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



And now got people on the left actually fecking defending this.:lol:
 
Party is a mess and although I care little for those at the top of Labour, the same scrutiny should ve placed on the Tories. Can't wait till Corbyn is no longer a topic of discussion.
 
He’s in Cornwall today. I was sat down having a pint then realised he was on the table next to me.
 
Corbyn either fumbles or fudges major decisions to the point of undermining his brand. Surely, despite that he is a God to them, even the Corbynistas can see he wouldn't make a very good prime minister because he is not very good (shite, even) at decision making?
 
RedChip said:
Corbyn either fumbles or fudges major decisions to the point of undermining his brand. Surely, despite that he is a God to them, even the Corbynistas can see he wouldn't make a very good prime minister because he is not very good (shite, even) at decision making?
Click to expand...
nah - its clearly blairs fault that the fake news controlled by the Illuminati cant understand the genius of corbyns 4d unicorn brexit chess
Strangely I think he will end up resigning as I'm not sure there is enough non momentum types left in the labour party to defeat him - but the broader electorate have clearly seen through him and hes going to kill the party electorally so he will either jump on (or be thrown on) the anti semitism bonfire that's about to ignite with the ehrc and panorama plus the whole NDA stuff
 
sun_tzu said:
nah - its clearly blairs fault that the fake news controlled by the Illuminati cant understand the genius of corbyns 4d unicorn brexit chess
Strangely I think he will end up resigning as I'm not sure there is enough non momentum types left in the labour party to defeat him - but the broader electorate have clearly seen through him and hes going to kill the party electorally so he will either jump on (or be thrown on) the anti semitism bonfire that's about to ignite with the ehrc and panorama plus the whole NDA stuff
Click to expand...

I have no real knowledge of this, but would it be likely that momentum swing their support behind a similar candidate to Corbyn? Do they now have the ability to control Labour leaders for the future?
 
Player Red said:
I have no real knowledge of this, but would it be likely that momentum swing their support behind a similar candidate to Corbyn? Do they now have the ability to control Labour leaders for the future?
Click to expand...
They will but it's taking an awful long time to sink in that that's what they need to do, in their own interest. The sooner they do so the sooner they can take advantage of how shit the other parties are. If they don't leave it too late of course.
 
Player Red said:
I have no real knowledge of this, but would it be likely that momentum swing their support behind a similar candidate to Corbyn? Do they now have the ability to control Labour leaders for the future?
Click to expand...

They don’t, the unions remain as important as they are, and anyway there is no similar candidate around
 
Player Red said:
I have no real knowledge of this, but would it be likely that momentum swing their support behind a similar candidate to Corbyn? Do they now have the ability to control Labour leaders for the future?
Click to expand...
potentially - but a bit like the conservative election any MP will need a certain number of other MP's to back them - and although i think they could well find a candidate similar in out look and broad economic policies they would surely find somebody with less baggage and a more coherent brexit position and almost certainly somebody who is a bit better communicator with non corbynistas.
 
Where’s our resident Corbyn fans btw? Cmon lads, we are waiting to hear this month’s excuses.
 
nickm said:
Where’s our resident Corbyn fans btw? Cmon lads, we are waiting to hear this month’s excuses.
Click to expand...

Excuses for what specifically? The NDA thing?

You know in the letter Sam Matthews was sent there is a whole paragraph which specifically states his rights to let the relevant authorities know about any issues or concerns he has... those are his rights as a whistleblower which are entirely protected.

Fortunately most organisations have a confidentially clause which prevents disclosure of confidential information to irrelevant bodies or individuals e.g. a Sunday Times Journalist. This is clearly a data protection issue. This all obviously stems from earlier this year when a junior Labour member of staff was plastered all over the papers because some emails were selectively leaked by this individual... I'd say it's completely right that they try and protect their staff. Imagine going to work and having to worry that any email you send could be taken out of context and printed in a newspaper?
 
ZupZup said:
Excuses for what specifically? The NDA thing?

You know in the letter Sam Matthews was sent there is a whole paragraph which specifically states his rights to let the relevant authorities know about any issues or concerns he has... those are his rights as a whistleblower which are entirely protected.

Fortunately most organisations have a confidentially clause which prevents disclosure of confidential information to irrelevant bodies or individuals e.g. a Sunday Times Journalist. This is clearly a data protection issue. This all obviously stems from earlier this year when a junior Labour member of staff was plastered all over the papers because some emails were selectively leaked by this individual... I'd say it's completely right that they try and protect their staff. Imagine going to work and having to worry that any email you send could be taken out of context and printed in a newspaper?
Click to expand...

Sorry, what? You shouldn't be using your employer's email system to be sending inappropriate messages, regardless of the context. I work in the Civil Service, where most things I do are subject to audit and Freedom of Information requests and I would not dream of sending any form of correspondence that is unprofessional in nature and this is how everyone should be. You should treat everything you do as though it is going to be audited, so "living in fear" really shouldn't be an issue; I have absolutely nothing to worry about if anyone ever went through all of my work emails and I don't feel a sense of infringement or invasion of privacy for it.
 
ZupZup said:
Excuses for what specifically? The NDA thing?

