Jump to content

Labour


jake

Recommended Posts

Just now, Ulysses said:

Lads, this thread is about the Labour party.  If you want to promote pro-Russia conspiracy theories broadcast on a Russian government-funded telly channel, could y'all at least take it to a thread of its own?

Boooo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 954
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • maroonlegions

    110

  • ri Alban

    69

  • Governor Tarkin

    62

  • doctor jambo

    53

Governor Tarkin
13 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

Lads, this thread is about the Labour party.  If you want to promote pro-Russia conspiracy theories broadcast on a Russian government-funded telly channel, could y'all at least take it to a thread of its own?

 

'Ymean, there's a chance it might not be true? :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

'Ymean, there's a chance it might not be true? :(

 

Probably not, but in any case it's nothing to do with the Labour party.  Mind you, at the rate the Labour party is going.........  :whistling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Corbyn had put a little effort into opposing Brexit during the referendum and since and left Isreal out of it, none of us would be in this mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PM pops out of her front door.    Reporters shout questions.   Met with Michael Myers face and silence.   Nashes off in ministerial car.   Perfectly normal and accepted.

 

Corbyn pops out of his front door.   Reporters shout questions (at much closer order).   Met with "good morning and... goodbye".    Nashes off in car.     Seethe boo hiss gtf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maroonlegions
2 hours ago, coconut doug said:

Perhaps if you updated your knowledge and understanding of the UK's international relations you might find Corbyn's position more honourable and logical. The idea that the UK is a beacon of ethical foreign policy and internationalist is ridiculous. Nothing is done unless it is in somebody's interest and these somebodies are rarely, if ever citizens. Little or nothing is done for the overall good of the country and that is why politics is broken.

       The press is there to support the unethical foreign policies of this country. They attempt to justify the usually needless but massively despicable acts of the U.K. It seems to me that in order to further ingratiate ourselves with a country that could'nt care less about us we are more than willing to ignore morality and decency. That comes in many forms but we have initiated wars, without UN backing on at least 2 occasions in this 40 years of Internationalism, you describe. I've not seen anything in these interventions that is beneficial to anybody other than those in the Military Industrial complex.

       It's never better demonstrated than this week though when a BBC producer has disclosed that the so called gas attacks on Douma never happened and that the casualties were actors. Do you remember when there was a clamour for the UK to bomb Syria and we did in response to Douma. Can you remember what Corbyn's response was at the time? I'll tell you, he was against it. If only he had compromised, that way there would only be half the number of fatalities or everybody would only be half-dead.

             Have you noticed that thousands are now returning to Syria now that Assad and the Russians have created a reasonable level of security? Do you think its alright to see things from a Russian perspective here or in Ukraine where they have been and continue to be ethnically cleansed by British backed fascists? The White Helmets and other terrorists have been evacuated to Israel. Strange isn't it that our press only gives us a one sided view of events. It's logical really that Corbyn who is a true internationalist should seek to avoid them. Have you ever seen him get a fair hearing?

  I'd like to see some real evidence of anti-semitism in the Labour Party, have you got any?

 

 

:greatpost:

 

 

Image may contain: 1 person, text
 
 

More lies from the MSM!

 

 

No photo description available.
 

 

Edited by maroonlegions
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dusk_Till_Dawn
3 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

 

:greatpost:

 

 

Image may contain: 1 person, text
 
 

More lies from the MSM!

 

 

No photo description available.
 

 

 

Good job we’ve got the Canary to gloss over all corbyn’s flaws then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

'Ymean, there's a chance it might not be true? :(

It's about as true as what we are told mate.

Don't know where that leaves us all .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maroonlegions

Dusk Till Dawn.

 

What flaws, dont be shy now , go on list em.  

 

:sleepy:

 

On line  social media Trolls get pulled up for trolling and  lying about Labour and Corbyn but you post what....... :facepalm:

 

 

 

Image may contain: 1 person, text
Edited by maroonlegions
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ulysses said:

 

So, the Labour party, jake?

Anyway.

Back when I was young I was a member.

Always been political and formative years were during the strike.

The days of militant .

 

I think the split in Labour is demographic.

