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

UnrelatedPsuedo said:
No. It's not. Authenticity trumps absolute knowledg for me. I'm not an asshat that runs through life looking for downside. I'm an optimist that places faith in people.

I've literally suggested that I'd own my own actions and place adequate blame on those that sought to deceive me or take advantage of my good nature. In my thought problem I accept that it would be my fault that I laid the wreath. But my original intent would still be authentic and I wouldn't regret it.

I had no knowledge of Corbyn and potential IRA ties. I'm in an airport waiting lounge. I haven't explored. Which is why I told @balaks that I'd read more, then comment.

Your response is typical of an Internet forum. "He admitted he doesn't know X, I'll take that as evidence he's not familiar with the alphabet". Go play with your damn crayons. Comment again when you understand subtlety and nuance.

It's possible to hold two issues in your head that run contrary to each other. Give it a go. Take a paracetamol if your head starts ringing.
Click to expand...

I have no idea how we've reached this point. I made a flippant post about someone "inadvertently" laying a wreath (a fecking hilarious excuse if ever there was one) and you decided to jump on it, tell me my head was up my ass and that you'd lay a wreath at a child molesters grave.

I replied flippantly again (a part of me thought you were joking) and you called me a knobber while doubling down on your wreath laying belief.

I'll admit my last post to you was condescending but given the insult and your ridiculous defence of "I trust people who tell me to do things" I felt it was deserved. Now you're telling me to go and play with crayons and take paracetamol?

What are we even arguing? What are we debating? That you believe it's a common occurrence for someone to inadvertently lay a wreath? That we should always trust people who tell us to lay wreaths? That we shouldn't be asshats running through life looking for downsides? Seriously, what the hell is going on?

You took offence to a flippant post at the outset and this has just snowballed. I was initially having some fun with my responses but this has become a complete waste of time. I'm not interested in the grand online war you appear to be spoiling for.

Have a safe flight and when you get back to land go and do something you find relaxing. You'll feel better. Then reread our exchange and see if you still feel it's worth this aggravation. Spoiler - it's not.
 
Dobba said:
You're the one who cited him as an example of what to do. I mean, there is a chance that you just forgot to mention him helping cover up Hillsborough for the best part of another decade, in fear of upsetting his beloved friend Murdoch and were going to mention it in your next post. But, just in case, I thought I'd do it for you.

I love the idea that all Corbyn needs to do is cuddle up to these cnuts in the media and they'll definitely not turn their back on him when he wants to tighten tax loopholes or implement Leveson 2. And they sure as shit wouldn't want to influence any other policy in return for their endorsement.
Click to expand...
It's not just about 'cuddling up to the media' but the full suite of public relations and creating a public image that people outside of your own circles can buy into and would want to vote for. Corbyn's been abysmal at that, and that he hasn't really tried engaging with the media is terrible.
Pogue Mahone said:
As a connoisseur of passive-aggression I’d just like to say that last post is an absolute doozy. Bravo!
Click to expand...
A classic. :lol:
 
Someone telling a Jew they're incorrect to feel persecuted because of lack of action against antisemitism, then laughing off comparison with the Nazis.

I see.
 
ThierryHenry said:
It's not just about 'cuddling up to the media' but the full suite of public relations and creating a public image that people outside of your own circles can buy into and would want to vote for. Corbyn's been abysmal at that, and that he hasn't really tried engaging with the media is terrible.
Click to expand...
So what would the media be getting in return for pushing this public image? He'd have to drop Leveson 2 for a start, because the Tories are against implementing that. Which is, in part why they supported them so passionately in the run up to the election. Same goes for tax loopholes and particularly targeting tax havens.

ThierryHenry said:
Oh man, I hope she gets in lots of trouble for that. Awful.
Click to expand...
Yeah, good luck with that.
 
Dobba said:
The idea of Israel's political policy being compared to that of the Nazis is abhorrent. Being investigated by a political party on the other hand...

Click to expand...


Think she has really jumped the shark here. Rightly or wrongly this will give plenty of ammunition to those arguing that anti-semitism is merely being used as a stick to beat Corbyn with. Although I suspect it will matter little as a split into a new party seems imminent.
 
