[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jet

The oppression and persecution of Catholics ended centuries ago. I am a N. Irish Catholic and I, nor anyone I know, was deliberately oppressed and certainly not persecuted in our lifetime. The Catholics were poorer than Protestants simply because they refused to practise birth control and many had families of 10 or more children. Protestants had mainly 2 or 3. You can see the problem here with adequate housing, welfare and jobs, can’t you?

Many people have this romantic notion of a poor persecuted people and the IRA as freedom fighters releasing them from their hell on earth. What a load of bollocks. It all may have started off initially as civil rights marches but by the time the IRA became involved it was all about a United Ireland and a long standing historical hatred of the British, nothing more. If it was about a better life for Catholics, why did they bomb the hell out of the place, with not only the tragic loss of life, but the severe loss of jobs, the curtailing of an ordinary everyday life, the serious effects on the economy and tourism, and the fear and mistrust among once peaceful communities that only made things 100% worse than they had ever been?

Why did they bomb public places like bars, restaurants, bus stations etc. were they didn’t know the religion of anyone about to lose their lives or limbs? Catholics, Protestants, any other religion, women, children, babies. And you have the gall to talk about oppression and persecution? If there ever was any it was soon replaced by terror and grief and real poverty.

Another misconception is why how the IRA came to end their campaign. The truth is they knew they were getting nowhere by bombing and murder and never would, their resources were seriously depleted and their recruitment was faltering. They welcomed the peace talks because it was the only way forward.

To put the British Government on a par with the IRA in the N.Ireland conflict in their ‘evilness’ is mind blowingly stupid and suggests a support for terrorists at worst and a wilful ignorance at best.

I know people who seen Corbyn praising the IRA at rallies with their own eyes, not that I expect you to believe that, and I know something else too that I wouldn't put my head on the block to put out there, as much as I'd like to. Scoff all you want, but there it is for what it's worth.

In that article you linked, the author asserts that Corbyn has denounced the actions of the IRA. He's not a very good researcher at all, is he?
On the Steve Nolan show, Corbyn sits there bigging himself up in a collective ‘we’ about the ceasefire, but refuses to answer the question ‘do you condemn what the IRA did’.
On the fifth time, he hangs up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POslQtEkCBY

And answer me this: why would N.I politicians and ministers on both sides and even IRA terrorists insist he had nothing to do whatsoever with the peace process but was simply an avid IRA supporter? What would be the point? Are they all secret Conservative fanatics do you think?

Then why would they need an amnesty? if innocent people weren't jailed and killed then what is there to hide?

https://www.irishnews.com/news/polit...mbers-1193265/

[jet]

Originally Posted by Christmas treeza

Then why would they need an amnesty? if innocent people weren't jailed and killed then what is there to hide?

https://www.irishnews.com/news/polit...mbers-1193265/

DM puts the British Government and the IRA on a par in their evil in his/her post. Do you agree then?

Are you saying that some British soldiers allegedly abusing their positions on a few occasions and some people being wrongfully jailed are on a par then with the IRA's years of terror, murder and destruction?
In that whole post, all you feel inspired to focus on is a section where I say the British Government were in no way on a par with the evil of the IRA.
...and no comment at all about the linked video in which Corbyn refuses to condemn the actions of the IRA and hangs up when pushed....all very telling indeed.

[Kizzy]

I do think they're on a par yes, how do you define what happened on bloody Sunday?

You can't condemn one terrorist organisation, you must condemn them all and that is precisely what he's done... What's wrong with that?
You can't suggest one murder is worse than another, how is that effecting any peace process condemning one side specifically :/

[jet]

Originally Posted by Christmas treeza

I do think they're on a par yes, how do you define what happened on bloody Sunday?

You can't condemn one terrorist organisation, you must condemn them all and that is precisely what he's done... What's wrong with that?
You can't suggest one murder is worse than another, how is that effecting any peace process condemning one side specifically :/

What happened on Bloody Sunday was a one - off tragedy - a march that went horribly wrong. Do you really think the Para's just said to themselves 'Lets just shoot all these people for s***s and giggles'? No, they claim they were terrified and confused when the march turned ugly and were ordered to fire. It was all a horribly botched mess. That honestly sounds more likely to most sane people. Did that make them right - absolutely not. They killed innocent people and justice should be done.
200 million has been spent on thoroughly investigating the circumstances by order of the British Government. I'd like to know how that puts the Government on a par with the iRA.

