Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)

Angela Eagle :lol:

Resigning in their masses and making the biggest fuss possible and then when they have to put their money where their mouth is, the best they can come up with is Angela fecking Eagle?

What is wrong with these people?
 
Really hope Jez hangs on and then pushes for a reselection of MPs across the board to force out the pathetic charlatans.

Oh and Chilcot, tick tock :)
 
If Jez hangs on I suspect 150 Labour MP's will switch over to the Libs and they will become the official opposition

Lol and then proceed to lose their seats in the next election. Spares Corbyn having to push for them getting deselected.

If they feel inclined to so easily switch to the Lib "identity crisis" Dems then they weren't genuine labour servants to begin with, so good riddance I say.
 
Angela Eagle :lol:

Resigning in their masses and making the biggest fuss possible and then when they have to put their money where their mouth is, the best they can come up with is Angela fecking Eagle?

What is wrong with these people?

It's so ridiculous the only reasoning I can guess at is that they think it'll be beneficial to have a female candidate against Boris or negate May.

Now I've caught up this mornings news it seems it's not the unity choice her people are making it out to be and there's concern she'll declare prematurely. Owen Smith (who I must say I know little about) is starting to get backing.
 
Last edited:
Lol and then proceed to lose their seats in the next election. Spares Corbyn having to push for them getting deselected.

If they feel inclined to so easily switch to the Lib "identity crisis" Dems then they weren't genuine labour servants to begin with, so good riddance I say.
possibly - but they will anyway - and they wont be loosing them to a corbyn lead labour they will be loosing them to UKIP
 
Ah right, they're now spinning this as being about how much Jeremy wins by, compared to last time & so on.
 
possibly - but they will anyway - and they wont be loosing them to a corbyn lead labour they will be loosing them to UKIP

Not in labour safe seats, which most of them occupy.

If they're at risks to losing seats to UKIP, it's not going to be prevented by Angela Eagle, or any of the other muppets.
 
It's so ridiculous the only reasoning I can guess at is that they think it'll be beneficial to have a female candidate against Boris or negate May.

Now I've caught up this mornings news it seems it's not the unity choice her people are making it out to be and there's concern she'll declare prematurely. Owen Smith (who I must say I know little about) is starting to get backing.
All that will do is help May. The difference between the two is so great that Eagle will look worse than ever as a suitable candidate to win an election.
 
Managed to persuade my older brother to join the Labour party and vote for Corbyn if it comes to that. He was anti-Corbyn last week.
 
doX14hk.png
 
500 councillors sign letter asking for him to resign.
 
Did no-one read that line and think it could sound bad?! Seumas Milne is a liability, he really is.
A Momentum activist laid into a jewish Labour MP attending as well, saying she was a member of a media conspiracy. Just needed Ken arriving to talk about Hitler's Zionism and it would've had the hattrick.
 
This is Farage's Britain where all Muslims are ISIS supporters.

Not sure I understand. He's just saying don't blame people for bad things they have nothing to do with but might be associated with due to their religion/race/whatever. Criticising him for it seems insincere.
 
Right then, I've not really been a Corbyn supporter but here's my point of view.

Politicians are scum, everyone knows this. There won't be a reform in Politics when the scummy ones are the majority, so in my suspicious mind for the majority of Labour to turn on Corbyn seems to me that two scenarios are occurring:

1. They are correct and Corbyn simply isn't a leader.
2. He is one of the genuine Politicians who wants to change the norm and the majority Politicians simply don't want that to happen.

So i'm personally in the frame of mind right now where i'm thinking "what the hell", why not take a risk on Corbyn and actually see what the other side of the coin is like. Worst case scenario, he is a terrible leader, if that's the scenario then in 4 years (perhaps even less) we can change the decision. But if however it's scenario 2, then it could well be the kick up the arse Politics needs in this Country and point us finally in the right direction.
 
Not sure I understand. He's just saying don't blame people for bad things they have nothing to do with but might be associated with due to their religion/race/whatever. Criticising him for it seems insincere.
The Internet really needs a sarcasm font :lol:

We know that to be the case and I'd go further than saying people criticising him are simply insincere, they're lying through their teeth. Plus there is a section of the UK, as shown in the pre and post Brexit vox-pops that think all Muslims are pro-ISIS so that false narrative will be lapped up.
 
Right then, I've not really been a Corbyn supporter but here's my point of view.

Politicians are scum, everyone knows this. There won't be a reform in Politics when the scummy ones are the majority, so in my suspicious mind for the majority of Labour to turn on Corbyn seems to me that two scenarios are occurring:

1. They are correct and Corbyn simply isn't a leader.
2. He is one of the genuine Politicians who wants to change the norm and the majority Politicians simply don't want that to happen.

So i'm personally in the frame of mind right now where i'm thinking "what the hell", why not take a risk on Corbyn and actually see what the other side of the coin is like. Worst case scenario, he is a terrible leader, if that's the scenario then in 4 years (perhaps even less) we can change the decision. But if however it's scenario 2, then it could well be the kick up the arse Politics needs in this Country and point us finally in the right direction.

:devil:
 
Right then, I've not really been a Corbyn supporter but here's my point of view.

