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

sun_tzu said:
You might want to try using the right ones...

As I say how can what I wrote be slander... How is that actually possible?

Have you tried looking it up in a dictionary yet?
Click to expand...
To slander someone is to use falsehoods to attack someone’s reputation.

Writing that a life long anti-racism and peace campaigner would drop a nuclear bomb on Israel pretty much fits that for me and is a completely unfathomable thing to write.

Why did you avoid answering the question and just continue the personal attack?
 
Nuts said:
To slander someone is to use falsehoods to attack someone’s reputation.

Writing that a life long anti-racism and peace campaigner would drop a nuclear bomb on Israel pretty much fits that for me and is a completely unfathomable thing to write.

Why did you avoid answering the question and just continue the personal attack?
Click to expand...

Righty ho Mr Nuts...

I believe all your questions have been answered before but lets keep it nice and respectful and see if I can help you

Firstly lets start with your criminal accusation against me

Nuts said:
:lol: Then you really don’t get it.

That’s such a disgusting misreading of someone, and slanderous, that you’d do well to log off and have a little think to yourself.

Disgusting.
Click to expand...

As you know this has genuinely confused me... a confusion compounded by your last post...

Nuts said:
To slander someone is to use falsehoods to attack someone’s reputation.
Click to expand...

Its almost like you might have looked it up in a dictionary and ignored what it actually said?

anyway http://lmgtfy.com/?q=slander+definition

slander
ˈslɑːndə/
noun
LAW
  1. 1.
    the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.
    "he is suing the TV company for slander"
Click to expand...

https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/slander

times-vs-sullivan-4-728.jpg%3Fcb%3D1241020080

Of course we are trying to keep this respectful so I guess there are two possibilities... either you fail to understand the difference between written and spoken? or perhaps you are incapable of writing without having to speak at the same time and think everybody else must struggle in a similar manner (in fairness my 4 year old finds it easier to form sentences when talking along so if your having word problems I feel bad for you son I got 99 problems but an inability to use a dictionary ain't one)

Now if we wanted to expand on what I said a little and examine if it was a true or false statement I feel it would be a somewhat pointless exercise because an accusation of anti-semitism against corbyn I don't think can really by definition be libel (yes it was written - see) and as defined it certainly cant be slander - however we are talking about front page of newspapers and leading news storys, we are talking about credible accusations from leading figures and we are in an environment where this is the public perception

skynews-jeremy-corbyn-labour_4371991.jpg


2540076170001_5814066032001_5814064262001-vs.jpg


Its a commonly help view of a major public figure...

though the real reason I think debating the statement is pointless and again a real confusion from me is already covered in the previous posts if you bothered to look

Nuts said:
Why did you avoid answering the question and just continue the personal attack?
Click to expand...

I am assuming your "question" was.

Nuts said:
Why would you say Corbyn would like to drop a bomb on Jews in Israel if he had the chance?
Click to expand...

And Im baffled as that question actually quotes my own post which surely contains the answer?... for clarity I'll highlight it for you

sun_tzu said:
What's more outrageous... The chief rabbi having to call out the leader of a mainstream political party in the UK for being anti Semitic or me making a joke about it?
And look up the meaning of slander before using it incorrectly... English is my 3rd language and even I know your wrong
Click to expand...

(Presumably pointing out you made a false criminal accusation about myself and clearly do not understand the legal term of the definition constituted a "personal attack"?

I really don't want to have to get this derailed again so let me help you again

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=joke

Joke - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke
A joke is a display of humour in which words are used within a specific and well-defined narrative structure to make people laugh and is not meant to be taken ...
Click to expand...

Perhaps Classical Mechanic was correct?

Classical Mechanic said:
Jokes about the Dear Leader are not permitted.
Click to expand...

Now you made a criminal accusation of slander against me - would you care to retract that Sir...
 
Last edited:
sun_tzu said:
Righty ho Mr Nuts...

