milestones in the fight against racism as Trevor Phillips, Dominic Kennedy writes.
Read the feature
He told Today on BBC Radio 4 that he had been suspended with immediate effect and accused the party of “shutting down genuine debate”.
“They say I’ve accused Muslims of being different — Muslims are different, and in many ways I think that’s admirable . . . We cannot continue to simply say differences don’t matter — it’s a form of disrespect,” he said.
Many of his statements date back years but Jennie Formby, Labour’s general secretary, suspended Mr Phillips as a matter of “urgency to protect the party’s reputation”, he was told. He has not been given the identity of any complainant. The suspension pending investigation means he cannot attend party meetings or run for office.
Mr Phillips was the inaugural chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which is investigating Labour for alleged [ censored word]emitism. He was among a number of anti-racists who wrote to The Guardian last year and said that they were refusing to vote Labour at the general election in solidarity with Jews.
In The Times today Mr Phillips says he is a victim of Labour’s adoption of a cross-party group of MPs’ definition of Islamophobia as a “kind of racism” hostile to “Muslimness”. Labour said the party “takes all complaints about Islamophobia extremely seriously and they are fully investigated”.
The accusations are based on his public statements about how to integrate Muslims. As chairman of the Runnymede Trust think tank, Mr Phillips in 1997 published a report on Islamophobia. He successfully lobbied Tony Blair for a law protecting Muslims from incitement.
Khalid Mahmood, England’s first Muslim MP and a Labour backbencher, said in a paper called The Trial: the strange case of Trevor Phillips, published by the Policy Exchange think tank today, “the charges were so outlandish as to bring disrepute on all involved in making them”. Mr Phillips has said there is no suggestion that he has done anything unlawful and “no one inside or outside the Labour Party has ever suggested that I have broken any rules”.
A draft charge sheet cites Mr Phillips’s remarks to a Conservative Party conference fringe event. He said: “I don’t know if I’m the only one here who’s been nominated by a UN body as the Islamophobe of the Year. You might have been, Peter, no?” To laughter, Peter Tatchell, the veteran gay rights campaigner, joked: “I’m jealous!”
The draft charge sheet accuses Mr Phillips of using language “which targets or intimidates members of ethnic or religious communities, or incites racism, including Islamophobia”.
There is speculation about the motives for trying to expel him now. He has been a leading voice denouncing Labour’s [ censored word]emitism problems under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership. He is also a member of the same Holborn & St Pancras constituency Labour party in north London as Sir Keir Starmer, the favourite to win the leadership election who is suspected of having designs to move away from a hard-left agenda.
The Tory event last autumn was exploring a new definition of Islamophobia proposed by a cross-party group of MPs. The wording has been widely denounced by religious, secular and free-speech campaigners, including Mr Phillips, who chairs the non-profit organisation Index on Censorship, for being a backdoor ban on blasphemy. Labour and some local authorities have adopted it, however.
Mr Phillips’ reference to being nominated as “Islamophobe of the Year” refers to a mock awards ceremony run by the Islamic Human Rights Commission, a Tehran-supporting, London-based pressure group recognised by the United Nations. The annual event was condemned as tasteless after the commission gave a posthumous award in 2015 to the cartoonists of Charlie Hebdo magazine, several of whom had been murdered by terrorists in Paris for drawing the Prophet Mohammed.
Mr Phillips is formally accused of breaking Labour rules forbidding conduct prejudicial or grossly detrimental to the party. The allegations cite extracts from a pamphlet he wrote for the Civitas think tank, an article for the Unherd website and quotations in news reports in The Times and Daily Mail.
In his 2016 pamphlet Race and Faith: The Deafening Silence, he wrote: “The most sensitive cause of conflict in recent years has been the collision between majority norms and the behaviours of some Muslim groups.
“In particular, the exposure of systematic and longstanding abuse by men, mostly of Pakistani Muslim origin in the north of England.”
He went on to describe attending an Islamic conference before Remembrance Sunday where only one Muslim attendee wore a poppy. The same day he visited an industrial site, the workplace of many African and eastern European immigrants. “Poppies were everywhere,” he wrote. “One group had clearly adapted to the mainstream, the other had not.”
Labour has demanded to know why he wrote in the pamphlet that Enoch Powell’s 1968 “rivers of blood” speech had been “lauded as an epic example of the use of political rhetoric”.
Mr Phillips’ full quotation shows he was emphasising that Powell’s career was ended by the speech. The lesson learnt by people in British public life, he said, was to say nothing about race or religion “that is not anodyne and platitudinous”, resulting in a failure to address anti-immigrant sentiment.
He is also criticised for being quoted in The Times in 2016 referring to “the unacknowledged creation of a nation within the nation, with its own geography, its own values and its own very separate future”.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/labour-suspends-race-pioneer-trevor-phillips-over-islamophobia-claims-m7qzzqz8d
https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2020/03/18/jeremy-corbyns-last-pmqs-shows-that-hes-the-leader-this-country-really-needs/
The perfect summation of Jeremy Corbyn’s years as Leader of the Opposition, god rest his soul
orbyn steps aside
Matt Chorley
, Red Box Editor
Thursday March 26 2020, 9.00am, The Times
A little over four years ago . . . will you let me finish? A little over four years ago I started writing Red Box and the very first thing I wrote about . . . can I finish? If you’d just let me finish.