There can be no doubt that Corbyn has had the message from the BBC.

Can't get my head round how this has been so acceptable.

But imo there is a similar problem to the days of militant tendency but it's  complicated by the demographics and the anti Semite problem is really a problem of the middle East .

Something that is important to a powerful lobby within the Labour party.

A justifiable cause.

But one that is being hijacked .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
5 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

 

Image may contain: 1 person, text

 

He missed out wealthy and contented.

But enough about me. 

 

Instead of posting inane memes, tell us what you think about Labour, ML.

 

Go on.

 

5 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

giphy-12.gif

 

:lol:

 

That's a good one!

Reminds me of that McCarthy gif that did the rounds a few years ago.

SparseEnviousDotterel-max-1mb.gif

Edited by Governor Tarkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
15 minutes ago, jake said:

It's about as true as what we are told mate.

Don't know where that leaves us all .

 

The first casualty, when war comes, is truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like the Blairites are all creeping out of the woodwork now.

 

Can't say I'm a Labour supporter but I don't think MPs or MSPs who were elected to represent a party using that party's funds should be allowed to resign and switch to another party or go independent to better themselves.  A by-election should be mandatory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, frankblack said:

Looks like the Blairites are all creeping out of the woodwork now.

 

Can't say I'm a Labour supporter but I don't think MPs or MSPs who were elected to represent a party using that party's funds should be allowed to resign and switch to another party or go independent to better themselves.  A by-election should be mandatory.

At least when Douglas Carswell defected from Tory to UKIP he also resigned as an MP, stood for re-election under the UKIP banner and won the seat again.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While no fan of Corbyn,  that sounds like the right thing to do. 

 

By-election that is 

Edited by Dirty Deeds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Cade said:

At least when Douglas Carswell defected from Tory to UKIP he also resigned as an MP, stood for re-election under the UKIP banner and won the seat again.

 

 

I'll stop now?????

Edited by Dirty Deeds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, coconut doug said:

Perhaps if you updated your knowledge and understanding of the UK's international relations you might find Corbyn's position more honourable and logical. The idea that the UK is a beacon of ethical foreign policy and internationalist is ridiculous. Nothing is done unless it is in somebody's interest and these somebodies are rarely, if ever citizens. Little or nothing is done for the overall good of the country and that is why politics is broken.

 

Never said we were a beacon of ethical foreign policy. 

 

7 hours ago, coconut doug said:

       The press is there to support the unethical foreign policies of this country. They attempt to justify the usually needless but massively despicable acts of the U.K. It seems to me that in order to further ingratiate ourselves with a country that could'nt care less about us we are more than willing to ignore morality and decency. That comes in many forms but we have initiated wars, without UN backing on at least 2 occasions in this 40 years of Internationalism, you describe. I've not seen anything in these interventions that is beneficial to anybody other than those in the Military Industrial complex.

 

Iraq was wrong. 

 

Kinda think interventions in Bosnia/Kosovo, Gulf 1, Falklands, Sierra Leone were justified uses of force. 

 

7 hours ago, coconut doug said:

       It's never better demonstrated than this week though when a BBC producer has disclosed that the so called gas attacks on Douma never happened and that the casualties were actors. Do you remember when there was a clamour for the UK to bomb Syria and we did in response to Douma. Can you remember what Corbyn's response was at the time? I'll tell you, he was against it. If only he had compromised, that way there would only be half the number of fatalities or everybody would only be half-dead.

 

He wasn't against it. He said if OPCW gave a thumbs up he'd back it. But the Syrians limited access to the area for weeks after limiting the chance of a thorough investigation. The UN's World Health Organisationstated that 43 of the 70+ deaths exhibited "symptoms consistent with exposure to toxic chemicals". 

 

https://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/statements/2018/chemical-attacks-syria/en/

 

The OPCW would later state there was no conclusive proof that they had gathered (despite being denied access two one of the storage facilities, not being allowed access by Russian and Syrian forces for days after the event and coming under fire in both areas under Syrian control) of an attack. But did state the reported injuries and images appeared to be in line with a chlorine based toxin. 

