Jeremy Corbyn

[Deleted member 16999]

....and a remidner that the current Labour leader has a track record of befriending scum

Is it any different to May selling arms to the Saudi’s? The biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the middle east or giving a billion to the DUP to secure votes, the same DUP that backed the UDA.

 

[Tashyboy]

You may of read that, but I’m responding directly to tashy’s post, is tashy’s post correct? were did tashy get that info from?
This trip was brought up in 2016, why are they bringing it up again?
imo, it’s a smear campaign and deflecting from the mess this government is in.

According to the daily express ? where I read it the other day it was,correct. So if it wasn't the terrorists I will hold my hands up. Pardon the pun. So it was at the graves of the people who planned the attack. Does that make it worse. It certainly don't make it better. As Hobbit says, (and seeing as Hobbit hasn't divulged where his info is from so I can only trust him to be correct), a Tory backbencher was at the same visit but declined to attend. Wonder if he actually thought " this is wrong", whereas Jezza thought this is ok.
I personally don't think it is a smear campaign, he is reaping what he has sown.

As a floating voter, and as I have already said, the government is in a mess, but not as big a mess as the Labour Party are. Like I said before for me it's a choice between Theresa and Boris or Jezza and Diane. Lord help the neutrals.

 

[Tashyboy]

Maybe because over time he’s learnt a lot of the media are not after the truth, there is the odd decent journo about, the rest are after a scoop.
Personally I reckon them and politicians are currently the lowest 2 jobs when it comes to credibility.

The media may well not be after the truth, but I am.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

According to the daily express ? where I read it the other day it was,correct. So if it wasn't the terrorists I will hold my hands up. Pardon the pun. So it was at the graves of the people who planned the attack. Does that make it worse. It certainly don't make it better. As Hobbit says, (and seeing as Hobbit hasn't divulged where his info is from so I can only trust him to be correct), a Tory backbencher was at the same visit but declined to attend. Wonder if he actually thought " this is wrong", whereas Jezza thought this is ok.
I personally don't think it is a smear campaign, he is reaping what he has sown.

As a floating voter, and as I have already said, the government is in a mess, but not as big a mess as the Labour Party are. Like I said before for me it's a choice between Theresa and Boris or Jezza and Diane. Lord help the neutrals.

It may or may not make it better in some peoples opinion, but obviously the headlines are misleading or a down right lie.
I don’t like Corbyn as I’ve said, but genuinely believe the media going after him are in a perverse way strengthening his position with his supporters.

He helped lay a wreath to the people killed in the air strike, at the same event other wreaths were laid, the graves of the “alleged” plotters/supporters were in the graveyard.

Is he really expected to know the location of grsves and names of every person who supported terrorism.

 

[Old Skier]

Is it any different to May selling arms to the Saudi’s? The biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the middle east or giving a billion to the DUP to secure votes, the same DUP that backed the UDA.

May does not sell arms to Saudi the British Government issues licenses to enable company's to sell. This has been a practice of UK Governments since you and eye were at junior school, so putting this down to May seems a little disingenuous.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

May does not sell arms to Saudi the British Government issues licenses to enable company's to sell. This has been a practice of UK Governments since you and eye were at junior school, so putting this down to May seems a little disingenuous.

Could the PM publicly come out and say she’s against it or she intends to change it? Just because we’ve always done it doesn’t mean it’s right to continue.
Weren’t the cluster bombs recently used in Yemen in civilian areas by the Saudis identified as coming from a British manafacturer?
No different to when thatcher was in charge and she got stick for her comments about Mandela or her friend Pinochet.

 

[HughJars]

https://order-order.com/2018/08/13/bbc-politics-homepage-boris-6-0-corbyn/

2 days ago on their website. It's back to 2-2 now, one of which "explains" Boris' quotes :mmm:

Regardless, how many read the website v how many watch TV news? There's the issue

 

[Old Skier]

Could the PM publicly come out and say she’s against it or she intends to change it? Just because we’ve always done it doesn’t mean it’s right to continue.
Weren’t the cluster bombs recently used in Yemen in civilian areas by the Saudis identified as coming from a British manafacturer?
No different to when thatcher was in charge and she got stick for her comments about Mandela or her friend Pinochet.

Im not going to go on about middle eastern affairs on this thread other than to say that one of the unfortunate ways of the world is that sides have to pick which tyrants they wish to support to deal with the tyrants that they believe are a threat to their way of life, we, rightly or wrongly, with the majority of the free world choose the Saudi regime.

Corbyn seems to make a habit of picking, IMHO, the wrong side, be it Irish or middle eastern terrorists.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Of course they would have gone on and on and on about it. But the media, especially Sky News and BBC news would not. THAT is the issue here. Every little thing Corbyn or the SNP do is minutely picked apart for a bad angle, May and her nasty cronies can do what they like, and little reporting of it is here today and gone tomorrow.

Hold on a minute - I thought the BBC were a biased bunch of lefties?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Im not going to go on about middle eastern affairs on this thread other than to say that one of the unfortunate ways of the world is that sides have to pick which tyrants they wish to support to deal with the tyrants that they believe are a threat to their way of life, we, rightly or wrongly, with the majority of the free world choose the Saudi regime.

Corbyn seems to make a habit of picking, IMHO, the wrong side, be it Irish or middle eastern terrorists.

No worries, much worse laying a wreath near dead terrorist sympathisers than selling arms to states supporting current terrorists, sorted.