The IRA campaign was a deliberate attack that killed and maimed thousands of innocent people, including women and children which lasted for many many years. How you can compare the two is beyond any human comprehension or compassion. But IRA apologists use Bloody Sunday to excuse the atrocities time and again. Shame on you.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by jet

DM puts the British Government and the IRA on a par in their evil in his/her post. Do you agree then?

Are you saying that some British soldiers allegedly abusing their positions on a few occasions and some people being wrongfully jailed are on a par then with the IRA's years of terror, murder and destruction?
In that whole post, all you feel inspired to focus on is a section where I say the British Government were in no way on a par with the evil of the IRA.
...and no comment at all about the linked video in which Corbyn refuses to condemn the actions of the IRA and hangs up when pushed....all very telling indeed.

I made it clear that the other side weren't innocent bystanders just wanting a peaceful outcome. There were terrorists on both sides of this war. The UVF didn’t just target the IRA, they targeted family members and civilians too and the British Government knew that UDR weapons were being used to arm the UVF. The government were also aware of the importation of arms for loyalists from South Africa and did nothing and we, in little old England didn't get any real information about that. The UVF were protected by both the government and the media.

In 1969 the loyalists were burning Catholic families out of their homes. Eight died 750 were injured and more than 2,000 Catholics were left homeless.

And lets face it, most of Northern Ireland was never affected by the troubles were they? It was West Belfast that took the brunt, especially when it came to Catholic persecution. You say there weren't, I know Irish Catholics from the troubled areas that would say otherwise.

When we talk about the Irish war, all our venom and hate go to the Irish Republican Party and everyone else who isn’t a member of the IRA are treated like victims. There were many victims on both sides of this conflict.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jet

What happened on Bloody Sunday was a one - off tragedy - a march that went horribly wrong. Do you really think the Para's just said to themselves 'Lets just shoot all these people for s***s and giggles'? No, they claim they were terrified and confused when the march turned ugly and were ordered to fire. It was all a horribly botched mess. That honestly sounds more likely to most sane people. Did that make them right - absolutely not. They killed innocent people and justice should be done.
200 million has been spent on thoroughly investigating the circumstances by order of the British Government. I'd like to know how that puts the Government on a par with the iRA.

The IRA campaign was a deliberate attack that killed and maimed thousands of innocent people, including women and children which lasted for many many years. How you can compare the two is beyond any human comprehension or compassion. But IRA apologists use Bloody Sunday to excuse the atrocities time and again. Shame on you.

Of course not, neither do I think that they acted against orders.

[jet]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

I made it clear that the other side weren't innocent bystanders just wanting a peaceful outcome. There were terrorists on both sides of this war. The UVF didn’t just target the IRA, they targeted family members and civilians too and the British Government knew that UDR weapons were being used to arm the UVF. The government were also aware of the importation of arms for loyalists from South Africa and did nothing and we, in little old England didn't get any real information about that. The UVF were protected by both the government and the media.

In 1969 the loyalists were burning Catholic families out of their homes. Eight died 750 were injured and more than 2,000 Catholics were left homeless.

And lets face it, most of Northern Ireland was never affected by the troubles were they? It was West Belfast that took the brunt, especially when it came to Catholic persecution. You say there weren't, I know Irish Catholics from the troubled areas that would say otherwise.

When we talk about the Irish war, all our venom and hate go to the Irish Republican Party and everyone else who isn’t a member of the IRA are treated like victims. There were many victims on both sides of this conflict.

Who said the other side were innocent bystanders? Who treats the UVF like victims? I abhor and condemn ALL violence. I condemn the IRA. I condemn the UVF.
This discussion is about the IRA and Corbyn.
But for the record, if it wasn't for the IRA, the UVF would never have emerged and the British Army wouldn't have been in N. Ireland for as long as they were. If it wasn't for the IRA continuing reign of terror there would have been few victims. Where did you read the ****e that the UVF were protected by the government and the media? Did one of your impartial persecuted friends from West Belfast tell you that? Good god, get a grip. (I grew up in West Belfast!)

