Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
With a Prime MInister that both coined the 'Nasty Party', she has done a lot develop it and still accuse others of being nasty.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
The Jeremy Corbyn thread
- Thread starter Simster
- Start date
With a Prime MInister that both coined the 'Nasty Party', she has done a lot develop it and still accuse others of being nasty.
Not this remainer, I'm afraid.
midnight_rendezvous
Well-known member
The problem with the that theory is that surveys suggest rates of anti-Semitism have actually fallen dramatically amongst Labour supporters since Jeremy Corbyn became leader in 2015. Still nasty people in the party that need to go, but they existed before Corbyn as I’m sure, as sensible adults, we’re all aware of...
Indeed they were lurking in the shadows of course they were, Corbyns election has given voice to these dark parasites and unfortunately will be his downfall and bless his ignorance he didn’t see it coming!
Ernest
Stupid IDIOT
Exactly as he will DOUBLE that at the next election and won't need TRAITORS like Kyle or SCUM like Caplin to do it
Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
Well if you live in Faversham you live in a rotten borough anyway - even a grand alliance against the TORY candidate would not shift them.
Only hope is a ground swell of non voters and youth to come out and change the political world in your area.
seagulls4ever
New member
- Oct 2, 2003
- 4,338
Depends on who you ask. Relating to the current controversy, there's lots of contradictions or complete misrepresentations in the media or by people who are talking to the media, and I, like most others probably, don't have time to research it fully. From what I gather, it goes a bit like this...
In 2014 he wrote an article for the Morning Star in which he said this:
He seems to have his dates slightly wrong as the events he appears to be referring to were in 1985 and 1992. In 1992 Atef Bseiso, who alleged to have been involved in the 1972 massacre, was killed in Paris.
But recently after this has come back into the news he has said he was invited to a conference in 2014 with other parliamentarians and others from other states. Corbyn is saying that he laid a wreath in memory of all those killed by the Israeli attack on the Palestine Liberation Organisation, the Palestinian government in exile, at their headquarters near Tunis in Tunisia in 1985, where at least 47 were killed. This attack was condemned at the time by both the UK and US. This shouldn't be news as it has been reported in the past.
But a wreath was also laid for some of those alleged to have links to the Munich terrorist incident in 1972. Those directly involved (8 individuals) were either killed at the scene or later captured, except one who went into hiding and was alive in 1999. But there were four other berried at the cemetery which Corbyn was at who are alleged to have links to the Black September terrorist organisation which was responsible for the Munich massacre, including Atef Bseiso. The Daily Mail found a picture of Corbyn in which he is said to be standing in front of a plaque honouring those responsible for the 1972 massacre.
So a wreath was laid for those killed in 1992, including Atef Bseiso. Corbyn had already referred to this in 2014 in his Morning Star article. After the latest Daily Mail article Corbyn has said he was present but doesn't think he was involved in the wreath laying. He says he was there for the event as a whole.
Netanyahu has got involved on Twitter and says Corbyn laid wreaths on the graves of the terrorists who perpetrated the Munich massacre. Corbyn has denied this.
So basically it has been said that Corbyn was specifically laying a wreath for those responsible for the 1972 Munich massacre. Corbyn says he laid a wreath in memory of all those had died in the 1985 Isreali attack. He says it was laid on the graves of all those had died, which would include the four individuals said to have links to the 1972 massacre. Some have called for Corbyn to apologise or resign, but Corbyn is refusing to do so as he doesn't believe he's done anything wrong. I think.
Here's Corbyn's response:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-95TdSUG_k
I suspect many will do even less research than this and just come to the conclusion that Corbyn specifically went to an event to lay a wreath for terrorists without understanding the whole story and what the whole event was about.
One of the frustrations I have with Corbyn he that he is often not clear enough when he talks to the media, which would stop some controversies developing into controversies in the first place. He seems to give long-winded answers referring to different historical events or policies or whatever, assuming people know the ins and out of them like he does. So when he gives answers they probably sound clear and detailed in his mind, but for the general public they sound quite vague and unclear as they don't really know what he's talking about.
Edit: Labour have released another statement saying "None of those who carried out the Munich massacre are buried in the Palestinian cemetery at Tunis and there was no ceremony held for them".