Raulduke said:
Think she has really jumped the shark here. Rightly or wrongly this will give plenty of ammunition to those arguing that anti-semitism is merely being used as s stick being used to beat Corbyn with. Although I suspect it will matter little as a split into a new party seems imminent.
Click to expand...
That's been imminent almost as long as Vesuvius' next eruption.
Silva said:
The Blairites are all career politicians who wouldn't join a third party for fear of never getting to be headboy/girl of the country.
Click to expand...
It would be 6 months before it split into half a dozen factions. Jess Phillips and Rees-Mogg would have launched a Gogglebox spin-off.
 
Margaret Hodge's interview was a shitshow. I wish the Labour Friends of Israel would be disbanded. Is there something similar for another country? Why can't Israel be criticised? Feck em! "There's a thing line between pro Palestine and anti-Semitism". No there isn't fecking dimwit.
Len McClusky didn't need to add his own opinions. The quicker this thing dies the better.
 
The funny thing is that, yet again, I think the smears have made him stronger.

I think the Press Complaints Commission will back him, and I think Margaret Hodge has scored an almighty own goal with her disgusting comments today.
 
Cheesy said:
Then it isn't a fabricated scandal. Imagine the outrage if a Tory MP inadvertently laid a wreath on the grave of a prominent ISIS or Al-Qaeda member? He should naturally be careful in an instance like that, and people are naturally going to be worried that he's associating with the wrong type of people if he's hanging around with groups laying wreaths for terrorists.
Click to expand...

You should be very careful when laying a wreath for a good reason and in good faith?! Behave.
 
Donk87 said:
Happens to the best of us. Who hasn't accidentally placed a wreath on a terrorists grave? In Tunisia.
Click to expand...

So what's the story then? Corbyn went to Tunisia in support of and to remember terrorists? Get a grip people. It's embarrassing that this is even a story.
 
Camilo said:
You should be very careful when laying a wreath for a good reason and in good faith?! Behave.
Click to expand...

If you're a politician, then yes, you should be incredibly careful in who you associate with, and who you're honouring at an event. I'm baffled anyone would disagree with that notion?
 
Nuts said:
The funny thing is that, yet again, I think the smears have made him stronger.

I think the Press Complaints Commission will back him, and I think Margaret Hodge has scored an almighty own goal with her disgusting comments today.
Click to expand...
Don't know about him being stronger. The party is certainly weaker. The people who support him still do, those who don't still won't. The needle isn't moving.
 
Adisa said:
Don't know about him being stronger. The party is certainly weaker. The people who support him still do, those who don't still won't. The needle isn't moving.
Click to expand...
It won't until one side breaks away. Which I think will come sooner rather than later if Unite manages to get mandatory reselection at the labour conference.
 
nickm said:
It’s about what the wreath symbolises, and his shifty response, as if he knew what he’d done and resented being held to account for it.
Click to expand...
Nothing to with what the ‘wreath symbolises’ you know that and so does everyone else. :rolleyes:
 
Corbyn is a leader of a major political party under scrutiny because of his own words, actions and associations. It's quite a dark twist for democratic discourse that his supporters genuinely seem to consider that to be beyond the pale now.

Maybe someone who likes Boris Johnson could write a column saying "Boris Johnson compared an opening on a garment to an opening on an object....HE'S WORSE THAN IDI AMIN!" in some strange attempt to try and mock anyone with legitimate concerns about what he wrote in his column.

I think it's maybe a consequence of people who have spent years forming their own political views without any real scrutiny. Prior to 2015 who really cared what Jeremy Corbyn had to say on anything? He could have regularly attend a cult meeting where everyone masturbates to pictures of the Queen's dead mum and aside from maybe a couple of words on page 15 of the Telegraph, who'd care?

Now he's actually being subject to study of what he's said, why he said it and his given reasons are being dissected and analysed - you know, like what happens to every politician - that by contrast it feels to him and his supporters as if he's being unfairly treated. Hence the arm flailing and the sarcastic comparisons and utter, utter disbelief anyone doesn't just take the word of their favourite politician as gospel.
 
Last edited:
Just seen Hodge's interview on sky making the comparison to 1930s nazi germany. What a feckwit, even the missus had to turn over because of its ridiculousness and she's politically apathetic
 
Cheesy said:
If you're a politician, then yes, you should be incredibly careful in who you associate with, and who you're honouring at an event. I'm baffled anyone would disagree with that notion?
Click to expand...