There was a National Health Service and Unemployment benefit for all, regardless of religion. The big Catholic families were a drain on resources, but the poor from both sides got free milk and free school dinners, free school uniforms. In many cases, free television sets, fridges and those twin tub washing machines! We were better treated than many in the mainland UK or the Republic of Ireland. There were area's of discrimination, but no way on earth to the extent that justified a killing spree of massive proportions that murdered the innocent.

I don't know where you get your info from, but ALL of Belfast was affected by the troubles, the West, East and North actually, less so South Belfast. And Derry and many other towns were viciously hit. You are woefully misinformed. And Belfast city centre, where most of the IRA's car bombs killed ordinary people going about their business.

And what about all the arms and money pouring into the IRA's coffers from the halfwits in America who lapped up the poor downtrodden Catholic propaganda fed to them?

You have no idea, have you, of how many Catholics detest, loathe the IRA with a passion? They indiscriminately murdered anyone, regardless of their religion, so many of our own loved ones were lost too, our children and babies at their hands; they spurred on the growth of Loyalist paramilitary groups who murdered our men and put people out of their homes in retaliation. Did anyone really expect the Prods to sit back and take their murderous campaign without doing anything to retaliate? Really? What sort of la la land do you live in?
Because of the IRA and their 30 year quest for a United Ireland most of us didn't even want, Catholics were murdered from both sides.

I am sick and tired of IRA apologists, who point the finger at everyone else to somehow make their atrocities seem more justifiable. The UVF were murderous bastards who murdered our innocent Catholic ADULTS in retaliation, but at least they didn't blow up innocent woman, children and babies on a regular basis. They went to prison just like IRA terrorists did. There was NO favouritism when it came to murderers. Where DO you get this stuff from?
I am sickened beyond words of the callousness of people who fail to condemn the IRA outright in a discussion about them, end of story. Just like Corbyn failed to condemn them in the video I posted and you have ignored. I can see why you admire him so much. Well, you are welcome to him and his great friend and fellow IRA sympathiser Mc'Donnell. Just leave me out of the misinformed and propaganda - fed warped bull****.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jet

Who said the other side were innocent bystanders? Who treats the UVF like victims? I abhor and condemn ALL violence. I condemn the IRA. I condemn the UVF.
This discussion is about the IRA and Corbyn.
But for the record, if it wasn't for the IRA, the UVF would never have emerged and the British Army wouldn't have been in N. Ireland for as long as they were. If it wasn't for the IRA continuing reign of terror there would have been few victims. Where did you read the ****e that the UVF were protected by the government and the media? Did one of your impartial persecuted friends from West Belfast tell you that? Good god, get a grip. (I grew up in West Belfast!)

There was a National Health Service and Unemployment benefit for all, regardless of religion. The big Catholic families were a drain on resources, but the poor from both sides got free milk and free school dinners, free school uniforms. In many cases, free television sets, fridges and those twin tub washing machines! We were better treated than many in the mainland UK or the Republic of Ireland. There were area's of discrimination, but no way on earth to the extent that justified a killing spree of massive proportions that murdered the innocent.

I don't know where you get your info from, but ALL of Belfast was affected by the troubles, the West, East and North actually, less so South Belfast. And Derry and many other towns were viciously hit. You are woefully misinformed. And Belfast city centre, where most of the IRA's car bombs killed ordinary people going about their business.

And what about all the arms and money pouring into the IRA's coffers from the halfwits in America who lapped up the poor downtrodden Catholic propaganda fed to them?

You have no idea, have you, of how many Catholics detest, loathe the IRA with a passion? They indiscriminately murdered anyone, regardless of their religion, so many of our own loved ones were lost too, our children and babies at their hands; they spurred on the growth of Loyalist paramilitary groups who murdered our men and put people out of their homes in retaliation. Did anyone really expect the Prods to sit back and take their murderous campaign without doing anything to retaliate? Really? What sort of la la land do you live in?
Because of the IRA and their 30 year quest for a United Ireland most of us didn't even want, Catholics were murdered from both sides.