I believe all your questions have been answered before but lets keep it nice and respectful and see if I can help you

Firstly lets start with your criminal accusation against me



As you know this has genuinely confused me... a confusion compounded by your last post...



Its almost like you might have looked it up in a dictionary and ignored what it actually said?

anyway http://lmgtfy.com/?q=slander+definition



https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/slander

times-vs-sullivan-4-728.jpg%3Fcb%3D1241020080

Of course we are trying to keep this respectful so I guess there are two possibilities... either you fail to understand the difference between written and spoken? or perhaps you are incapable of writing without having to speak at the same time and think everybody else must struggle in a similar manner (in fairness my 4 year old finds it easier to form sentences when talking along so if your having word problems I feel bad for you son I got 99 problems but an inability to use a dictionary ain't one)

Now if we wanted to expand on what I said a little and examine if it was a true or false statement I feel it would be a somewhat pointless exercise because an accusation of anti-semitism against corbyn I don't think can really by definition be libel (yes it was written - see) and as defined it certainly cant be slander - however we are talking about front page of newspapers and leading news storys, we are talking about credible accusations from leading figures and we are in an environment where this is the public perception

skynews-jeremy-corbyn-labour_4371991.jpg


2540076170001_5814066032001_5814064262001-vs.jpg


Its a commonly help view of a major public figure...

though the real reason I think debating the statement is pointless and again a real confusion from me is already covered in the previous posts if you bothered to look



I am assuming your "question" was.



And Im baffled as that question actually quotes my own post which surely contains the answer?... for clarity I'll highlight it for you



(Presumably pointing out you made a false criminal accusation about myself and clearly do not understand the legal term of the definition constituted a "personal attack"?

I really don't want to have to get this derailed again so let me help you again

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=joke



Perhaps Classical Mechanic was correct?



Now you made a criminal accusation of slander against me - would you care to retract that Sir...
Click to expand...
Did you really just use two ‘Sky data polls’ as your only sources?

“we are talking about credible accusations from leading figures”

Name one.
 
Jesus thought I'd come in here to see some intetesting discussion of the conference and it's just dick swinging over the difference between slander and libel :wenger:
 
I do feel like stating that Corbyn would launch an anti-Semitic nuclear attack on Israel if he got into power crosses the line of political satire somewhat. Having said that, think we can safely say that it was an attempt at humour, but a misguided and unfunny one, which isn't unusual given the source.

edit: also can we take all dictionary-based pedantry to one thread and burn it down?
 
Last edited:
jeff_goldblum said:
I do feel like stating that Corbyn would launch an anti-Semitic nuclear attack on Israel if he got into power crosses the line of political satire somewhat. Having said that, think we can safely say that it was an attempt at humour, but a misguided and unfunny one, which isn't unusual given the source.

edit: also can we take all dictionary-based pedantry to one thread and burn it down?
Click to expand...

Agree with you entirely. Except I think it’s actually pretty important to point out that he probably wasn’t joking and has continued to defend his stance several times subsequently:

sun_tzu said:
I think his anti nuclear stance is overplayed... I'm sure he would use them on Israel if the opportunity arose
Click to expand...

That’s Jeremy Corbyn, vice-President of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmement...

Sorry for being a pedant but it’s pretty important to correct this.
 
Carolina Red said:
They won’t have to in the CE now.
Click to expand...

I've just seen this, what the hell?! You may not agree with the things he has to say but his views are by no means scandalous and his mannerisms are no worse than plenty of others here. A few weeks ago, a regular poster on here accused all white British people of being racist and absolutely nothing happened. The decision to forum ban is @Oscie is a fecking outrage.
 