I'm baffled why anyone would care that he apparently didn't. Seriously - who cares? It's like intent is just no longer a thing in the UK - it's absolutely mental. He was laying a wreath for goodness sake.
 
Camilo said:
I'm baffled why anyone would care that he apparently didn't. Seriously - who cares? It's like intent is just no longer a thing in the UK - it's absolutely mental. He was laying a wreath for goodness sake.
Click to expand...

How do you know what his intent is? He's supported terrorists in the past.

2cents said:
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.pol...ng-hamas-friends-hezbollah-anti-semitism/amp/

Another example would be referring to one of the planners of a 2003 suicide attack in Jerusalem as "brother" and saying that he's glad the guy was released from prison (he'd been serving seven life sentences but was released as part of the Gilad Shalit exchange deal) -https://www.standard.co.uk/news/lon...r-a3899281.html?amp&__twitter_impression=true
Click to expand...

You only have to look at his beloved looney brother to see what might go unspoken.
 
we know his intentions, because he described them in his own Morningstar article. He specifically included the persons, who are in the graves, that are shown in the pictures. Its also a nice worldview, where the own side by definition has always the best intentions and consequently can't do any wrong, while the other side is not only promoting wrong policies, but has sinister motives. They are by definition evil. I guess when reality doesn't fit one's narrative, reality has to get rebranded. It is reaching Orwellian dimensions.
 
Last edited:
PedroMendez said:
we know his intentions, because he described them in his own Morningstar article. He specifically included the persons, who are in the graves, that are shown in the pictures. Its also a nice worldview, where the own side by definition has always the best intentions and consequently can't do any wrong, while the other side is not only promoting wrong policies, but has sinister motives. They are by definition evil. I guess when reality doesn't fit one narrative, reality has to get rebranded. It is reaching Orwellian dimensions.
Click to expand...

Typically hard core socialists are like that in my experience - if you disagree with them they at first think you simply don't understand and will try and explain it to you - if you still disagree they will think you are either stupid or evil.
 
Kaos said:
This again :rolleyes:

Care to elaborate on how he’s allegedly supported terrorists in the past?
Click to expand...

There is plenty of evidence out there that supports this - if you can't be arsed reading about it yourself they why should we bother wasting time trying to convince you? Start by googling Corbyn and IRA and take it from there.
 
Terrorists have causes.

With regard to said cause you have three choices:

1. You sympathise with or support their cause
2. You are ambivalent towards their cause
3. You are against their cause

If you fit the category of 2 and 3 then the following applies:

A. You do not share a platform with other people who support the cause.
B. You do not march with other people who support the cause.
C. You do not lay wreaths on the graves of people who supported the cause.

Which category does Jeremy fit?
 
Kaos said:
This again :rolleyes:

Care to elaborate on how he’s allegedly supported terrorists in the past?
Click to expand...

2cents said:
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.pol...ng-hamas-friends-hezbollah-anti-semitism/amp/

Another example would be referring to one of the planners of a 2003 suicide attack in Jerusalem as "brother" and saying that he's glad the guy was released from prison (he'd been serving seven life sentences but was released as part of the Gilad Shalit exchange deal) -https://www.standard.co.uk/news/lon...r-a3899281.html?amp&__twitter_impression=true
Click to expand...
 
balaks said:
There is plenty of evidence out there that supports this - if you can't be arsed reading about it yourself they why should we bother wasting time trying to convince you? Start by googling Corbyn and IRA and take it from there.
Click to expand...

I'm slightly surprised that this point is even being debated any more. I thought as long ago as two years ago we all decided that he'd hung around with questionable people, but were arguing about his intentions in doing so.

I'm starting to loose track of the excuses tbh. I think we're on the fourth version of the wreath story by now: 'Yeah, well Corbyn did go there, and he did lay a wreath, and he did say it was for all those who were buried there (please ignore where we said all of those things were smears before), but the terrorists weren't buried there after all, ha!'
 
I used to find this thread depressing and upsetting. Now, I laugh at the number of posters who’ve bought the Mail’s smears hook, line and sinker. You can see why the media persist when so many of you lot just believe it all. :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.