I am sick and tired of IRA apologists, who point the finger at everyone else to somehow make their atrocities seem more justifiable. The UVF were murderous bastards who murdered our innocent Catholic ADULTS in retaliation, but at least they didn't blow up innocent woman, children and babies on a regular basis. They went to prison just like IRA terrorists did. There was NO favouritism when it came to murderers. Where DO you get this stuff from?
I am sickened beyond words of the callousness of people who fail to condemn the IRA outright in a discussion about them, end of story. Just like Corbyn failed to condemn them in the video I posted and you have ignored. I can see why you admire him so much. Well, you are welcome to him and his great friend and fellow IRA sympathiser Mc'Donnell. Just leave me out of the misinformed and propaganda - fed warped bull****.

From the beginning they did just that, do you think history is different for everyone else?

Just before 8pm on Saturday 4 December, a customer in the bar on Belfast's North Queen Street thought he could smell a stink bomb being let off.

Wreckage of McGurk's pub
Many victims were buried under the wreckage of the pub
It was in fact a UVF bomber lighting the fuse on a 50lb bomb.

Seconds later it exploded almost completely destroying the pub, claiming 15 lives.

It was the UVF's first major atrocity and to this day the biggest loss of life in Belfast in one incident during the Troubles.

Among the dead were the wife and daughter of the bar's owner, Thomas McGurk.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6617329.stm

[jet]

Originally Posted by Christmas treeza

From the beginning they did just that, do you think history is different for everyone else?

Just before 8pm on Saturday 4 December, a customer in the bar on Belfast's North Queen Street thought he could smell a stink bomb being let off.

Wreckage of McGurk's pub
Many victims were buried under the wreckage of the pub
It was in fact a UVF bomber lighting the fuse on a 50lb bomb.

Seconds later it exploded almost completely destroying the pub, claiming 15 lives.

It was the UVF's first major atrocity and to this day the biggest loss of life in Belfast in one incident during the Troubles.

Among the dead were the wife and daughter of the bar's owner, Thomas McGurk.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6617329.stm

Yes, the bombing history is very different. The part of my post you have highlighted is the truth - The UVF, as awful as they were, did not blow up woman and children on a regular basis, so I don't get the point you are making?

Of course there were a few UVF bombings in the early days that mainly targeted pubs...factually very few indeed, because that is not how they operated.

The McGurks Bar bombing was in retaliation for the Red Lion bar bombing by the IRA in which 3 were killed and many injured. The Red Lion bombing was the first bombing of the troubles.

The IRA carried out thousands of bombings....

The Omagh Bomb.
John Hume said "When you look at the faces of those young children and see the terrible suffering inflicted on their families, you wonder what sort of people are these who can leave those children in the coffin the way they are."

Have a look at this:
The Omagh Bomb
http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/...magh/dead.html

And this:
The Claudy Bomb
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/...ngs-derry-1972

And this:
Bloody Friday Bomb.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/events/...friday_belfast

And this:
Shankill Chip Shop Bomb
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...-29687669.html

And this:
Enniskillen Bomb
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/events/enniskillen_bombing

It also transpired that the IRA had targeted the village of Tullyhommon, 20 miles from Enniskillen, on that Remembrance Sunday. The bomb at Tullyhommon was four times the size of the Enniskillen device. Had it exploded, members of the Boys' and Girls' Brigades would have been caught up in the carnage.

And this:
The Warrington Bomb
http://www.warrington-worldwide.co.u...g-24-years-on/

And this:
The La Mon Hotel Bomb
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/i...-28285671.html

And this:
The Harrods Bomb
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/w...00/3327609.stm

And this:
The Manchester Bomb
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co....years-11425324


These examples are just a sample - I could go on and on all day, but I think you get the picture that highlighting the very few UVF bombs (and I have condemned the UVF, as I abhor ALL violence) doesn't stand up to any comparison in the slightest and says quite a lot about your total ignorance of the Troubles and the devastation and death caused on a HUGE scale, by the bombings of the IRA. At least, I HOPE it's ignorance.