 

[Foxholer]

Im not going to go on about middle eastern affairs on this thread other than to say that one of the unfortunate ways of the world is that sides have to pick which tyrants they wish to support to deal with the tyrants that they believe are a threat to their way of life, we, rightly or wrongly, with the majority of the free world choose the Saudi regime.
...

Er.. No they (we) don't! We could simply not 'deal' with ANY tyrants - as was pretty much done successfully with Rhodesia and, probably not so successfully, with South Africa!

The US has a history of not 'managing' this sort of thing very well - supporting Saddam Hussein against Iran, the Taliban against Russia and even funding (Right Wing) revolutionaries in Central America!

Corbyn seems to make a habit of picking, IMHO, the wrong side, be it Irish or middle eastern terrorists.

I don't have a problem with him supporting the 'downtrodden' side - which is always likely to be the 'wrong' side for many. But I do take issue with his support of (active) terorists - if that's what he has done.

Remember that many high up in 'now acceptable' governments where (revolutionary) change has taken place are/were ex 'freedom-fighters' - aka 'reformed' terrorists!

 

[Old Skier]

Er.. No they (we) don't! We could simply not 'deal' with ANY tyrants - as was pretty much done successfully with Rhodesia and, probably not so successfully, with South Africa!

Er.. yes (we) do. Whether it's right or wrong is another matter. Interesting that you even think Zimbabwe was a success. Perhaps you might like to do some reading on what happened straight after independence under Mugabe untill the present date.

 

[drdel]

What I find worse (marginally) is his attempt to deny what took place and then to compound the matter by trying to justify it rather than simply accepting a mistaken action.

Add this to the Jewish debacle and it does put Labour in a very poor light.

 

[Hobbit]

It may or may not make it better in some peoples opinion, but obviously the headlines are misleading or a down right lie.
I don’t like Corbyn as I’ve said, but genuinely believe the media going after him are in a perverse way strengthening his position with his supporters.

He helped lay a wreath to the people killed in the air strike, at the same event other wreaths were laid, the graves of the “alleged” plotters/supporters were in the graveyard.

Is he really expected to know the location of grsves and names of every person who supported terrorism.

The headlines were misleading. The wording was (deliberately) vague. I researched it, and its clear Corbyn was a liar. Then Corbyn started dancing around the issue, then changed his tune, and proved he's a liar.

What I find worse (marginally) is his attempt to deny what took place and then to compound the matter by trying to justify it rather than simply accepting a mistaken action.

Add this to the Jewish debacle and it does put Labour in a very poor light.

This for me. Corbyn could, on so many occasions, have held his hands up on so many issues but, typically, of a politician he just won't admit when he's in the wrong.

Many of the social policies he proposes are very good, and are needed. They are typically Labour, and will appeal to many Labour supporters. But he has too much smoke without fire to be believable. He's a loose cannon, with years of evidence of that, to be a 'safe bet' to lead the UK.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

The headlines were misleading. The wording was (deliberately) vague. I researched it, and its clear Corbyn was a liar. Then Corbyn started dancing around the issue, then changed his tune, and proved he's a liar.



This for me. Corbyn could, on so many occasions, have held his hands up on so many issues but, typically, of a politician he just won't admit when he's in the wrong.

Many of the social policies he proposes are very good, and are needed. They are typically Labour, and will appeal to many Labour supporters. But he has too much smoke without fire to be believable. He's a loose cannon, with years of evidence of that, to be a 'safe bet' to lead the UK.

Question for you, why is this being dragged up for the third time? He was there in 2014 and reported on, 2016 prior to the election he was questioned on it and again now in 2018?
Is it a coincidence the government is in a mess, the labour party are having the anti-semitism row that bringing it up again deflects our attention away from the government troubles.
Even the Isreali PM’s tweet is a lie.
As I said previously all this media witch hunt is doing is entrenching people on opposing sides.

 

[MegaSteve]

So, in summary... Antisemitism bad... Islamaphobia good...

Bottom line, with such a small number of truly marginal seats, can't see anything other than the blue team running the place for many years to come...

Irrespective of who leads Labour the press/media will always find 'issues' even when none are there to be found... Always been the way...

 

[Deleted member 16999]

How times change.

 

[Hobbit]

Question for you, why is this being dragged up for the third time? He was there in 2014 and reported on, 2016 prior to the election he was questioned on it and again now in 2018?
Is it a coincidence the government is in a mess, the labour party are having the anti-semitism row that bringing it up again deflects our attention away from the government troubles.
Even the Isreali PM’s tweet is a lie.
As I said previously all this media witch hunt is doing is entrenching people on opposing sides.

It may well be the third time its been dragged up but I haven't seen it before, and I (avidly) follow politics? Have you seen it before? Where you aware of every meeting with Hamas, Hezbollah, IRA, Czech Secret Service, PLO, Black September? Were you aware of his slot on Iranian TV, and the fact he was still doing the programme after Ofcom revoked Iran TV's licence in the UK and censored him for it. Did you know he has lied about the £20k he received from Iran TV.

And, as the wives of the Israeli athletes have said, when has he ever met with the other side of any argument?

Some of the questions being asked may well have not been asked before because he was a nobody weirdo backbencher.

Are the press gunning for him? Yes. But they dredge up all sorts of rubbish for pretty much everyone that makes it to a position of prominence. Rooney, Beckham, Froome, Wiggins, Duchess of Sussex and then list anyone you like who's got to the top in their profession.

 

[Hobbit]

How times change.
View attachment 25412

Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[Old Skier]

How times change.
View attachment 25412

Yep, she also met Nelson Mandela, both leaders of their country.