Jeremy Corbyn's Labour

[Tangled up in Blue]

Anyone see Jeremy Corbyn lose his rag with Krishnan Guru-Murphy on C4 News last night when questioned about referring to Hamas and Hezbollah as "friends"?

Yes and he was quite right to criticise KG-M's "tabloid journalism" smear tactics.

 

[Benfleet A1]

Yes and he was quite right to criticise KG-M's "tabloid journalism" smear tactics.

Yes, disgraceful that a potential future Labour leader should be questioned on his warped views that the two aforementioned organizations who would see every Jew on the planet slaughtered and Israel wiped from the map should be considered 'friends'. Mind you, he was quite 'friendly' with another terrorist organization as I recall.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Even that Tory bint on QT on Thursday was tipping RC as runner up in the election.He'll certainly do a lot better than Dianne Abbott did.

4th place for Liz Kendall methinks.:smiles:

Who is RC?

 

[Pubey]

Who is RC?

Richard Cadette

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Yes, disgraceful that a potential future Labour leader should be questioned on his warped views that the two aforementioned organizations who would see every Jew on the planet slaughtered and Israel wiped from the map should be considered 'friends'. Mind you, he was quite 'friendly' with another terrorist organization as I recall.

Actually, (and I imagine you didn't see the interview), JC was at pains to point out, (when the interviewer finally let him answer his question fully), that his use of "friends" was merely a fraternal greeting,(ie like "comrade"), when calling on the representatives of Hamas and Hezbolá present, to participate in all-party talks to attempt to resolve the conflict in Israel.He made it quite clear that he was not a supporter of Hamas or Hezbolá as such.

No doubt you'll "recall" that the IRA were also involved in such all-party talks with the GB government before the conflict in NI was resolved.

Who is RC?

Typo for JC!:raspberry:

 

[Benfleet A1]

Actually, (and I imagine you didn't see the interview), JC was at pains to point out, (when the interviewer finally let him answer his question fully), that his use of "friends" was merely a fraternal greeting,(ie like "comrade"), when calling on the representatives of Hamas and Hezbolá present, to participate in all-party talks to attempt to resolve the conflict in Israel.He made it quite clear that he was not a supporter of Hamas or Hezbolá as such.

No doubt you'll "recall" that the IRA were also involved in such all-party talks with the GB government before the conflict in NI was resolved.



Typo for JC!:raspberry:

I can only assume that you have now stooped to the level of apologist for a terrorist apologist. Congratulations, a new low.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I can only assume that you have now stooped to the level of apologist for a terrorist apologist. Congratulations, a new low.

I quite clearly stated that JC did not voice any support for Hamas or Hezbolá.

He merely stated that there would be no resolution of the conflict in Israel unless these two groupings were present at the conference table together with all other interested parties.

Many commentators happen to agree with him (including me).

This was after all how the conflict in NI was eventually resolved,by talking to the IRA and their political wing, Sinn Féin .

Don't you understand English?

 

[Benfleet A1]

I quite clearly stated that JC did not voice any support for Hamas or Hezbolá.

He merely stated that there would be no resolution of the conflict in Israel unless these two groupings were present at the conference table together with all other interested parties.

Many commentators happen to agree with him (including me).

This was after all how the conflict in NI was eventually resolved,by talking to the IRA and their political wing, Sinn Féin .

Don't you understand English?

I'm afraid I have a problem with a man who would make such claims but had no problems with attending Troops Out marches and invited terrorists to the HofP at the height of the troubles. You not having a issue with that fact doesn't surprise me in the least. As to my understanding of English, it's fine, thank you.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Dirty tricks by The Torygraph.

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/15/daily-telegraph-labour-party-jeremy-corbyn

 

[Benfleet A1]

Dirty tricks by The Torygraph.

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/15/daily-telegraph-labour-party-jeremy-corbyn

It won't make a blind bit of difference,don't the unions block vote? If they want him in then that's what will happen. I personally hope it happens.