And your hero, Corbyn, fails to outright condemn these cold blooded killers, who didn't care WHO they killed in their indiscriminate bombings.

A little reminder:
Corbyn lies about his part in the peace process and refuses to answer the question ‘do you condemn what the IRA did’ 5 times.
On the fifth time, he hangs up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POslQtEkCBY

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by jet

A little reminder:
Corbyn lies about his part in the peace process and refuses to answer the question ‘do you condemn what the IRA did’ 5 times.
On the fifth time, he hangs up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POslQtEkCBY

You keep posting this video but it really doesn't demonstrate what you're saying at all. I can accept having issue with what he DOES have to say in it if, for example, you don't believe there is equivalence between the violence on either side but... to say that he doesn't condemn IRA violence in this clip... is simply false.


"My point was always that there had to be a political peace process, to avoid the violence, avoid the bloodshed and avoid the deaths."

"I condemn all bombing - it's not a good idea, it's terrible what happened."

"The whole violence issue was terrible, was appalling."


He quite explicitly does condemn the violence of the troubles and therefore, he does condemn many of the actions of the IRA. Now... I think what you - and importantly here, the interviewer in this video - are looking for is not actually for him to condemn it, but to "admit that it's worse". And while that is a perfectly valid standpoint too, it's not the same as saying he refuses to condemn the violence at all. The interviewer's goal seems to be to push him into making a definitive statement on what he considers to be a very nuanced political minefield so... I personally can't blame him for not being pushed into answering the question. It's an aggressive, bullying interview style designed to prove some sort of point and frankly I'd have hung up on him too. Like I said - holding the stance that the IRA's actions were far worse IS totally valid - but he was clearly not interested in a full discussion at all.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Toy Santa

You keep posting this video but it really doesn't demonstrate what you're saying at all. I can accept having issue with what he DOES have to say in it if, for example, you don't believe there is equivalence between the violence on either side but... to say that he doesn't condemn IRA violence in this clip... is simply false.


"My point was always that there had to be a political peace process, to avoid the violence, avoid the bloodshed and avoid the deaths."

"I condemn all bombing - it's not a good idea, it's terrible what happened."

"The whole violence issue was terrible, was appalling."


He quite explicitly does condemn the violence of the troubles and therefore, he does condemn many of the actions of the IRA. Now... I think what you - and importantly here, the interviewer in this video - are looking for is not actually for him to condemn it, but to "admit that it's worse". And while that is a perfectly valid standpoint too, it's not the same as saying he refuses to condemn the violence at all. The interviewer's goal seems to be to push him into making a definitive statement on what he considers to be a very nuanced political minefield so... I personally can't blame him for not being pushed into answering the question. It's an aggressive, bullying interview style designed to prove some sort of point and frankly I'd have hung up on him too. Like I said - holding the stance that the IRA's actions were far worse IS totally valid - but he was clearly not interested in a full discussion at all.

No, I did not expect him to say it was worse - the thought never even entered my mind...and that is not what he was being asked.
He faffed around like the usual politician and avoided answering the question 5 times just like I knew he would.
He was asked a simple question - 'do you condemn the actions of the IRA'.

The question was specific, and needed a specific answer. Why? Because he wants to be the next Prime Minister and he has all the IRA stuff surrounding him. It's relevant and important that the distinction should be made.

He could simply have said, 'Of course I condemn the actions of the IRA, like I condemn all bombings'. Ah, now that would be different altogether, don't you think? A crucially important distinction. But he refused to condemn them OUTRIGHT as I knew he would - because as an IRA supporter he doesn't! - and the blanket statement of 'all bombings' was his get out. Then when it gets too hot he hangs up - because he knows the interviewer has his measure. Slimy, lying little coward.

I'm surprised even you fell for it,TS, surely you recognise the dodges of politicians when you hear them? I can't quite believe you really did though.