The first thing I wrote about in January 2016 was Jeremy Corbyn. And his neverending revenge reshuffle. And since then I have been opposed to all forms of reshuffles.
The reshuffle lasted days and days. In fact I’m not sure it ever ended. But at least he is now finished. Corbyn took part in his final prime minister’s questions yesterday, having performed some 150 times since his election as Labour leader back in 2015.
All of those who have endured the weekly tedium of his open-goal-dodging, emails from Doris in Derby who speaks only in Labour press release-ese, statements which weren’t questions, and stressing IN all THE wrong places now find themselves well-equipped for self-isolation. We have been trapped for what felt like hours with nothing decent to watch every Wednesday lunchtime for four and half years.
There was a frisson of excitement in the press gallery yesterday when three of Corbyn’s aides were kicked out by a doorkeeper for trying to take photos of the saintly one at the dispatch box. “Seumus I’m not sure this is a great idea.”
Down in the chamber, Boris Johnson rose to the occasion and managed to squeeze out some warm words of tribute “to him, his service to the party and indeed the country over the last four years in a very difficult job”.
Corbyn was slightly thrown by a Tory being nice to him, and said the PM was “talking as if it was some kind of obituary.” He insisted “my voice will not be stilled, I will be around”. Labour MPs inwardly groaned.
In his time as leader Corbyn has seen off three prime ministers, although they have managed the one thing he never did. Actually become PM.
Written off as a leftie beardie weirdie who could not win an election he proved us all wrong, by not winning the two.
He won over Twitter, Owen Jones and half of UB40, but in the end the mainstream electorate was biased against him.
So here, in no particular order and making no particular sense, are a collection of things Magic Grandpa which make me smile, because frankly we could do with it right now. As a wise man’s Twitter account once said after being hacked: “Here we . . . here we . . . here we f***ing go!!!”
Even before he became leader, Jeremy Bernard Corbyn was giving us gold. Asked during the 2015 leadership contest by MumsNet what his favourite biscuit was he said that he was trying to cut down sugar but if forced he would have shortbread. If forced? Who would force you to have shortbread? Unless you’ve been taken hostage by a Scottish terrorist. And he’s probably friends with them anyway.
Soon after becoming leader he broke all the rules: not singing the national anthem, refusing to press the nuclear button, opposing shoot-to-kill, raising doubts over the Falklands, backing flying pickets, suggesting negotiating with Isis and refusing to be any good.
Pressed on his own unpopularity he once replied: “I think we can spend too much time worrying about polls.”
On Brexit he was, to coin a phrase, present but not involved. During the referendum campaign he went on a walking holiday. He went on Channel 4’s Last Leg in a pimp’s fur coat and declared his enthusiasm for the EU to be “Seven, seven-and-a-half”.
This supposedly-devoted Remainer responded to the Leave vote the morning after the referendum by rushing on TV and declaring: “Article 50 has to be invoked now.”
Adopting five tests his own frontbench described as “bollocks”, he was dragged to to the idea of a second referendum before revealing he was the only person in Britain who was entirely neutral on what was then the biggest issue facing the country. (Oh for those days.)
Giving Russia the benefit of the doubt over the Salisbury poisonings. Giving Ken Livingstone the benefit of the doubt over, well, almost everything. Calling Theresa May “a stupid woman”.
His hooded coat at the cenotaph. His hat on Newsnight. His shellsuit on the streets of Islington. “When I go home every night, I put my tracksuit on. I feel very comfortable in it. You can do anything in a tracksuit. You can go out. It’s great! Although people round here make me stop going out in it.”
Of course in the 2017 election he defied all of the pundits who predicted he would lose by only losing by a bit less than they thought. And he celebrated with his fabulously misplaced high-five with Emily Thornberry.
Once challenged over why he couldn’t explain his own policy, he replied: “That’s why we have iPads.”
Mistakenly thinking that everyone at Glastonbury was there for him, and so organising LabourLive, which was just like Glastonbury except in every way, with less Stormzy and more Barry Gardiner.
The big marrow on his allotment. The jam-making. Signing apples with a gold pen. Going to the kebab awards and extolling the virtues of salad. Suggesting that he was “going through the process” of becoming a vegan but found it hard because he liked cheese.
The lieu days and afternoon naps. Grading all Labour MPs from “core to hostile”.
Telling parents who go to the school gate in their pyjamas: “I’d advise people to wear a coat and put some proper clothes on, it gets cold out there.” Filing his tax return late. Forgetting to mention that Iain Duncan Smith had quit the government, insisting that it was not “up to me to throw in other than a couple of lines about ‘the government’s in a mess’.”
Being constantly, endlessly baffled that journalists might want to ask questions of the man who wanted to be prime minister: “Thank you very much for invading my private space.” “You’re shouting questions at me. It’s quite rude”
Actually saying: “I think we need to examine this question in some detail and see if there is excessive profit-making by those who make Freddos – then they’ve got us to answer to.”