Politicians are scum, everyone knows this. There won't be a reform in Politics when the scummy ones are the majority, so in my suspicious mind for the majority of Labour to turn on Corbyn seems to me that two scenarios are occurring:

1. They are correct and Corbyn simply isn't a leader.
2. He is one of the genuine Politicians who wants to change the norm and the majority Politicians simply don't want that to happen.

So i'm personally in the frame of mind right now where i'm thinking "what the hell", why not take a risk on Corbyn and actually see what the other side of the coin is like. Worst case scenario, he is a terrible leader, if that's the scenario then in 4 years (perhaps even less) we can change the decision. But if however it's scenario 2, then it could well be the kick up the arse Politics needs in this Country and point us finally in the right direction.

At any other time I'd agree, but this could be our last chance to save EU membership. I just don't see him achieving that given his lukewarm support. Also his focus right now appears to be on the Iraq War report. Again at any other time that would be great, but right now all it will do is damage the Labour party at the point when they are needed to stop far right Tories. He's just not the man for the hour.
 
At any other time I'd agree, but this could be our last chance to save EU membership. I just don't see him achieving that given his lukewarm support. Also his focus right now appears to be on the Iraq War report. Again at any other time that would be great, but right now all it will do is damage the Labour party at the point when they are needed to stop far right Tories. He's just not the man for the hour.

I just don't see how we can Brexit given the Immigration promises. Simply won't happen. I'm getting more and more confident by every passing day.
 
At any other time I'd agree, but this could be our last chance to save EU membership. I just don't see him achieving that given his lukewarm support. Also his focus right now appears to be on the Iraq War report. Again at any other time that would be great, but right now all it will do is damage the Labour party at the point when they are needed to stop far right Tories. He's just not the man for the hour.
Why is any 'damage' caused by the report a bad thing? The party/left as a whole needs an as public as possible distancing from the Iraq issue, especially the desire of many to refuse an investigation into it.

If the future of the party is based on avoiding any backlash for supporting an illegal war and then refusing to acknowledge that for a decade, what about it is worth saving in the first place?
 
What's wrong with that?

This is Farage's Britain where all Muslims are ISIS supporters.

This: http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ment-islamic-state-labour-antisemitism-review

Don't say 'Islamic states'. Say 'Islamic governments', if you have to. This speech was obviously not read out loud in advance. If it had been, someone competent would have pointed out the problematic phonetics of that line. In a speech meant to draw a line under accusations that Labour have an anti-Semitism problem, guess what the news will be?
 
Meanwhile, here is the actual report: http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/party-documents/ChakrabartiInquiry.pdf

And here is the gist of the report:

The Labour Party is not overrun by antisemitism, Islamophobia or other forms of racism. Further, it is the party that initiated every single United Kingdom race equality law. However, as with wider society, there is too much clear evidence (going back some years) of minority hateful or ignorant attitudes and behaviours festering within a sometimes bitter incivility of discourse. This has no place in a modern democratic socialist party that puts equality, inclusion and human rights at its heart. Moreover, I have heard too many Jewish voices express concern that antisemitism has not been taken seriously enough in the Labour Party and broader Left for some years.


An occasionally toxic atmosphere is in danger of shutting down free speech within the Party rather than facilitating it, and is understandably utilised by its opponents. It is completely counterproductive to the Labour cause, let alone to the interests of frightened and dispossessed people, whether at home or abroad. Whilst the Party seeks to represent wider society, it must also lead by example, setting higher standards for itself than may be achievable, or even aspired to, elsewhere. It is not sufficient, narrowly to scrape across some thin magic line of non-antisemitic or non-racist motivation, speech or behaviour, if some of your fellow members, voters or potential members or voters feel personally vulnerable, threatened or excluded as the result of your conduct or remarks. The Labour Party has always been a broad coalition for the good of society. We must set the gold standard for disagreeing well. I set out clear guidance so as to help achieve this.

This is such a self-inflicted wound.
 

I think it was clumsy but I don't think he meant to make a equivalence between the two but was using the two as separate analogies to make one overarching point. But putting them together was clumsy I think. The rest of his speech with regards to arguing unequivocally against the use of conspiracy theories, use of the prefix Zio- etc I think was pretty good as that should be the part that should be more focused on will unfortunately be sidetracked from the reporting.
 
I think it was clumsy but I don't think he meant to make a equivalence between the two but was using the two as separate analogies to make one overarching point. But putting them together was clumsy I think. The rest of his speech with regards to arguing unequivocally against the use of conspiracy theories, use of the prefix Zio- etc I think was pretty good as that should be the part that should be more focused on will unfortunately be sidetracked from the reporting.

I don't disagree with you.

My point here is broader. Image does matter. Saying that does not mean that I want a return to Campbell and Blair, but modern media works from controversy and soundbites. Corbyn knows this - he complained about it in the Vice documentary. The fact that this line was left in the speech (and prepared remarks handed to journalists!) was just asking for trouble. It just smacks of carelessness and poor preparation, at a time when what was needed was just the opposite. Whoever wrote that speech needs firing. They should have been extra careful, especially given the context. It is entirely self-defeating rubbish, likely to perpetuate an idea that the media are out to get him.