 

The GPPI institute have, on their research, noted 300 chlorine gas type outbreaks in the 8 years of war and attribute that to the Syrian regime:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/syrian-military-linked-to-more-than-300-chemical-attacks-report-says/2019/02/16/c6e128de-31d4-11e9-ac6c-14eea99d5e24_story.html?utm_term=.a4751ba1a87c

 

7 hours ago, coconut doug said:

             Have you noticed that thousands are now returning to Syria now that Assad and the Russians have created a reasonable level of security?

 

Yes. Why shouldn't they? It's their home. I do, however, think members of the Assad regime should face a ICC Investigation over the conduct of the conflict along with other state and non-state actors in that conflict. As was done in Bosnia and the Yugoslav Wars.

 

7 hours ago, coconut doug said:

 

Do you think its alright to see things from a Russian perspective here or in Ukraine where they have been and continue to be ethnically cleansed by British backed fascists?

 

Pardon? So we're going with the RT/Sputnik line. I'm inherently dubious of anything broadcast by either organisation. Given they are state funded arms of the Kremlin. And given they are implicated in spreading Russian propaganda across the west as part of the wider aim to do so:

 

https://www.rferl.org/a/are-russian-trolls-saving-measles-from-extinction/29768471.html

 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi8mPSEh8ngAhVGgxoKHT75B1UQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fmedia%2F2017%2Fnov%2F29%2F24-hour-putin-people-my-week-watching-kremlin-propaganda-channel-rt-russia-today&psig=AOvVaw24Y5lCSLGXCZPpN0rRCltk&ust=1550708922159896

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/world/national-security/russian-propaganda-skripal-salisbury/?utm_term=.ad841ae33f4c

 

7 hours ago, coconut doug said:

 

 The White Helmets and other terrorists have been evacuated to Israel. Strange isn't it that our press only gives us a one sided view of events.

 

I'm not really here to defend the White Helmets but the issue with them is very very mixed and subject to different stages of the war. C4 news factcheek has said they pose Assad no threat. France 24 has a detailed 3 page report which shows caution should be exercised in how they operate and how the west deals with them but does not confirm them to be terrorists:

 

https://observers.france24.com/en/20180511-white-helmets-syria-fact-fiction-debunking

 

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/syria-chemical-attack-the-evidence

 

But what's this got to do with JC? 

 

7 hours ago, coconut doug said:

 

It's logical really that Corbyn who is a true internationalist should seek to avoid them. Have you ever seen him get a fair hearing?

 

Corbyn is an affable man who seems willing to facilitate withdrawal of the UK from the EU, perhaps one of the great international institutions ever established. He should be honest in that rather than simply hiding behind the strained interpretation of the party's Brexit policy. 

 

There will be no general election before March 29th now. He should now back a people's vote as he is committed to by party motion. He wanted democracy, abide by it. 

 

His allies get a fair hearing often; Abbott has been listened to as a voice of reason on the Home Office's harsh and regressive immigration and hostile environment policies. I've read pro-McDonnell lines in centre right papers on economic issues. Labour's opposition to UC, largely without alternative, is gaining a good response. As is his critique of Failing Grayling.

 

7 hours ago, coconut doug said:

  I'd like to see some real evidence of anti-semitism in the Labour Party, have you got any?

 

I'm not a member these days nor am I on any of the disciplinary committees, so personally no.

 

But Jewish members within Labour - not just MPs - feel they're being asked to account for Israeli policies, that they're marginalised and claim they face intimidation. Labour as a party should spend less time inviting Derek Hatton back into its ranks and more time addressing these concerns with practical steps.

 

Jim Sheridan said he had respect for the Jewish community but that "they and their Blairite plotters" - so Jews in the labour party are intrinsically anti-Corbyn to our Jim. Since readmitted I should add. But that's not racist then? Anti-semitic isn't here in the fact he's classed a whole group of members of one faith of something? 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/18/jim-sheridan-suspended-from-labour-over-antisemitism-row-comments?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

Naz Shah and Ken were also suspended for anti-semitic remarks.

 

Even if it is small scale. Any perception of racism or discrimination within Labour must be challenged and dealt with swiftly. Much like it should in the Tories who have an equally big issue around Islamophobia.