The mad schemes that never came off: giving a speech from a floating platform in the seas; projecting holograms of himself around the country; free broadband for all. (What we wouldn’t do for that right now.)
Calling for nuclear submarines without nuclear warheads. Likening Isis to Israel. Campaigning for the Labour leader to bring back a shadow cabinet minister for mental health when he was the Labour leader who abolished the post.
Paying tribute to a police officer who “lost his life”, who hadn’t died. Wishing good luck to the England football team with a quote from Bill Shankly, who was Scottish. Announcing a new bus policy on a tram. Sitting on the floor of a “ram-packed” train.
Making an ectoplasm jelly bath bomb. Appointing Pat Glass as shadow education secretary before she quit two days later. Attending a party celebrating Andy Burnham becoming mayor of Manchester, to which Burnham wasn’t invited.
Winning the argument, by coming up with ideas that were more popular when it wasn’t him extolling them.
Seeing his deputy quit on the eve of an election and writing to him: “I hope the horseradish plants I gave you thrive.”
This is a man who once said out loud: “Let us remember the incompetence we have been forced to endure.” Apparently under the impression that people would think of the government and not him.
Given what we are going through right now it seems wrong even to blow the cobwebs off the This. Is. Not. Normal. catchphrase. But it all began when I found myself having to explain that British Jews protesting outside parliament at [ censored word]emitism in the Labour Party was not normal.
A man who claimed to be a life-long anti-racist not knowing that that mural was racist was not normal.
The Chief Rabbi saying that a “new poison” had entered the party was not normal. The Jewish Labour Movement saying that the party was “no longer a safe space for Jewish people” was not normal. Some Labour MPs had the courage to say that enough was enough and walked out. They all lost their seats at the election, but they will always have the knowledge that when things really mattered they did what was right.
And now Corbyn leaves with the Labour Party still under investigation to see if it is institutionally racist. That, perhaps more than anything, should shame him and those around him, and those who supported the very idea of him becoming prime minister. But it won’t.
At the end of it all, what was the point? What did he achieve? As a long-standing Eurosceptic who wanted a massive expansion in the size of the state funded by huge government borrowing, and the nationalisation of the railways and private hospitals, he could look around now and think job done. Albeit, none of it actually down to him.
As this bizarre era comes to an end, I want to go back to a quote from the beginning. Nothing he has said or done since has managed to better sum up his leadership: superficially well-meaning, yet bafflingly meaningless.
In his very first conference speech as leader he told us, strong message here: “Let’s give them the space for that fizz to explode into the joy we want of a better society.”
For now. Finally. Jeremy Corbyn does not cling on. Obviously.
Give me Chorley over Chomsky any day. What has Chomsky ever done for me? Defended Holocaust Deniers? Doggedly pursued a socialist political agenda for 70 plus years? And I should respect his views why? Because he is “the father of modern linguistics”? Does that mean his views trump those of everyone else’s and we should all shut up and defer to him? I don’t think it works like that.
You cannot be serious Faithlilly??! If academic achievement should be a measure of whether or not one person’s opinion is to be taken more seriously than another then where does that leave Jeremy Corbyn who failed his A-Levels??! I bet even Matt Chorley managed to pass his, which means his opinion counts for more than Corbyn’s right?
We are not talking about academic achievement. We are talking about multiple awards and honours bestowed upon the man by a number of great institutions and a swath of his contemporaries.So what are you saying? Chomsky is the top trump and his views are the last word and must be agreed with? How typically authoritarian lefty of you. Everything Matt Chorley wrote was factual anyway and god knows what Noam Chomsky has got to do with it, apart from it’s just another beautiful example of your desperate deflection tactics.
So what are you saying? Chomsky is the top trump and his views are the last word and must be agreed with? How typically authoritarian lefty of you. Everything Matt Chorley wrote was factual anyway and god knows what Noam Chomsky has got to do with it, apart from it’s just another beautiful example of your desperate deflection tactics.
No everything Matt Chorley wrote was opinion. Like you he seems to have a well established loathing of Corbyn.Excuse me, but Matt Chorley listed a number of facts about Corbyn’s tenure as shadow leader, you obviously didn’t read it. Thanks for giving me permission to go on a wild goose chase to try and find someone of equal standing as Chomsky (according to whom?) that you will almost certainly reject for some childishly spurious reason. I’m not dancing to your tune.
Noam Chomsky was brought into the topic for balance. You are quite welcome to supply us with the opinion of someone of equal standing amongst his peers as Chomsky.
Excuse me, but Matt Chorley listed a number of facts about Corbyn’s tenure as shadow leader, you obviously didn’t read it. Thanks for giving me permission to go on a wild goose chase to try and find someone of equal standing as Chomsky (according to whom?) that you will almost certainly reject for some childishly spurious reason. I’m not dancing to your tune.
Equal standing according to their peers.Ooh, saucer of milk for the hissy cat.
Unfortunately you have been reading the ( insert tabloid here ) for so long you no longer recognise a superior intellect such as Chomskys when you read it
Ooh, saucer of milk for the hissy cat.