Mr nuts
I said the fact that I was joking
I highlighted This in the previous post... Along with classical mechanics post suggesting that we are not permitted to make Jones about the dear leader...
I also find it strange that despite that having been made clear you have not chosen to retract your accusation of my alleged criminal misconduct
I do think your actions have given an answer to the question i posed though... What's more serious the chief rabbi making accusations of anti-Semitism against a mainstream party leader or me making a joke... You clearly think the latter which kinda sums up just what a pathetic state politics is in right now.
So to be clear
1. You never answered how I can slander somebody in writing... And are you still accusing me of such criminal actions
2. Are you seriously saying there are no credible people saying Corbyn is anti Semitic because is a chief rabbi isnt credible what exactly would be?
3. You have now twice ignored the fact despite being it being perfectly clear and highlighted it was a joke... So can you answer classical mechanics point and are we allowed to make a joke about the dear leader
4. Nuts seems somewhat fitting as a name
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
I've just seen this, what the hell?! You may not agree with the things he has to say but his views are by no means scandalous and his mannerisms are no worse than plenty of others here. A few weeks ago, a regular poster on here accused all white British people of being racist and absolutely nothing happened. The decision to forum ban is @Oscie is a fecking outrage.
Click to expand...


Did you report this? I'd like to take a look.
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
I've just seen this, what the hell?! You may not agree with the things he has to say but his views are by no means scandalous and his mannerisms are no worse than plenty of others here. A few weeks ago, a regular poster on here accused all white British people of being racist and absolutely nothing happened. The decision to forum ban is @Oscie is a fecking outrage.
Click to expand...

I agree. Although he sometimes went over the top he added to the discussion and provided good arguments for the majority of his opinions. I don’t particularly understand why he was singled out and banned.
 
Vitro said:
I agree. Although he sometimes went over the top he added to the discussion and provided good arguments for the majority of his opinions. I don’t particularly understand why he was singled out and banned.
Click to expand...

What makes you think it's a permanent ban? It's likely he will return.
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
I've just seen this, what the hell?! You may not agree with the things he has to say but his views are by no means scandalous and his mannerisms are no worse than plenty of others here. A few weeks ago, a regular poster on here accused all white British people of being racist and absolutely nothing happened. The decision to forum ban is @Oscie is a fecking outrage.
Click to expand...
Oh my.

It had nothing to do with their views and everything to do with how they were expressed.

Besides that, like @Grinner said, if you saw someone go on a racist rant... did you report it?
 
17 Van der Gouw said:
I've just seen this, what the hell?! You may not agree with the things he has to say but his views are by no means scandalous and his mannerisms are no worse than plenty of others here. A few weeks ago, a regular poster on here accused all white British people of being racist and absolutely nothing happened. The decision to forum ban is @Oscie is a fecking outrage.
Click to expand...
See I knew people read my posts on here. joking
 
Vitro said:
I agree. Although he sometimes went over the top he added to the discussion and provided good arguments for the majority of his opinions. I don’t particularly understand why he was singled out and banned.
Click to expand...
Repetative abuse of Corbyn perhaps? Mentioning the chant in every single post perhaps? General over the topishness maybe. To him Brexit was the fault of Corbyn, not the tories or cameron in particular, just Corbyn. His posts were jaw droppingly mental.
 
Wait Oscie was banned? I mean he was a little irritating and a touch condescending but I don’t recall him saying anything ban worthy.
 
I must admit I was surprised when the press rated the Labour party conference as a success. As posted at the time 'we haven't ruled a second referendum out' was not what the Labour's activists and newer members wanted to hear.
 
Frosty said:
I think it will take years for the Lib Dems to be forgiven for the Coalition and for tuition fees.
Click to expand...

That plus a lot of their key figures are fairly right-wing economically. Plus they're fecking terrible at marketing themselves. A party that prides itself on being socially open and liberal almost getting outflanked by Theresa May on gay marriage was grim. The overall trend in that regard seems to be though that youngsters who are turning away from Corbyn at the moment aren't really turning anywhere else at all.
 
Cheesy said:
That plus a lot of their key figures are fairly right-wing economically. Plus they're fecking terrible at marketing themselves. A party that prides itself on being socially open and liberal almost getting outflanked by Theresa May on gay marriage was grim. The overall trend in that regard seems to be though that youngsters who are turning away from Corbyn at the moment aren't really turning anywhere else at all.
Click to expand...
Is there a trend of them turning away ? Labour are still polling around 40%, yeah the younger voters might have felt let down or they think Corbyn is now rubbish but it isn't effecting Labour in the polls.
 