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...about-corbyn-palestinian-cemetery-visit-false
Last edited:
larus
Well-known member
I see there’s now pictures of Corbyn making the four-fingered Rabbi’ah sign, a symbol of the Muslim Brotherhood, during a visit to Finsbury Park mosque in his Islington North constituency.
But, no doubt the rabid lefties well denounce this as lies and misunderstanding. This is as bad as a Tory leader being on the platform supporting extreme far-right organisations such as BNP.
*** awaits abuse from usual suspects ***
But, no doubt the rabid lefties well denounce this as lies and misunderstanding. This is as bad as a Tory leader being on the platform supporting extreme far-right organisations such as BNP.
*** awaits abuse from usual suspects ***
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,288
just an awkward wave isnt it? copying his constituents custom. he's not involved with the Muslim Brotherhood or the mosque.
Why not just leave it after your first sentence and let people react naturally. It's almost, almost. as if you invite arguments.
larus
Well-known member
Pot and kettle springs to mind here. Maybe it’s a natural reaction to the constant battles on the Brexit thread and being called stuff like thick, racist, etc.
There you go again! Just make your point and leave out the invitations to argue. You poor victim.
Wardy's twin
Well-known member
- Oct 21, 2014
- 8,433
The problem is that the people who Corbyn sees as friends (HAMAS/PLO etc) don't want the state of Israel to exist and have spent the last 50+ years trying to destroy it. They don't care if it's liberal (small l) or the right wing.
What I don’t understand is why the Labour Party leadership won’t simply accept the IHRA definition of anti-semitism in full now, despite fighting a rear guard action against being accused of anti-semitism for the last few weeks. To deliberately refuse to endorse the most widely accepted definition (the one accepted by the Police and CPS, for example) smacks either of an ostrich-like arrogance (“we know best what anti-semitism is”), or of the leadership’s unhappiness to include some of the IHRA’s examples. For what reason would they be unhappy, I ask myself.
Corbyn’s lack of a credible answer to why he attended/participated in a Palestinian commemoration of the Munich terrorism event isn’t helping Labour resolve this issue either.
Until very recently, I thought that while there were bound to be some anti-semitic members of the Party, it was unlikely that the leadership was. Now though, I’m starting to believe that Corbyn actually is anti-semitic himself, or, at best, is wilfully refusing to take appropriate steps to persuade me otherwise.
Just accept the IHRA definition, ffs - what’s wrong with it?
Corbyn’s lack of a credible answer to why he attended/participated in a Palestinian commemoration of the Munich terrorism event isn’t helping Labour resolve this issue either.
Until very recently, I thought that while there were bound to be some anti-semitic members of the Party, it was unlikely that the leadership was. Now though, I’m starting to believe that Corbyn actually is anti-semitic himself, or, at best, is wilfully refusing to take appropriate steps to persuade me otherwise.
Just accept the IHRA definition, ffs - what’s wrong with it?
Uncle C
Well-known member
Because there is credible evidence that Corbyn has not complied with the bit they want to leave out.
Lower West Stander
Well-known member
I’ve been reading your posts for the last 5 minutes.
In your view has Corbyn ever done anything wrong? Is he capable of doing anything which attracts your criticism?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
midnight_rendezvous
Well-known member
If you had read my posts you’d have seen that I’m unhappy with his lack of inclination to fight Brexit. However, I won’t criticise him based on smears in right wing rags like the Daily Mail, especially when said right wing rag has outright lied to generate more negativity towards JC. Evidence and context are important when forming judgements.
This exemplifies why Corbyn is unfit to lead the country. He actually comes across like some of the old guard in my reseach society - wanting to control everything and go through the committee process even when executive action would be welcomed and approved by all. If Corbyn's house was on fire he would burn to death.
This also. You don't need to pretend a dog is the hound of the Baslervilles to show it is a dog. The more Corbyn gets shit from the Mail, the more I am inclined to vote for him. The Mail et al are undermining all the good work done by Corbyn to undermine himself!
Lower West Stander
Well-known member
So it is all the press - nothing to do with the man himself.....
Out of interest. Do you condone him attending IRA rallies in the 80s as well?