And you accuse me of deflection.My reply was in response to your attempt at a withering put down vis-a-vis my supposed inability to recognise a superior intellect such as Noam Chomsky. Where’s the deflection?
Keir Starmer is rising in my estimation, especially if this is true:
Sir Keir Starmer is planning to purge Jeremy Corbyn’s allies in the shadow cabinet and party headquarters within weeks of becoming Labour leader, according to “scorched earth” plans that lay bare his desire to break definitively with the factionalism of the party under his predecessor.
Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, is expected to be crowned leader on Saturday in a result deemed so damaging to some on the left that last week members of Corbyn’s office briefly discussed whether to extend his leadership by invoking the chaos caused by the the coronavirus.
In one of his first acts, Starmer is set to request the departure of Karie Murphy, Corbyn’s chief of staff, and Jennie Formby, the party’s general secretary, citing their alleged mishandling of bullying and anti-semitism allegations, which aides have said amounts to “gross misconduct”.
He will then overlook high-profile Corbynistas by appointing a fresh shadow cabinet, with almost all left-wing rising stars excluded.
Can we have a link please ?https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/labour-leadership-race-keir-starmers-scorched-earth-plan-to-roast-left-zthbw2dqz
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/labour-leadership-race-keir-starmers-scorched-earth-plan-to-roast-left-zthbw2dqz
Thank you. I’m not a subscriber so can only see part of the article.Weak leadership prevented them from doing so, they only have themselves to blame. I always said Corbyn should have come out of the closet and nailed his colours to the Brexit mast. Of course that would have cost him the support of many Labour members but would have gone down well with the average working class Brexit voter.
Starmer will have to be very careful. The voters who were disillusioned by the politics of Blair will not be lured back by more of the same and those members, somewhere in the region of 200000+, who joined precisely because of the party’s shift to the left will not take too kindly to a purge of the those they see as carrying that mantle forward.
We must never forget that in 2017 Labour, on a leftist platform, were 250,000 votes away from being able to form a government and, I believe, if they hadn’t supported a second referendum on Brexit then we just may have seen the same, if a not better, result this time. Many, many Labour supporters interviewed said they were ashamed of voting Tory but they were doing so in order to ‘get Brexit done’. Now imagine if Labour had also offered to uphold the result of the referendum?
Weak leadership prevented them from doing so, they only have themselves to blame. I always said Corbyn should have come out of the closet and nailed his colours to the Brexit mast. Of course that would have cost him the support of many Labour members but would have gone down well with the average working class Brexit voter.
We are a Democratic Party, the policy was not Corbyn’s to decide but was agreed on at conference. Being a party of mixed demographics it would always have been difficult to satisfy everyone. Take Brexit out of the equation and it would have been a whole different story.Obviously not a very good way of deciding a coherent policy is it?
Obviously not a very good way of deciding a coherent policy is it?
In this case obviously not but whatever policy the party adopted would have lost them voters.Just goes to prove they were unlectable then and that’s something they need to sort out pdq if they ever want the opportunity to demonstrate how brilliant they would be in a corona crisis.
Keir Starmer is rising in my estimation, especially if this is true:
Sir Keir Starmer is planning to purge Jeremy Corbyn’s allies in the shadow cabinet and party headquarters within weeks of becoming Labour leader, according to “scorched earth” plans that lay bare his desire to break definitively with the factionalism of the party under his predecessor.
Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, is expected to be crowned leader on Saturday in a result deemed so damaging to some on the left that last week members of Corbyn’s office briefly discussed whether to extend his leadership by invoking the chaos caused by the the coronavirus.
In one of his first acts, Starmer is set to request the departure of Karie Murphy, Corbyn’s chief of staff, and Jennie Formby, the party’s general secretary, citing their alleged mishandling of bullying and anti-semitism allegations, which aides have said amounts to “gross misconduct”.
He will then overlook high-profile Corbynistas by appointing a fresh shadow cabinet, with almost all left-wing rising stars excluded.
Just goes to prove they were unlectable then and that’s something they need to sort out pdq if they ever want the opportunity to demonstrate how brilliant they would be in a corona crisis.
Well talk about nailing your colours to the mast- seems some lefty politician are indeed from another planet- lessons NOT learned..
Open the borders for 70k fruit pickers from the Balkans.. yeah lets do that shall we?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1262160/Sky-News-Kay-Burley-European-workers-coronavirus-news-UK-latest-COVID19-cases-pandemic
It's not like we don't have prisons full of prisoners seeking to be outdoors or those laid off wanting work.
I am trying to recall the last time the UK population was reduced by millions due to starvation deaths...erm um Oh we need the immigrants to save us all. Gang masters must have' upped their bungs' to 'concerned' do gooders.
Don’t be ridiculous, one no-win decision doesn’t make a party unelectable.Remind me when they last won an election?
Remind me when they last won an election?
Yes damn those lefties for wanting us to have British grown food in our sops come winter....grrrr.
Ten years..and before that 13 years for the Conservatives, and some of that when Blair’s approval ratings were low.Historically Labour have spent the large majority of time since their formation out of power. What do the keep on doing wrong I wonder...?