Just look at the sample of the IRA bombings I posted above - how could ANY right minded person NOT condemn them OUTRIGHT! Only an callous dedicated IRA sympathiser and supporter would not.

[jet]

If Corbyn ever gets seriously near to being PM, the spotlight on his past activities will come to the fore. How could we have a PM who supported and sympathised with the murderers of woman, children and babies, and refused to outright condemn them? A PM who not only attended IRA rallies, but gave speeches spurring them on; who attended the funerals of IRA bombers? Who cynically lied about and bigged up his part in the N.Ireland peace process which he had no influence on and which nobody of any note remembers him as being a part of. It will all come out in the wash, sooner or later. Be careful what you wish for, Corbynites.
Unless you don't give a **** about that and only care about more pennies in your wallets and less in the coffers of the rich, which seems to be the case overall with his supporters. Well, good luck with that, if it comes down to it I hope the boost of more nosh helps salve your conscience that you championed a terrorist hugger. Enjoy your better standard of living (ha ha, do you really think Corbyn will deliver all your dreams!) while children, innocent victims of his cohorts, lie rotting in their graves, their life taken away from them.
You are pathetic, the lot of you. If you want a better life, get it with someone who deserves to have the accolade of giving it to you.

[DemolitionRed]

If it was going to come out in the wash it would of done so by now. People are employed full time to investigate and dig the dirt on people like Corbyn. Where is all this evidence? where are all your sources of proof?

Nobody can make a claim about this sort of thing without proof.

[Toy Soldier]

Thing is Jet, had he said "I condemn IRA actions, as I condemn all bombings"... I'm not sure that WOULD have been enough for many listeners nor for the host who was asking in this case. He would have taken flak for including the caveat. The interviewer was pressing for a "no strings" answer, just a flat "I condemn the IRA" with no nuanced elaboration. His interviewing style was agenda driven and pressing / bullying for a manipulated statement and so that's why I too would have been very tempted to hang up on the guy. Even if in my head I was thinking "well of course I condemn those actions"... I would absolutely not want to cave and "give the guy what he wanted". Frankly... I think he was a bad interviewer and too personally invested in the question to whittle out a real answer.

But yes, he's a politician giving politicians answers and as you know those can't be taken at face value... But that also doesn't mean you can assume the truth either way? I genuinely couldn't tell you either way what his hand-on-heart honest personal feelings about the IRA bombings are because the answers he gives are pure politics... But that's no different from ANY politician. I mean, look at all of the politicians who vehemently denounce middle eastern terrorism by day and then sell them guns and bombs under the table .

[parmnion]

Eds love will soon diminish as corbyn backers half in numbers as he fails to give labours stance on brexit cause its exactly that...brexit

[jet]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

If it was going to come out in the wash it would of done so by now. People are employed full time to investigate and dig the dirt on people like Corbyn. Where is all this evidence? where are all your sources of proof?

Nobody can make a claim about this sort of thing without proof.

Proof of what? Corbyn didn't break any laws. Who he sympathised with and patronised is a huge matter of conscience now. There is more to come though, if a N.Ireland person other than me is willing to break it. I'm not, all I can do in my cowardice is post my absolute disdain and disgust of him.

So...Where is the proof he wasn't involved up to his eyeballs with the IRA?
There is plenty of stuff already out there that says he was, from all different sources - why hasn't he sued yet? - but it is just ignored because people don't want to believe it. The spin from his supporters/or those who just feel like an argument is quite horrific really, what they are willing to brush aside because it comes from the DM, or some other Conservative friendly source (though even some Labour publications have been honest enough) - or worse - they simply don't care. It was so long ago, after all - but all those people are still dead.

Where is the proof he had a big part to play in the Good Friday Agreement and the peace process? (His get - out explanation for his patronage and sympathy with the IRA). There isn't any, because he hadn't. He is telling a bare faced lie, and his supporters all believe HIM, not the N. Ireland politicians, not an ex - IRA man, not the investigative journalists, not even the Nationalist Deputy First Minister, Seamus Mallon, who insists he had no part in it whatsoever, and was an IRA supporter. What reason has the Minister to lie?

