“Corbyn The Collaborator”

[Northern Monkey]

Corbyn 'The Collaborator': Czech spy reveals how he recruited Labour leader and used him as an 'asset' to create network of informants in Russian operation.

.Ex Czech secret agent Jan Sarkocy said Jeremy Corbyn was a paid informant
.Said he was rated by Russia who made plans to move him out there if discovered
.Labour leader's spokesman dismissed the allegations branding them 'smears'

Jeremy Corbyn was a paid informant of the Czech secret police at the height of the Cold War, a former Communist secret agent claims

Former spy Jan Sarkocy said he recruited the MP, codenamed Cob, in the 1980s.

Mr Corbyn was an ‘asset’ who knew he was working with the Soviet puppet state, Mr Sarkocy claimed.

Earlier this week it emerged Mr Corbyn had hosted Mr Sarkocy – who was posted to Britain as a diplomat under a fake identity – in the House of Commons.






http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5401097/Jeremy-Corbyn-paid-Czech-secret-police-spy-claims.html

[Underscore]

Wouldn't surprise me tbh.

[Underscore]

BUT this is the Daily Mail so I shall take it with a pinch of salt.

[bots]

Hmmm, i guess anything is possible, but i'm not inclined to believe it without at least some form of evidence

[Tom4784]

I don't think it's realistic, this is real life, not Homeland.

[MTVN]

Hmmm, i guess anything is possible, but i'm not inclined to believe it without at least some form of evidence

There is evidence that the Czech government identified Corbyn as someone sympathetic to the Soviet cause and had a file on him where they used the codename 'Cob'. Corbyn admitted that he met with a Czech diplomat but claims he didn't know he was a security agent

The Sun had that exclusive a couple of days ago but this new claim today that he was actually a paid informant hasn't been collaborated

[MTVN]

I don't think it's realistic, this is real life, not Homeland.

This sort of thing went on all the time in the Cold War

[MTVN]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/nintchdbpict000385150206-e1518646772701.jpg?strip=all&w=583

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/nintchdbpict000385230067.jpg?strip=all&w=629

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/nintchdbpict000385150226-e1518645236661.jpg?strip=all&w=960

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5581166/jeremy-corbyn-communist-spy-cold-war-briefings/

[Beso]

Busy man...no wonder he can keep his beard so well groomed.

[user104658]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/nintchdbpict000385150206-e1518646772701.jpg?strip=all&w=583

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/nintchdbpict000385230067.jpg?strip=all&w=629

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/nintchdbpict000385150226-e1518645236661.jpg?strip=all&w=960

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5581166/jeremy-corbyn-communist-spy-cold-war-briefings/

So they went to the trouble of giving him a code name for some circumstances, but then plastered his full name all over other documents? :think: worst spies ever tbh.

[Maru]

So they went to the trouble of giving him a code name for some circumstances, but then plastered his full name all over other documents? :think: worst spies ever tbh.

When half the public believes everything is #fakenews, it's pretty easy to get away with this kind of stuff though... I mean look at half the threads. :laugh: Nobody thought Trump would be elected either and here we are...

They are effective because they can sew distrust... even just a story, whether proven or not, turns some people off and hurts the voting numbers here (again, see 2016 election). Because nobody knows what /really/ to believe anymore..

[bots]

There is evidence that the Czech government identified Corbyn as someone sympathetic to the Soviet cause and had a file on him where they used the codename 'Cob'. Corbyn admitted that he met with a Czech diplomat but claims he didn't know he was a security agent

The Sun had that exclusive a couple of days ago but this new claim today that he was actually a paid informant hasn't been collaborated

The Russia of that time is what the current Labour leadership want for the UK, so I guess its all feasible, I'm just a bit surprised its not been mentioned before

[jaxie]

I think it's clear there is something shady about Jeremy's past sympathies generally which does pose worrying questions about him as a potential leader. I have no idea whether this story is all it seems but one thing that can't be denied is that there was an association.

Overall the most worrying thing about this man is that in the eyes of some he can do no wrong. That kind of blind trust without question is dangerous. Though you have to look on with a little amazement at the current power of spin.

[joeysteele]

I have no interest in what the so called newspapers present as fact with nothing substantiated.

I glanced at the press reviews last night on TV,where it was felt this was a real non story.
That in the 80s with the changes in the Eastern bloc Nations happening,people were in and out of Westminster regularly.

It was further stated on that press review that the man who is the source of this,is a totally discredited and unreliable source.

Furthermore the reviewers and presenter revealed the Czech authorities have dismissed this story of events too.

So I'll settle for that unless something is proven,rather than be taken in by the likes of the Sun,Mail and Telegraph bandwagon rolling again.
It really does astound me anyone takes seriously what they read in all papers now.
'News'papers are what they certainly are not anymore in my view.
Far better shoving them on fiction stands now rather than news ones.