Historically Labour have spent the large majority of time since their formation out of power. What do the keep on doing wrong I wonder...?
Well talk about nailing your colours to the mast- seems some lefty politician are indeed from another planet- lessons NOT learned..
Open the borders for 70k fruit pickers from the Balkans.. yeah lets do that shall we?
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1262160/Sky-News-Kay-Burley-European-workers-coronavirus-news-UK-latest-COVID19-cases-pandemic
It's not like we don't have prisons full of prisoners seeking to be outdoors or those laid off wanting work.
I am trying to recall the last time the UK population was reduced by millions due to starvation deaths...erm um Oh we need the immigrants to save us all. Gang masters must have' upped their bungs' to 'concerned' do gooders.
You tell me ?I would but you wouldn’t agree.
Sooooo we aren’t going to let prisoners pick the veggies....if indigenous Britons wanted to pick fruit for a pittance we wouldn’t need our Eastern European friends. Where does that leave us ?
I would but you wouldn’t agree.
We never needed them before the EU open borders.
With universal credit having more money in the coffers for the real needy! I don't know where you live (Scotland) ?
Many summers are spent going fruit picking in Scotland it is a community thing up north-same in Italy and China many elderly are self sufficient and self reliant- is it beneath people to go and pick fruit and veg? to cook from scratch what they grow?
Best not waste our energy then.Quite, I have certainly wasted far too much of my time engaging with you, perhaps I should let you get back to copying and pasting to yourself.
Quite, I have certainly wasted far too much of my time engaging with you, perhaps I should let you get back to copying and pasting to yourself.
But you won’t because unfortunately as soon as I post something there you’ll be, on your hind legs, begging for attention...and this doesn’t only happen when I post. I change my profile avatar, you comment, I change my tag line, you comment, I ignore you, you comment....you take notice of when I post and comment...you search long forgotten posts of mine and comment.I felt sorry for you. Obviously without my contribution you’d have had virtually no-one else to talk to. But if that’s what you want that’s what you shall have. To ensure that I no longer have to read your spiteful, rude posts directed at me and to ensure that you no longer feel threatened by my presence on this forum, I have put you on ignore, which I’m sure will very much meet with your approval. Bye-bye, it’s been fun, stay safe and be well.
Why, oh why would you do all the above if you find me so wearisome?
I felt sorry for you. Obviously without my contribution you’d have had virtually no-one else to talk to. But if that’s what you want that’s what you shall have. To ensure that I no longer have to read your spiteful, rude posts directed at me and to ensure that you no longer feel threatened by my presence on this forum, I have put you on ignore, which I’m sure will very much meet with your approval. Bye-bye, it’s been fun, stay safe and be well.
Yet again your supporting the (alleged) terrorist loving Corbyn with no evidence.
Can you tell me how I can block or ignore this person Faithlilly please?click on profile, account settings, modify profile, buddy / ignore list and put Faithlilly in the ignore box. Works like a dream!
click on profile, account settings, modify profile, buddy / ignore list and put Faithlilly in the ignore box. Works like a dream!
Yet again your supporting the (alleged) terrorist loving Corbyn with no evidence.
Most people are well aware of Jeremy Corbyn's 'links' to terrorist organisations like Hamas/Hezbolla and the IRA. He has previously referred to the former as 'friends'and later said he regretted it, need we say any more!Thank god he’s history, just an embarrassing footnote, best forgotten.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/04/jeremy-corbyn-says-he-regrets-calling-hamas-and-hezbollah-friends
https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/opinion/letters/18139917.letters-jeremy-corbyn-attended-pro-ira-meetings-rallies-making-speeches-supporting-ira/
Most people are well aware of Jeremy Corbyn's 'links' to terrorist organisations like Hamas/Hezbolla and the IRA. He has previously referred to the former as 'friends'and later said he regretted it, need we say any more!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/04/jeremy-corbyn-says-he-regrets-calling-hamas-and-hezbollah-friends
https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/opinion/letters/18139917.letters-jeremy-corbyn-attended-pro-ira-meetings-rallies-making-speeches-supporting-ira/
Thank god he’s history, just an embarrassing footnote, best forgotten.
Good on ‘ol Keir
He also apologised for anti-semitism in the party, which had brought “grief” to Jewish communities, adding: “I will tear out this poison by its roots and judge success by the return of Jewish members and those who felt they could no longer support us.”
It seems Keir’s pledge to work with the government on the Coronavirus crisis and not to score political points hasn’t gone down too well with the Corbyn Fan Club.
https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2020/04/04/keir-starmers-victory-speech-just-finished-the-labour-party/
Interesting study, the results of which are, ironically, published in the Daily Mail.
Right-wingers are less intelligent than left wingers, says study
Children with low intelligence grow up to be prejudiced
Right-wing views make the less intelligent feel 'safe'
Analysis of more than 15,000 people
By ROB WAUGH
UPDATED: 00:55, 1 February 2016
Right-wingers tend to be less intelligent than left-wingers, and people with low childhood intelligence tend to grow up to have racist and anti-gay views, says a controversial new study.