Sweet Square said:
Is there a trend of them turning away ? Labour are still polling around 40%, yeah the younger voters might have felt let down or they think Corbyn is now rubbish but it isn't effecting Labour in the polls.
Click to expand...
Are the overall polls weighted for likley to turn out as well... As we know traditionally the turnout 18 to 24 is relatively low
 
sullydnl said:
Given how key an issue Brexit is for 18-24 year olds this can hardly be a huge surprise. If you are opposed to Brexit then Corbyn has failed to represent your point of view.
Click to expand...

More like they've realised he's the Child Catcher from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang.

"Lollipops!"
 
Cheesy said:
That plus a lot of their key figures are fairly right-wing economically. Plus they're fecking terrible at marketing themselves. A party that prides itself on being socially open and liberal almost getting outflanked by Theresa May on gay marriage was grim. The overall trend in that regard seems to be though that youngsters who are turning away from Corbyn at the moment aren't really turning anywhere else at all.
Click to expand...

Tbh, I've argued on here before that support in Corbyn amongst that demographic is collapsing, so it's nice to have some hard proof in support of that, but I don't think it necessarily follows that those voters are necessarily being lost to Labour. I accept that I am a fairly atypical member of that demographic (not least because I'm actually outside of it) but the conversations I have had with people about Corbyn over the last few months haven't necessarily shown they've lost faith in his platform or policies (except the big one in Brexit) but have lost faith in his ability to actually deliver it.

I wouldn't be amazed if when push came to shove they voted Labour, which probably also explains Labours relatively stable numbers, even if they don't believe in Corbyn as a PM, especially if he's able to keep up a thin veneer of being incompetent rather than a leaver on Brexit.
 
The sooner Corbyn goes the better as far as I'm concerned - his weakness on the Brexit issue is unforgivable and I've changed from quite liking and respecting him to wanting him gone asap in the last year or two. I'm sure I'm not alone in this and his chance of becoming PM has completely collapsed in my opinion.
 
Sweet Square said:
Is there a trend of them turning away ? Labour are still polling around 40%, yeah the younger voters might have felt let down or they think Corbyn is now rubbish but it isn't effecting Labour in the polls.
Click to expand...

Currently Labour are at 36%, 5 points behind the Tories (!)
'Don't know' currently beat Corbyn's number for 'who would make the best PM' - 35% for Don't know, vs 24% for Corbyn.

Those are terrible numbers by any standard.
 
nickm said:
Currently Labour are at 36%, 5 points behind the Tories (!)
'Don't know' currently beat Corbyn's number for 'who would make the best PM' - 35% for Don't know, vs 24% for Corbyn.

Those are terrible numbers by any standard.
Click to expand...
In terms of Labour polling yougov are the outlier, everyone else has the around the same as the tories.

X leader is shite isn't having a effect on overall party polling.
 
Pogue Mahone said:


Ouch.
Click to expand...


It's not entirely surprising. He was marketing the hell out of himself to that demographic a year ago. The hype was always going to die down and his policies and actions would have to stand up to scrutiny.

I have always said I don't think he really wants to be PM. His career has been about being a thorn in the side of those in power and it seems to be what he enjoys.
 
Sweet Square said:
Is there a trend of them turning away ? Labour are still polling around 40%, yeah the younger voters might have felt let down or they think Corbyn is now rubbish but it isn't effecting Labour in the polls.
Click to expand...

True, probably been slightly off in my assessment there - still though, it's fairly worrying for the party insofar as people who have less faith in Corbyn are more likely to eventually turn away from Labour, and are going to be less likely to campaign for them. The latter would potentially be troubling for the party in that a significant advantage they held in the last election was the sheer numbers they could amass when it came to campaigning, especially in comparison to a lagging Tory party that's struggling to even attract semi-decent prospective MP's at the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.