 

It is not contradictory to believe Corbyn has a good domestic agenda but also think he is not doing enough to root out any form of anti-semitism or racism in Labour. Nor is it mad to appreciate his agenda and think he is fundamentally out of touch with the Labour party on Brexit and on our relationship with NATO. 

 

For me, the party backed him twice. He is leader. End of. But he doesn't get a blank cheque. I expect more from Labour as a party. I want them raising the issues at the heart of May's deal with vigour, to stand up to vested interests within its ranks and to any harassment and bullying. Where is Corbyn on the dodgy funding of Vote Leave? Where is his alternative welfare plan? What is his agenda internationally once we Brexit? He's been found wanting of late. I do not think he has proved himself of late. Not at all. Others have. He has not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dusk_Till_Dawn
32 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-47300832

 

Joan Ryan quits Labour. I look forward to the character assanation that she’s not ‘real’ labour 

 

Though the statement is quite daming of Jezza accusing him of deriliction of duty

 

Rumours going about that a number of Tory mp’s about to flip to new independent group as well. That could make things way more interesting.

 

A few torie MP’s flip the independent group will be bigger than the dup!

 

:pleasing:

 

corbyn on on the way out hopefully

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lord BJ said:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-47300832

 

Joan Ryan quits Labour. I look forward to the character assanation that she’s not ‘real’ labour 

 

Though the statement is quite daming of Jezza accusing him of deriliction of duty

 

Rumours going about that a number of Tory mp’s about to flip to new independent group as well. That could make things way more interesting.

 

A few torie MP’s flip the independent group will be bigger than the dup!

 

The real hope is mass defections breaking the backs of both main parties. Apparently the aim is to overtake the SNP, gain access to the short money and get a weekly slot at PMQs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

They will need a lot of mp’s to flip to overtake the snp. If it did happen it would be pretty momentous.

 

Cant see it happening albeit would quite like to see it happen for a variety of reasons.

 

Got 8 now. Would need another 26/27 I think. Not inconceivable. Especially if the LibDems join them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Captain Sausage

Would be great for British politics if the centrist Tories and Labour MPs joined forces with the Lib Dem MPs and there was finally a party worthy of the name in the middle of the spectrum. 

 

At the moment, the electorate (down south anyway) have a choice between the ever further right Conservatives or the ever further left Labour. Neither of those appeals to me, so Lib Dem’s were about my only choice. Given they’re not a valid threat to either main party, it’s more of a protest vote. Hopefully this Independent Party can change that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dusk_Till_Dawn
6 minutes ago, Captain Sausage said:

Would be great for British politics if the centrist Tories and Labour MPs joined forces with the Lib Dem MPs and there was finally a party worthy of the name in the middle of the spectrum. 

 

At the moment, the electorate (down south anyway) have a choice between the ever further right Conservatives or the ever further left Labour. Neither of those appeals to me, so Lib Dem’s were about my only choice. Given they’re not a valid threat to either main party, it’s more of a protest vote. Hopefully this Independent Party can change that. 

 

That is surely what will happen, although Tory MPs will be more reluctant on the basis that they're already in government and Labour are doing a good job of eating themselves. It would make a lot of sense for the Lib Dems to get involved though, given that they're an irrelevance on their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

The real hope is mass defections breaking the backs of both main parties. Apparently the aim is to overtake the SNP, gain access to the short money and get a weekly slot at PMQs.

 

I read that too, then wondered how that could be fair, given they aren't even a registered political party.

 

New democracy! Yay!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dusk_Till_Dawn
10 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

I read that too, then wondered how that could be fair, given they aren't even a registered political party.

 

New democracy! Yay!

 

You'd imagine they will register if they get the numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

You'd imagine they will register if they get the numbers.

 

One would hope so.  Then we can see who the finance is behind them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Proper demented rant by that Ryan woman.    Her deluded assertion is that she won her seat in 2017 on the basis of her as a candidate.    Not aided by her being a Labour Party candidate and in spite of Corbyn.    All seemingly contrary to the general gains made by Labour.    Utter delusion.