You know in the letter Sam Matthews was sent there is a whole paragraph which specifically states his rights to let the relevant authorities know about any issues or concerns he has... those are his rights as a whistleblower which are entirely protected.

Fortunately most organisations have a confidentially clause which prevents disclosure of confidential information to irrelevant bodies or individuals e.g. a Sunday Times Journalist. This is clearly a data protection issue. This all obviously stems from earlier this year when a junior Labour member of staff was plastered all over the papers because some emails were selectively leaked by this individual... I'd say it's completely right that they try and protect their staff. Imagine going to work and having to worry that any email you send could be taken out of context and printed in a newspaper?
Click to expand...
is evidence of anti-semitism not in the public interest given that corbyn / labour are you know trying to run the whole country?...
 
That'sHernandez said:
Sorry, what? You shouldn't be using your employer's email system to be sending inappropriate messages, regardless of the context. I work in the Civil Service, where most things I do are subject to audit and Freedom of Information requests and I would not dream of sending any form of correspondence that is unprofessional in nature and this is how everyone should be. You should treat everything you do as though it is going to be audited, so "living in fear" really shouldn't be an issue; I have absolutely nothing to worry about if anyone ever went through all of my work emails and I don't feel a sense of infringement or invasion of privacy for it.
Click to expand...

We are absolutely not talking about anything inappropriate. Where on earth do you get that from? We're talking about ordinary work emails... for instance, someone could be asked for work related advice about a situation. The person could reply with said advice... if someone were to then take a spliced up piece of what has been suggested without the wider context, a situation could be made to look bad or like an individual has made a bad decision or given inappropriate advice. That is entirely wrong and employees should be protected from that.

sun_tzu said:
is evidence of anti-semitism not in the public interest given that corbyn / labour are you know trying to run the whole country?...
Click to expand...

Anti-semitism is illegal. I am sure like me, you would have absolutely no issue with the individual reporting their concerns to the police/relevant authorities... just like Labour wouldn't.
 
ZupZup said:
Anti-semitism is illegal. I am sure like me, you would have absolutely no issue with the individual reporting their concerns to the police/relevant authorities... just like Labour wouldn't.
Click to expand...
thats why the ehrc are undertaking a formal investigation... equally as there may be a general election before that happens some public whistleblowing would seem in the public interest
 
ZupZup said:
It's not whistleblowing if it is to a journalist. If you're bored, a nice list of prescribed bodies covered for whistleblowing purposes.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...istle-list-of-prescribed-people-and-bodies--2
Click to expand...

meh - according to that people shouldn't have gone to the press about thalidamide babies or about the inherent racism in the met during the stephen lawrence inquiries so perhaps labour since corbyn took over shouldnt have been antisemitic - and thinking that people breaching an NDA about making that antesemitism public rather than acceptig that he and the party in its current state are not fit to govern and sorting that out would be a better use of the parties resources than using lawyers to threaten people.
 
sun_tzu said:
meh - according to that people shouldn't have gone to the press about thalidamide babies or about the inherent racism in the met during the stephen lawrence inquiries so perhaps labour since corbyn took over shouldnt have been antisemitic - and thinking that people breaching an NDA about making that antesemitism public rather than acceptig that he and the party in its current state are not fit to govern and sorting that out would be a better use of the parties resources than using lawyers to threaten people.
Click to expand...

You clearly don't even know the specifics of this case. The reality is that this individual had no interest in whistleblowing because he is not interested in someone investigating his supposed 'concerns'. He'd rather take a small piece of a bigger puzzle that he can give to a hostile media and have them twist it to make the Labour party look bad. In doing so he ensured that a junior member of staff was splashed all over the papers.

It's funny how supposedly sensible people will suddenly say that whistleblowing law or standard employment confidentiality clauses should be flouted as soon as it will damage someone they don't like. I suspect their opinion would be a little different if it was their own organisation and something which might impact them negatively.
 
Panorama out on Wednesday and predictably the corbynistas are attacking the journalist

.
John Ware: pro-Israel former Sun journalist and maker of libellous output condemned as Islamophobe and already subject of complaint by Labour over earlier ‘hatchet job’
Click to expand...

https://skwawkbox.org/2019/07/07/th...panorama-hatchet-job-or-jobs-on-labour-party/

You might be thinking John ware... Sounds vaguely familiar... Well here is an early day motion from the house of commons about him

.

“That this House warmly congratulates BBC Panorama and the ever-vigilant investigative journalist, John Ware, for their perseverance and courage in researching and broadcasting, Licence to Murder, an investigation into collusion between British intelligence services and loyalist paramilitaries…”
…
Click to expand...


And who exactly sponsored the EDM? None other than a certain Jeremy Bernard Corbyn

 
Player Red said:
I have no real knowledge of this, but would it be likely that momentum swing their support behind a similar candidate to Corbyn? Do they now have the ability to control Labour leaders for the future?
Click to expand...

You would hope any other candidate realises how dangerous they could be and would take steps to curb their influence once at the head of the party.
 
The Armenian genocide happened around the time of the first world war. Darzi was born in 1960. Wiki says his paternal grandmother fled Turkey as a child and lived with her mother as a refugee in Iraq.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.