Conservative politics work almost as a 'gateway' into prejudice against others, say the Canadian academics.
The paper analysed large UK studies which compared childhood intelligence with political views in adulthood across more than 15,000 people.
The authors claim that people with low intelligence gravitate towards right-wing views because they make them feel safe.
Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron Labour party leader Ed Miliband
The survey, which compared childhood intelligence with political views, is bad news for David Cameron, the Conservative Party Prime Minister but should give a lift to Labour Party leader, Ed Miliband, pictured in Question Time
Crucially, people's educational level is not what determines whether they are racist or not - it's innate intelligence, according to the academics.
Social status also appears to play no part.
The study, published in Psychological Science, claims that right-wing ideology forms a 'pathway' for people with low reasoning ability to become prejudiced against groups such as other races and gay people.
President Barack Obama Romney
Left-wingers tend to be more open-minded says the survey - Democrats voted in first black U.S. president Barack Obama. But right-wing ideology forms a pathway for prejudice - Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney, pictured right, was glitter-bombed yesterday by gay-rights activists because of his views
'Cognitive abilities are critical in forming impressions of other people and in being open minded,' say the researchers.
'Individuals with lower cognitive abilities may gravitate towards more socially conservative right-wing ideologies that maintain the status quo.
'It provides a sense of order.'
The study, by academics at Brock University in Ontario, Canada, used information from two UK studies from 1958 and 1970 , where several thousand children were assessed for intelligence at age 10 and 11, and then asked political questions aged 33.
The 1958 National Child Development involved 4,267 men and 4,537 women born in 1958.
RELATED ARTICLES
Previous
1
2
Next
RIGHTMINDS: Does a low IQ make you right-wing? That depends on how you define left and right
As scientists discover how to 'translate' brainwaves into words... Could a machine read your innermost...
How everyone from top civil servants to TV presenters are using a loophole to only pay 21% tax - and how you...
SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Share
'Individuals with lower abilities may gravitate towards right-wing ideologies that maintain the status quo.
It provides a sense of order,' say the academics
The British Cohort Study involved 3,412 men and 3,658 women born in 1970.
It's the first time the data from these studies has been used in this way.
In adulthood, the children were asked whether they agreed with statements such as, 'I wouldn't mind working with people from other races,' and 'I wouldn't mind if a family of a different race moved next door.'
They were also asked whether they agreed with statements about typically right-wing and socially conservative politics such as, 'Give law breakers stiffer sentences,' and 'Schools should teach children to obey authority.'
The researchers also compared their results against a 1986 American study which included tests of cognitive ability and questions assessing prejudice against homosexuals.
The authors claim that there is a strong correlation between low intelligence both as a child and an adult, and right-wing politics.
The authors also claim that conservative politics is part of a complex relationship that leads people to become prejudices.
'Conservative ideology represents a critical pathway through which childhood intelligence predicts racism in adulthood,' says the paper.
'In psychological terms, the relation between intelligence and prejudice may stem from the propensity of individuals with lower cognitive ability to endorse more right wing conservative ideologies because such ideologies offer a psychological sense of stability and order.'
'Clearly, however, all socially conservative people are not prejudiced, and all prejudiced persons are not conservative.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-intelligent-left-wingers-says-controversial-study--conservative-politics-lead-people-racist.html
The most intelligent voters are Greens and Lib Dems, and that’s a fact.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2008/nov/03/greenpolitics-liberaldemocrats
It’s a little too early to know what kind of leader he’ll make. One good thing, the MSM won’t be able to monster him like they did Corbyn.
I have to disagree, Faithlilly, of course they will find something to monster him with. I can't think of a single Labour leader in my lifetime or my parents' who didn't receive the treatment. What I think Starmer will do will be to consolidate the lost core vote and with any luck make inroads into becoming electable again.
I came across this just now which reiterates an observation I made a couple of days ago and I think it is so true of the Corbyn Lefties who even find most of their own party evil for not wholesale worshipping their dear departed leader.
“Left-wing people find it very hard to get on with right-wing people, because they believe that they are evil. Whereas I have no problem getting on with left wing people, because I simply believe that they are mistaken.” Roger Scruton.
How very true indeed. When I am called a right wing Nazi I smile and say well, look at Stalin at least Hitler was a pussy cat compared to him! if counting slaughtering of innocents was a comparison.
Left hate that being mentioned. I think it important to keep things in perspective 8)--))
https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/corbyn-and-[ censored word]emitism-will-any-brave-journalist-souls-admit-they-got-the-story-wrong/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=today-on-the-jvl-blog-newsletter-total-articles-for-you_1
I did read the labour report somewhere, I believe it was hidden, and nothing to do with COVID-19 considering we get to hear about the boring Beckhams non entities kerdashians mind numb media and other non stories.
I understand the claims about anti [ censored word]emitism is about what we can and cannot say about Israels dealings with Palestine. In other words having concerns about Israels behavior is now a hate crime- my we have come a long way with this free speech malarkey!
There may be some who dislike Jews -so what? some Jews dislike other people we are all human and individuals -do we only stone those we can or those we should?
It would appear that criticising Israel per se is now [ censored word]emitic.