 

[Gt Yarmouth Shrimper]

Dirty tricks by The Torygraph.

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jul/15/daily-telegraph-labour-party-jeremy-corbyn

Saw that earlier, thought it hilarious.:hilarious:

 

[RHB]

It won't make a blind bit of difference,don't the unions block vote? If they want him in then that's what will happen. I personally hope it happens.

Why on earth would you want that? Surely democracy and our parliament deserve a strong main opposition party regardless of who is in the driving seat currently?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

It won't make a blind bit of difference,don't the unions block vote? If they want him in then that's what will happen. I personally hope it happens.

He's already got Unite's support and is presumably a shoe-in to hoover up votes from CLP's.But I'd've thought second place to AB would be the most likely outcome.

Saw that earlier, thought it hilarious.:hilarious:

Maybe.But hardly democratic.

 

[EastStandBlue]

Saw that earlier, thought it hilarious.:hilarious:

Yeah. My sides are splitting that a national broadsheet has been reduced to that calibre of clickbait crap.

 

[Benfleet A1]

Why on earth would you want that? Surely democracy and our parliament deserve a strong main opposition party regardless of who is in the driving seat currently?

Simple really, the union block vote could quite possibly push JC over the line giving Labour it's first truly left wing leader in 30 years. Party policy would lurch radically to the left which would give the electorate a clear choice of preference for future government. JC's vision would spell disaster for this country and see a return of gross union influence. It would put this country back decades.

 

[RHB]

Simple really, the union block vote could quite possibly push JC over the line giving Labour it's first truly left wing leader in 30 years. Party policy would lurch radically to the left which would give the electorate a clear choice of preference for future government. JC's vision would spell disaster for this country and see a return of gross union influence. It would put this country back decades.

I don't disagree with you assessment of JC, but the UK hasn't had a strong affection for the left wing for years so I couldn't see a JC led party winning the country over. As for Union influence, it looks as if the current incumbent at No 10 and his chums are intending to curb union power to the point where it is toothless - Whilst that may be a good thing from a Tory voters perspective, I don't think it is healthy in terms of non aligned folk. Members of trade Unions are also voters and they don't all have three heads and love causing trouble. The same as it would be bad to have an unopposed left wing government, so it is for a right wing one. No competition leads to dictatorship eventually.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Simple really, the union block vote could quite possibly push JC over the line giving Labour it's first truly left wing leader in 30 years. Party policy would lurch radically to the left which would give the electorate a clear choice of preference for future government. JC's vision would spell disaster for this country and see a return of gross union influence. It would put this country back decades.

There is no union block vote it's now one member one vote. The individual unions will chose to support a particular candidate in the same way local Labour Party branches will but it is just support they can't dictate how anyone votes any more than they could in a general election.

The Labour Party has the biggest membership of any party in the UK so the readership of the Telegraph is unlikely to impact the vote as only a tiny proportion of them would be stupid enough to take on that option and most would be registered as Tory voters so be rejected.

This will have more impact on how people view the free press than on the leadership vote. Especially in light of this:

'During the general election, the Telegraph took its support for the Conservatives a step further by using its marketing database to urge people to vote Tory via email in a missive signed by the newspaper’s editor, Chris Evans.'

 

[Benfleet A1]

Hence the question mark,I wasn't sure.

 

[MK Shrimper]

It would put this country back decades.

As opposed to Cameron and his chums who want us back to the 1850s.

 

[Benfleet A1]

As opposed to Cameron and his chums who want us back to the 1850s.

Wonderful contribution as ever. If you want a man in charge who openly supported Irish terrorists, would price the financial sector out of London costing thousands of jobs, would give huge power to unions that would destroy the economy and create a welfare state that would cripple the rest of us who do work, then sign up and vote for him. Then go house hunting for a nice cave because he would have us back in the Stone Age within five years of power.