 

If she thinks she won her seat wholly independently and if she thinks the Labour Party is so toxic,    why has it taken until now for her to leave?     Why wait until others show their hand?    Why jump on the bandwagon two days late?

 

Not recontesting her seat as an independent.    Just like the other heroes.

Edited by Victorian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

One would hope so.  Then we can see who the finance is behind them.

 

That's the real big question here. But at present I don't think there's much to worry about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JamboX2 said:

 

That's the real big question here. But at present I don't think there's much to worry about. 

 

Perhaps not, but if they want to be a political party, they obviously have to engage with the rules surrounding them.  At the moment they are a eight individuals.

 

As mentioned previously I also think they should resign and stand as independents or under the guise of their new party.

 

Early days I guess, but I think that the demise of the Labour Party is being over exaggerated.  Corbyn has the mandate from the party.  He recorded a successful GE last time round.  I'm not saying he's amazing, recent times have shown a distinct lack of leadership or charisma, but the manifesto and the "for the many, not the few" tagline resonates.

 

Brexit is the key - and this is where Corbyn is floundering.

 

I wonder if his strategy is to allow Brexit, it is then shown up for what it is, the Tories get the blame, then Labour cleans up.  Risky and naive, IMO, if that is the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-mp-letter-joan-ryan-theresa-may-confidence-jeremy-crobyn-marginal-seat-prime-minister-a7768466.html

 

Joan Ryan also said polls show the Conservatives heading for a "large majority" and that "no one thinks Theresa May will not be Prime Minister", before begging local residents to vote for her despite "misgivings about the Labour leadership".

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-mp-letter-joan-ryan-theresa-may-confidence-jeremy-crobyn-marginal-seat-prime-minister-a7768466.html

 

Joan Ryan also said polls show the Conservatives heading for a "large majority" and that "no one thinks Theresa May will not be Prime Minister", before begging local residents to vote for her despite "misgivings about the Labour leadership".

 

 

 

Politically astute that one!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-47300832

 

Joan Ryan quits Labour. I look forward to the character assanation that she’s not ‘real’ labour 

 

Though the statement is quite daming of Jezza accusing him of deriliction of duty

 

Rumours going about that a number of Tory mp’s about to flip to new independent group as well. That could make things way more interesting.

 

A few torie MP’s flip the independent group will be bigger than the dup!

Another Zionist quits labour, hardly surprising. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff the Mince
9 minutes ago, XB52 said:

Another Zionist quits labour, hardly surprising. 

Never knew George Galloway was on Kback .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Victorian said:

I wonder what her opinion was about the unmitigated clown show that was Ed Milliband's tenure as leader.     

 

Miliband's tenure was statesmanlike in comparison to now. Even on Syria he held a better line. 

 

Miliband was hobbled by two things:

 

1. The Daily Mail - Red Ed stuff

2. The sudden rise of the SNP a year before the election allowing the Cameron caricature of "chaos with Ed".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JamboX2 said:

 

Miliband's tenure was statesmanlike in comparison to now. Even on Syria he held a better line. 

 

Miliband was hobbled by two things:

 

1. The Daily Mail - Red Ed stuff

2. The sudden rise of the SNP a year before the election allowing the Cameron caricature of "chaos with Ed".

 

Milliband was a twat without any clear,  alternative policies to offer.    Just another superficial robot dressed up as a mild socialist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Ulysses said:

Lads, this thread is about the Labour party.  If you want to promote pro-Russia conspiracy theories broadcast on a Russian government-funded telly channel, could y'all at least take it to a thread of its own?

The things i referenced were entirely to do with the Labour Party. They were responses to another poster's assertion that Corbyn was hard left in his international relations, a Russian sympathiser and was lacking skill in his dealings with the press. If what i have linked to is correct then Corbyn's judgement on international matters is more informed and more constructive than those of HMG and the Labour party generally on this matter at least. 

