Jeremy Corbyn

[Spuddy]

Fair enough. At least you replied.

Non combatants? One would assume from this that the murder (because it was murder) of UK soldiers was not abhorrent to you, or am I misreading your post?

And I don't think you can airbrush the blowing up of supermarkets, pubs, town centres and killing of civilians to be honest.

Anyway, I don't want to derail the thread too much, his thoughts and politics have been highlighted (as have some posters imo), which was in keeping with the main thrust of the thread.
Points have been made and countered (by some), so Ill let others draw their own conclusions on this particular matter.

I dont agree with killing at all (except in self defence) whether that be soldiers in a barracks, off duty RUC officers doing their shopping, blowing up kids on an English high street or gunning down civilians at a civil rights march.

The airbrushing refers to South Africa. A lot of people worldwide will be completely unaware of the terrible attoricites carried out there by people who are now so revered.

 

[Hobbit]

Do you ever consider that sometimes things just change.
Nothing ever remains the same.

Earlier in this thread I posted a thread about the Loony Left of Ken Livingstone's GLC time.
Nearly all of his Loony Left policies such as Gay rights, subsidised travel, cycle paths, emission restrictions etc are now seen as 'normal'.

And once upon a time it was ok to keep slaves/bonded serfs. Sorry Doon but I have to disagree with you. And there is a difference between the building of cycle paths and gay rights, the latter being about ending unfair discrimination. That was achieved without car bombs and troops on the streets of London.

And you still fail to condemn terrorist violence! Change via the ballot box not by gun law. At least via the ballot box its about engagement with the population, but via the bullet its about bullying in the extreme.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Two wrongs don't make a right, especially if violence is involved. I'm genuinely disappointed in you Doon. Irrespective of your political views I thought you would at least condemn violence.

Please stop trying to mimic Paxman/liverpoolphil. It fails.

Of course I think the violence and killings on both sides of the divide in NI is dreadful.
I would always support people like Corbyn/Mowlem etc who seek all avenues of brokering a lasting peace in that region.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Please stop trying to mimic Paxman/liverpoolphil. It fails.

Of course I think the violence and killings on both sides of the divide in NI is dreadful.
I would always support people like Corbyn/Mowlem etc who seek all avenues of brokering a lasting peace in that region.

So I'll ask the question again as you have avoided it

Do you think what he has said is acceptable

 

[Doon frae Troon]

So I'll ask the question again as you have avoided it

Do you think what he has said is acceptable

Sorry.........I'm not playing silly games.
And before you go all Paxman again.
That is neither a yes or no.

 

[Foxholer]

...
Edit: And whether we like it or not, the ira atrocities were a lot closer to home than Mandelas bombing of school busses, perhaps affecting people in the UK a lot more.
...

Can you just explain how proximity to the deeds actually makes any difference to the to the degree or the atrocity?

Seems to me it's a case of 'it doesn't affect me, so not a big deal!'!

 

[Hobbit]

Please stop trying to mimic Paxman/liverpoolphil. It fails.

Of course I think the violence and killings on both sides of the divide in NI is dreadful.
I would always support people like Corbyn/Mowlem etc who seek all avenues of brokering a lasting peace in that region.

Not trying to mimic anyone, just trying to get you to answer a straight question that you seemed to be avoiding. If you don't make your opinions clear, you'll always get people questioning them. Why are your opinions a secret when you're asked to confirm them?

I'll agree with your support of Mo Mowlem 110%, and I agree that dialogue is the only way to achieve a lasting peace, but not Corbyn and his support of Hamas, Hezbollah, the IRA, Argentina and Putin. Personally, I think he crosses the line... imo.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Sorry.........I'm not playing silly games.
And before you go all Paxman again.
That is neither a yes or no.

It's not about playing silly games - its once again you posting comments and people asking to a question to clarify your standpoint and you once again avoiding the direct question. It was a simple question that a few people have asked you

Do you think his comments about the IRA are acceptable

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Not trying to mimic anyone, just trying to get you to answer a straight question that you seemed to be avoiding. If you don't make your opinions clear, you'll always get people questioning them. Why are your opinions a secret when you're asked to confirm them?

I suppose that would be people like you who only seem to see one side of a conflict.

or

People like the BBC reporter who just asked the Shadow Chancellor if he will wear a poppy on 11th Nov.

 

[Foxholer]

It's not about playing silly games - its once again you posting comments and people asking to a question to clarify your standpoint and you once again avoiding the direct question. It was a simple question that a few people have asked you

Do you think his comments about the IRA are acceptable

Time to let this die Phil - just as you've successfully avoided numerous 'direct questions' yourself in the past!

Perhaps you should ask whether his 'diplomatic' efforts assisted the peace process - or do you not believe in that process? That's a direct question btw!

 

[c1973]

I dont agree with killing at all (except in self defence) whether that be soldiers in a barracks, off duty RUC officers doing their shopping, blowing up kids on an English high street or gunning down civilians at a civil rights march.