Yes, someone thought that one up. It is a disgrace really.Except it’s not true. You can criticise the state of Israel, just don’t be racist about it, or call them Nazis. It’s quite simple really.
Except it’s not true. You can criticise the state of Israel, just don’t be racist about it, or call them Nazis. It’s quite simple really.
It is true, it was agreed a whole list of things which some take offence to.What is true? That to criticise the state of Israel is [ censored word]emitic? Who said?
And ethnic cleansing is something the Jews in Israel know all about as they can testify it was done to them by.....THE NAZIS. Why not make that comparison. It is quite legitimate IMO. It doesn't mean I hate all Jews.In fact many Jews in Israel do not agree with the continued settlements. are they [ censored word]emitic ?
What is true? That to criticise the state of Israel is [ censored word]emitic? Who said?
The paper is back in this thread somewhere. The list was drawn up by some jewish forum/group.Yeah I posted it, and it didn’t say that.
Jeremy Corbyn is Anti Jews and Anti Israel. Call it what you like. But Israel is a State and bloody well hard earned on the backs of Millions of The Dead. No more. Enough was finally enough.
I don't know what Corbyn might have hoped to do but he is a nasty little man without a hope in hells chance.
I hope that he fades back into obscurity where he should always have been.
Jeremy Corbyn is Anti Jews and Anti Israel. Call it what you like. But Israel is a State and bloody well hard earned on the backs of Millions of The Dead. No more. Enough was finally enough.Jeremy who? Already an embarrassing footnote in Labour's history. Sir Keir is a giant of a man by comparison, so much more intelligent and doing a great job so far in challenging government but also giving them just enough rope to hang themselves (see his latest position on Brexit - very shrewd). If you want to know why people on the far left hate Israel so much and how their hatred actually does a disservice to the Middle East including Palestine, this is a brilliant article which explains it very well https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/18/corbyn-[ censored word]emitism-left-is-hurting-palestine/
I don't know what Corbyn might have hoped to do but he is a nasty little man without a hope in hells chance.
I hope that he fades back into obscurity where he should always have been.
I have to agree its wring to take land from an indigenous population and is a recipe and cause for future conflict. There was talk on this forum recently about terrorism.... As I understand the state of Israel was formed partly due to pressure from Jewish terrorists...
I have every sympathy for the Jewish people.. Theres lots to admire about Judaism.
The Palestinians have been wronged and deserve support from the west but Corbyn has supported terrorists... That's where he's mistaken
Such a hate filled post Eleanor...surprising from you.
As to Israel, no one is entitled to steal land from an indigenous population simply because a horrifying genocide was perpetrated on them. The native Americans and Aboriginal people both suffered the same kind of land grab....that was unjustifiable and so is what is happening in Israel at them moment.
Nelson Mandela was once seen as a terrorist.
Nelson Mandela was once seen as a terrorist.
There is no hate in my comment, Faith. Only an inability to understand. And The Jews didn't steal the land that The Arabs even wanted. The Arabs didn't even want it. It was all desert.
I know only to well of the land grab that happened to my people, but that is another story. And far less interesting.
And I know of The Aborigines and American Indians.
And a surprising accusation from you. I have never made a hate filled post about anything. I thought that you and I were doing better than that. You have really shocked me.
I know.. He planted a bomb in a shopping mall but it failed to go off
Then we have both been shocked this afternoon.
It is always dangerous to base your opinion of a person on what we read in the media. Haven’t you learned that with the McCann case ?
Only too well, Faith. But you obviously haven't. The McCanns are still Innocent.
However, as is usual for me, I don't bear grudges. This would be a good thing for all to remember.
It’s not about innocence or guilt but how the media can monster individuals with little or no evidence.
I can't even be bothered to answer that.
Fair enough.
What a lovely update.
Hello everyone,
How amazing are we!
I want to share with you my thoughts on what this fund represents to me, and also to update you on developments.
I have always felt that Jeremy spoke from his heart, and we listened with ours and heard the call. I firmly believe there are really only two roads to choose in this life, one is of love, the other of fear. Through this fund we have not only made our voices heard but we have also declared our united hope and belief that a better world is possible.
I wanted to find a way that we could maintain our connection to one another moving forward into the future. To that aim, I have been in touch with the organisers of an initiative called Truth Defence which started around the same time as the crowdfund, and clearly shares our aims and hopes for a better world: https://www.truthdefence.org. It is dedicated to promoting a culture of honesty and integrity in politics and public life, which is exactly the principles that Jeremy stands for. Please join as a registered supporter under this link https://www.truthdefence.org/join or send an email to truth.defence2020@gmail.com if you want to sign up to be part of our network for free.
In the meantime, all funds raised by us to support Jeremy in a potential legal defence will be held in trust for that purpose, and details of that will be announced soon.
We really have created something truly amazing and we can go forward knowing that what we stand for is a force to be reckoned with.
With love to you all,
Carole
And almost £330 000 raised.
Matt Chorley@timesradio
Best Prime Minister we never had poll.
Jeremy Corbyn by a country mile.