The fact that i linked the story of the BBC's Syria producer stating that he was 100% certain that the gas attacks on Douma were staged was to show that Corbyn's cautious approach may well have been the right approach after all. As far as i can remember there was no credence given to Corbyn's view at the time and our state funded BBC were clamouring with most of parliament (SNPexcepted) for our country to bomb Syria and they duly did. The lack of any real scrutiny and objectivity by most of our press due to their inherent bias determines Corbyn's relationship with them and not the other way round was my point. 

  It matters not where the the info regarding the BBC producers investigations appear. I linked two sources as i suspected that there might be a response similar to that above. The story can be found on dozens of sites with a variety of vested interests supporting them. I can link if you wish. The real story is that the producer's allegations do not appear in our mainstream press. A BBC Syria producer has claimed that the Douma "gas attacks" were 100% staged. That is an incontrovertible fact.

Can i ask, why is it that you get to decide what is relevant and what is not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff the Mince
6 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

The things i referenced were entirely to do with the Labour Party. They were responses to another poster's assertion that Corbyn was hard left in his international relations, a Russian sympathiser and was lacking skill in his dealings with the press. If what i have linked to is correct then Corbyn's judgement on international matters is more informed and more constructive than those of HMG and the Labour party generally on this matter at least. 

The fact that i linked the story of the BBC's Syria producer stating that he was 100% certain that the gas attacks on Douma were staged was to show that Corbyn's cautious approach may well have been the right approach after all. As far as i can remember there was no credence given to Corbyn's view at the time and our state funded BBC were clamouring with most of parliament (SNPexcepted) for our country to bomb Syria and they duly did. The lack of any real scrutiny and objectivity by most of our press due to their inherent bias determines Corbyn's relationship with them and not the other way round was my point. 

  It matters not where the the info regarding the BBC producers investigations appear. I linked two sources as i suspected that there might be a response similar to that above. The story can be found on dozens of sites with a variety of vested interests supporting them. I can link if you wish. The real story is that the producer's allegations do not appear in our mainstream press. A BBC Syria producer has claimed that the Douma "gas attacks" were 100% staged. That is an incontrovertible fact.

Can i ask, why is it that you get to decide what is relevant and what is not?

Why would you believe the one BBC guy about Douma over the 100s who said it was a chemical attack ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Milliband was a twat without any clear,  alternative policies to offer.    Just another superficial robot dressed up as a mild socialist.

 

Hang on. The energy price freeze, rail rationalisation, investment in schools, the investment bank... green energy boost... no policies?

 

Ed got no fair hearing. And surprisingly labour went further left. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

The things i referenced were entirely to do with the Labour Party. They were responses to another poster's assertion that Corbyn was hard left in his international relations, a Russian sympathiser and was lacking skill in his dealings with the press. If what i have linked to is correct then Corbyn's judgement on international matters is more informed and more constructive than those of HMG and the Labour party generally on this matter at least. 

The fact that i linked the story of the BBC's Syria producer stating that he was 100% certain that the gas attacks on Douma were staged was to show that Corbyn's cautious approach may well have been the right approach after all. As far as i can remember there was no credence given to Corbyn's view at the time and our state funded BBC were clamouring with most of parliament (SNPexcepted) for our country to bomb Syria and they duly did. The lack of any real scrutiny and objectivity by most of our press due to their inherent bias determines Corbyn's relationship with them and not the other way round was my point. 

  It matters not where the the info regarding the BBC producers investigations appear. I linked two sources as i suspected that there might be a response similar to that above. The story can be found on dozens of sites with a variety of vested interests supporting them. I can link if you wish. The real story is that the producer's allegations do not appear in our mainstream press. A BBC Syria producer has claimed that the Douma "gas attacks" were 100% staged. That is an incontrovertible fact.

Can i ask, why is it that you get to decide what is relevant and what is not?

 

Is it not more because his view adheres to your view rather than whether he is right or not? 

 

It's not state funded like RT. It is funded by the licence fee and has freedom to spend its money independently under the Royal Charter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
10 minutes ago, Geoff the Mince said:

Why would you believe the one BBC guy about Douma over the 100s who said it was a chemical attack ? 

 

20190220_113330.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bit more credibility to this now so fair play.     It's a tangible thing to have recruited across the house.    Sarah Wollaston especially is a top performer and the best of the cross party bunch thus far.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...