But we are all liars, That Minister is a liar, the ex - IRA man is a liar, the politicians are liars, the press are liars, the essayists are liars, the investigative journalists are liars, I'm a liar, all of us in cahoots with each other in some nefarious plot we have planned together. It's all lies, lies, lies, and Corbyn is alone in telling the truth (with NO proof to back up anything he says.)

At this point all I can say is that those who brush aside Corbyn's sympathy and patronage of the indiscriminate murderers of men, women, children and babies can stick him up their buttholes to smell their s***, which is as putrid as his. You are very welcome to each other.

[Alf]

I hear they're eating animals from the zoo's in Venezuela. That's socialism for you.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Toy Santa

Thing is Jet, had he said "I condemn IRA actions, as I condemn all bombings"... I'm not sure that WOULD have been enough for many listeners nor for the host who was asking in this case. He would have taken flak for including the caveat. The interviewer was pressing for a "no strings" answer, just a flat "I condemn the IRA" with no nuanced elaboration. His interviewing style was agenda driven and pressing / bullying for a manipulated statement and so that's why I too would have been very tempted to hang up on the guy. Even if in my head I was thinking "well of course I condemn those actions"... I would absolutely not want to cave and "give the guy what he wanted". Frankly... I think he was a bad interviewer and too personally invested in the question to whittle out a real answer.

But yes, he's a politician giving politicians answers and as you know those can't be taken at face value... But that also doesn't mean you can assume the truth either way? I genuinely couldn't tell you either way what his hand-on-heart honest personal feelings about the IRA bombings are because the answers he gives are pure politics... But that's no different from ANY politician. I mean, look at all of the politicians who vehemently denounce middle eastern terrorism by day and then sell them guns and bombs under the table .

Oh seriously, spare me the spin.
You can go all around the houses to excuse and explain why the poor bullied perfect - one Corbyn didn't answer a simple straightforward question and you know what? - I'm sick of these shallow, excusing, goading replies that show no empathy for the dead -FFS, he was asked if he condemned the IRA bombings - bombings which indiscriminately KILLED MANY YOUNG CHILDREN AND BABIES AS YOUNG AS 9 MONTHS OLD!!!!!
AND HE REFUSED TO DO IT. Do you HEAR - REFUSED.
And you are acting as if it is a game - I wouldn't have answered either the way the big bad interviewer asked ME! Why should I?
But its not any children or babies you know personally or who Perfect Corbyn knew personally who were robbed of their whole life and destroyed their families lives forever so it's fk all hunky dory and glib and spin.
Every time I see that Corbyn ******* smug face I feel ill. I haven't got in in for him for no reason - he's a very unwelcome topical and potent reminder of what he was, what he is and the great person many people believe him to to be NOW, while he continues to lie and avoid and spin. And it is bringing back pain and anguish for so many one hundred fold.
I HATE him.

[Tom4784]

There's very little point in a debate like this if you can't seperate emotion from logic.

[Marsh.]

Ed Sheeran knows how to make a good bop.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

There's very little point in a debate like this if you can't seperate emotion from logic.

Emotion and logic are not exclusive of each other. Emotions are often brought out more strongly when logic is ignored or suppressed.

I must say I find your coldness exceedingly chilling. As usual.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jet

Oh seriously, spare me the spin.
You can go all around the houses to excuse and explain why the poor bullied perfect - one Corbyn didn't answer a simple straightforward question and you know what? - I'm sick of these shallow, excusing, goading replies that show no empathy for the dead -FFS, he was asked if he condemned the IRA bombings - bombings which indiscriminately KILLED MANY YOUNG CHILDREN AND BABIES AS YOUNG AS 9 MONTHS OLD!!!!!
AND HE REFUSED TO DO IT. Do you HEAR - REFUSED.
And you are acting as if it is a game - I wouldn't have answered either the way the big bad interviewer asked ME! Why should I?
But its not any children or babies you know personally or who Perfect Corbyn knew personally who were robbed of their whole life and destroyed their families lives forever so it's fk all hunky dory and glib and spin.
Every time I see that Corbyn ******* smug face I feel ill. I haven't got in in for him for no reason - he's a very unwelcome topical and potent reminder of what he was, what he is and the great person many people believe him to to be NOW, while he continues to lie and avoid and spin. And it is bringing back pain and anguish for so many one hundred fold.
I HATE him.