Certainly not for me.Daniel Finkelstein agrees with you (almost)
John Smith was the best Prime Minister we never had.
Not in a million years was it dear old Jeremy.
He probably did more to lose the Scottish Labour vote than any other influence here.
Certainly not for me.
John Smith was the best Prime Minister we never had.
Not in a million years was it dear old Jeremy.
He probably did more to lose the Scottish Labour vote than any other influence here.
Bless his greying, threadbare, sandal encased cottons...
“Jeremy Corbyn’s position as Britain’s leading out-of-touch, hopeless cult leader* was secured today after he took victory in a Twitter poll world cup of ‘Greatest PMs we never had’ so seriously he recorded a victory speech, claiming the win – which only came after a considerable push from Corbynite Twitter accounts to hijack the fun poll – didn’t “give the response that a lot of our media pundits really expected – or possibly the one that they wanted”. It’s truly staggering that after 5 years of leadership, Corbyn still takes social media support on a platform primarily used by young people – and had #KickBorisOut and #VoteTheToriesOut trending on election day – seriously…”
Another Angry Voice
@Angry_Voice
Remember when Jeremy Corbyn said Johnson's deal was lamentable nonsense that needed to be renegotiated before being signed, and then all the hacks did performative stupidity to pretend they didn't understand his point?
Johnson's now disowning his own deal as the nonsense it is.
They are merely checking and clarifying the small print before signing anything. the details were not set in stone- just as well.
Oh Jeremy....
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8792113/Jeremy-Corbyn-flouts-Rule-Six-regulations-dinner-party.html
Corbyn suspended over Labour anti-Semitism report
Published6 minutes ago
Jeremy Corbyn
IMAGE COPYRIGHTPA MEDIA
Labour has suspended former leader Jeremy Corbyn after an inquiry found the party was "responsible for unlawful acts of harassment and discrimination" during his time in charge.
The UK's human rights watchdog identified "serious failings" in dealing with anti-Jewish racism.
And the watchdog said Mr Corbyn's office had "politically interfered" in the complaints process.
Mr Corbyn insisted he did "everything [he] could" to tackle the issue.
8@??)(
I really don't believe JC to be an anti Semite or racist- (as much as I dislike the man an his policies) some people associate Jews as money grabbing people and hate capitalists- hence hate jews persay. others hate jews because of the israeli jews treatment of vulnerable Muslims in that area. The human rightswatchdog should knowledge peoples freedom to dislike other people and express opinions.Corbyn is on record as supporting organisations that are dedicated to the annihilation of the state of Israel and who believe the holcaust was a hoax.
Unless I hear from any government or crown demanding we kill all jews I would not get bothered about it. Many Jews hate people too- so it is all about who likes who and who doesn't like who from all sections of every country. you won't wipe it out -ever.
Corbyn is on record as supporting organisations that are dedicated to the annihilation of the state of Israel and who believe the holcaust was a hoax.
It is possible to be critical of Israel without lending your support to terrorist organisations intent on its annihilation imo.
All British governments and Royals in recent history lip service to the ARABS for their money and oil, now the Chinese are our masters also.. erm what was that point again?
There is nothing [ censored word]emitic about questioning the validity of the Israel as a country who encourage racism and genocide towards the indigenous Arab population. Tossed out of their homes and land! Many Jews are very against the treatment of Palestinians who have been treated very badly by Israel.
As and when any government tells me to round up and slaughter all Jews- I will accept anti [ censored word]emitism within the establishment and will be first out to defend them.
However, I will not be party to 'hurt feelings' of a minority who wish to be held as being special just because they have a religion to cling onto.
It is possible to be critical of Israel without lending your support to terrorist organisations intent on its annihilation imo.
I don't think Corbyn is an anti-Semite in that he hates Jews because they are Jews. In fact, there are Jewish people who support him. He supports the Palestinians over Israel, but that, in itself, does not make someone an anti-Semite.He supports organisations that want to see the annihilation of Israel and Jews everywhere. Not only that but you have to ask yourself why the Palestine conflict has been his (and many on the hard Left’s) overriding international concern for so many years, There have been and are other (far worse imo) human rights abuses in other parts of the world but this issue appears to be the Left’s overriding concern - why?
His main fault, IMO, is that he did very little to admonish some on the "hard left" who are anti-Semitic, and who harrassed and abused some Jewish M.Ps of the party he was supposed to be leading. I feel that he brought the Labour party into disrepute for this reason.
Two scruffy gits for the price of one...
emitism/]https://order-order.com/2020/11/03/holidaying-corbyn-hangs-out-with-nudist-suspended-from-labour-party-over-[ censored word]emitism/ (https://order-order.com/2020/11/03/holidaying-corbyn-hangs-out-with-nudist-suspended-from-labour-party-over-[ censored word)
He supports organisations that want to see the annihilation of Israel and Jews everywhere. Not only that but you have to ask yourself why the Palestine conflict has been his (and many on the hard Left’s) overriding international concern for so many years, There have been and are other (far worse imo) human rights abuses in other parts of the world but this issue appears to be the Left’s overriding concern - why?
Oh good grief. Dentist-dodging herberts.
%56&