The airbrushing refers to South Africa. A lot of people worldwide will be completely unaware of the terrible attoricites carried out there by people who are now so revered.

Well, we agree on that anyway.

 

[Crazyface]

A move back to old labour and old labour socialist views, the ones they had to abandon in order to be elected.

THIS......IN SPADES !!!!! Is the correct post and cannot be disputed. TB changed Labour's outlook and trade union voting and clause 4 or summat to make them electable and now they've reverted back. LMAO !!!!!

 

[Hobbit]

I suppose that would be people like you who only seem to see one side of a conflict.

or

People like the BBC reporter who just asked the Shadow Chancellor if he will wear a poppy on 11th Nov.

Lol... i'm half Irish, brought up and educated in Ireland. And I manage a mixed staff north and south of the border. I have a Higher in Irish history, and I could quote you chapter and verse on that conflict going way back to the 1700's. I see both sides of that on-going conflict pretty much every day.

But I notice you leave out the second half of my post which included Corbyn's support of Hamas, Hezbollah etc... says a lot about your understanding of legitimising paramilitary organisations...

 

[c1973]

Can you just explain how proximity to the deeds actually makes any difference to the to the degree or the atrocity?

Seems to me it's a case of 'it doesn't affect me, so not a big deal!'!

Pretty much hit the nail on the head for most........would they be honest enough to admit it? I very much doubt it.

I'd assume proximity (not necessarily geographical btw) to an atrocity would have an effect on your feelings, particularly if someone had lost a close friend or family member to such atrocities. Would you not?

And this has nothing to do with South Africa. The thread is about Corbyn and by extension his politics and shadow cabinet. If you wish to get my views on S.A then start a thread, unlike some I'll actually give my opinion.


His comments for a UK politician are imo, and plenty others, indefensible. That is the point being discussed.

 

[c1973]

Lol... i'm half Irish, brought up and educated in Ireland. And I manage a mixed staff north and south of the border. I have a Higher in Irish history, and I could quote you chapter and verse on that conflict going way back to the 1700's. I see both sides of that on-going conflict pretty much every day.

But I notice you leave out the second half of my post which included Corbyn's support of Hamas, Hezbollah etc... says a lot about your understanding of legitimising paramilitary organisations...

Very good post. Well said sir.


As an aside, if you could recommend any readily available decent material on the subject matter I'd appreciate a pm. I've had a passing interest in the subject, particularly around ' the troubles' and the UK involvement with paramilitaries (not to your standard btw) for a good few years now.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Lol... i'm half Irish, brought up and educated in Ireland. And I manage a mixed staff north and south of the border. I have a Higher in Irish history, and I could quote you chapter and verse on that conflict going way back to the 1700's. I see both sides of that on-going conflict pretty much every day.

But I notice you leave out the second half of my post which included Corbyn's support of Hamas, Hezbollah etc... says a lot about your understanding of legitimising paramilitary organisations...

Very good post :thup:

 

[Foxholer]

...
The airbrushing refers to South Africa. A lot of people worldwide will be completely unaware of the terrible attoricites carried out there by people who are now so revered.

To me, South Africa was quite a different type of situation - though there was indeed terrorism!

The oppressive nature of the SA Government, Laws and Police in maintaining Apartheid were obscene! As an 'interested party' via sporting connections, I never had any faith in the SA Government's stance until FW DeClerk started negotiation with ANC after Mandela's release. The death of Steve Biko, and subsequent 'cover-up', was probably the most damning demonstration of that oppression!

Edit: Just seen the 'this ain't about SA' post and indeed it's not. But Corbyn's attitude has been consistent that there has to be dialog with certain levels of 'opponents' in order to find some resolution to the conflict. In that regard, he should also have made some sort of contact with Israel. McDonnell subsequently explained his 'honour IRA' speech in equivalent, but more eloquent text to my attitude!

 

[Spuddy]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/jun/03/northernireland.labourT

this is John McDonnell's explanation of his comments.

 

[c1973]

"negotiations on the future of Northern Ireland would not be taking place if it had not been for the military action of the IRA."


"There needs to be an honest admission that their position can no longer be sustained by a combination of paramilitary violence and the force of the British army"


The irony is not lost on me.

I'm afraid his explanation does not wash with me.
Particularly when it is the IRA who stand accused of being active at this point (by the PSNI) and not loyalist paramilitaries.

Telling Unionists they just need to accept things will change is hardly a sound base for negotiations, is it? That is the politics of confrontation.

And with that explanation (not apology, let it be noted) Labour have just lost a lifetime supporter as has the Union that supported these idiots. My mind has now been made up on the matter. I shall never again vote Labour until this element of the party has been expunged. A great shame.



Gandhi was pretty successful in achieving his aims without violence btw. Just saying.

 

[DCB]

Well, if his first official engagement, at St Pauls today for a commemorative service for the Battle of Britain is anything to go by, Mr Corbyn isn't going to turn over a new leaf. A distinct lack of respect IMO.