I think you're being irrational, you've inflated his words to make him sound like he actioned the murders personally... get some perspective for gods sake.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Christmas treeza

I think you're being irrational, you've inflated his words to make him sound like he actioned the murders personally... get some perspective for gods sake.

Okay, so lets talk about the IRA and ISIS.
Lets say he was asked about the recent ISIS attacks on UK cities. If he was asked if he condemned them 5 times and each time he refused to answer (and it wasn't just on this one particular interview) and each time he said 'I condemn ALL bombings' but avoided like the plague mentioning ISIS specifically, what would be your thinking on that -
especially if you had seen him hanging around with ISIS leaders, all those photo - ops, attending their rallies, giving rousing speeches at said rallies and attending funerals of their lost dead in their war against us?

Just like Crobyn did with his IRA buddies. But it doesn't matter now - it was years ago in your mind....I need to get perspective according to you...

When it comes to IRA victims, it's just.... It was only the IRA - pfffff....that was yonks ago....get over it....forget it...forget your dead and get a fk'ing life.

As for your telling me to get PERSPECTIVE - how cold and heartless - I have news for you - NEVER!

And I'm still waiting for the historic proof of his massive involvement in the peace process, which was his excuse for fraternising with murderers....(on one side only, I add, any comment on that, eh?) - without it, his whole house of cards falls down...so YOU get some perspective for God's Sake.
From your previous posts on the history of the N. Ireland troubles, your lack of knowledge is a barrier to any future discussion anyway. You clearly know zilch about it, and probably even less about Corbyn's malevolent part in it.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by jet

Okay, so lets talk about the IRA and ISIS.
Lets say he was asked about the recent ISIS attacks on UK cities. If he was asked if he condemned them 5 times and each time he refused to answer (and it wasn't just on this one particular interview) and each time he said 'I condemn ALL bombings' but avoided like the plague mentioning ISIS specifically, what would be your thinking on that -
especially if you had seen him hanging around with ISIS leaders, all those photo - ops, attending their rallies, giving rousing speeches at said rallies and attending funerals of their lost dead in their war against us?

Just like Crobyn did with his IRA buddies. But it doesn't matter now - it was years ago in your mind....I need to get perspective according to you...

When it comes to IRA victims, it's just.... It was only the IRA - pfffff....that was yonks ago....get over it....forget it...forget your dead and get a fk'ing life.

As for your telling me to get PERSPECTIVE - how cold and heartless - I have news for you - NEVER!

And I'm still waiting for the historic proof of his massive involvement in the peace process, which was his excuse for fraternising with murderers....(on one side only, I add, any comment on that, eh?) - without it, his whole house of cards falls down...so YOU get some perspective for God's Sake.
From your previous posts on the history of the N. Ireland troubles, your lack of knowledge is a barrier to any future discussion anyway. You clearly know zilch about it, and probably even less about Corbyn's malevolent part in it.

I would think fair play, I condemn all bombings too... I condemn ISIS bombing as well as drone strikes that kill innocent children that are written off as 'collateral damage' ... You don't get to justify one set of murderers as worse than another no matter what side of the religious, cultural or 'in the national interest' package it's peddled in.

We all wanted bombings over there.. we all have infant blood on our hands, Corbyn was one of the only ones in the commons screaming NO! and yet you class him as complicit... he has never advocated violence, ever.

You're delusional, you can't see you're placing blame where none lies and excusing those who state sponsored the annihilation of 100s.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Greg-nog!

Oh wow who knew rich people were allowed to support anyone other than the Tories! :O I for one am in shock!!

Exactly, you'd almost think that all rich people had to support the Tories and couldn't have their own individual thoughts, just like how a working class person can support the Tories.

Personally I don't know how much Ed Sheeran really "loves" Corbyn's policies, but it's well known that most people in Showbiz are left wing so I don't get why LT seems to be so shocked at a rich person supporting the Labour?