[Alf]

Well if it's definitely untrue, then I'm assuming that Corbyn will sue for slander?

[Oliver_W]

I have no interest in what the so called newspapers present as fact with nothing substantiated.

I glanced at the press reviews last night on TV,where it was felt this was a real non story.
That in the 80s with the changes in the Eastern bloc Nations happening,people were in and out of Westminster regularly.

It was further stated on that press review that the man who is the source of this,is a totally discredited and unreliable source.

Furthermore the reviewers and presenter revealed the Czech authorities have dismissed this story of events too.

So I'll settle for that unless something is proven,rather than be taken in by the likes of the Sun,Mail and Telegraph bandwagon rolling again.
It really does astound me anyone takes seriously what they read in all papers now.
'News'papers are what they certainly are not anymore in my view.
Far better shoving them on fiction stands now rather than news ones.
I'm relieved that the only dodgy people he's associated with are the IRA and various islamic terrorists and hatepreachers.

[joeysteele]

Well if it's definitely untrue, then I'm assuming that Corbyn will sue for slander?

This debate has been held on other threads,if Politicians sued for every wrong thing the press said about them,they would never be out the Courts.

Politicians on all sides seem to now more likely choose to just not give credibility to the nonsense printed about them.
Probably wiser so to do in fact too, although I wish they would.

Otherwise this endless disservice given by the press particularly,regardless of political persuasion,will just go on and on.
Gutter journalism is what the UK has now in my opinion.

Of course a free press is a good thing but freedom should come with responsibilities too,in my view anyway.

Also when front page rubbish is shown to be so,apologies should fill said front page,not hidden at the bottom of an inner page.

Almost another waste of time then taking the press to task,when the story is highlighted but the apology more likely to go unnoticed.

[MTVN]

Sorry but it is historical fact that the Czech intelligence service identified Corbyn, arranged to meet him and kept a file on him. That information can't be denied. The story in the OP is just reporting a claim by a former Czech agent, those unhappy with that claim should take issue with him not the newspaper who are merely acting as the messenger

[Kizzy]

Sorry but it is historical fact that the Czech intelligence service identified Corbyn, arranged to meet him and kept a file on him. That information can't be denied. The story in the OP is just reporting a claim by a former Czech agent, those unhappy with that claim should take issue with him not the newspaper who are merely acting as the messenger

I wonder why they did that?..He was just a British MP and diplomat after all.

The claim by the former agent states that he got nothing of any value from the meeting, so where is the issue?
Corbyn wasn't ( even if true) the first to be duped by an agent and he won't be the last, the fact is that there was no useful info gleaned from him so what is the point of the story here?

The point of the story was to 'break' at the same time as those celebrating the 15th anniversary of Corbyns 'stop the war' speech, #fake news was touched upon earlier... this is a prime example.
In fact this news item could quite possibly have been generated by the same bots, or those with similar aims, that is entirely plausible.

Aside from the claim that many are inclined not to believe it the flip side of that is many are very much inclined to believe it, which of course was the aim of the item regardless of whether or not it has any basis in fact or not.

[Kizzy]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-stop-the-war-speech-video-15-years-on-iraq-2003-a8211816.html

[MTVN]

I wonder why they did that?..He was just a British MP and diplomat after all.

The claim by the former agent states that he got nothing of any value from the meeting, so where is the issue?
Corbyn wasn't ( even if true) the first to be duped by an agent and he won't be the last, the fact is that there was no useful info gleaned from him so what is the point of the story here?

The point of the story was to 'break' at the same time as those celebrating the 15th anniversary of Corbyns 'stop the war' speech, #fake news was touched upon earlier... this is a prime example.
In fact this news item could quite possibly have been generated by the same bots, or those with similar aims, that is entirely plausible.

Aside from the claim that many are inclined not to believe it the flip side of that is many are very much inclined to believe it, which of course was the aim of the item regardless of whether or not it has any basis in fact or not.

Were people really 'celebrating' the 15th anniversary of a speech? How odd

He was identified because they thought he'd be sympathetic to the Soviet cause. At best Corbyn was naive to meet with the Czech three times, at worst he was deliberately assisting a member of the Czech Intelligence services. Neither reflects very well on his judgement

[Kizzy]

Were people really 'celebrating' the 15th anniversary of a speech? How odd

He was identified because they thought he'd be sympathetic to the Soviet cause. At best Corbyn was naive to meet with the Czech three times, at worst he was deliberately assisting a member of the Czech Intelligence services. Neither reflects very well on his judgement

Yes, it was a wonderful speech.

They thought wrong then didn't they?

Is it any different to Priti Patel meeting Israeli officials off the record?
That was poor judgement from a minister wasn't it?

Essentially what you are saying is MPs and diplomats shouldn't meet with anyone... how then are international relations to improve?
What do we pay our representatives to do then?

[jaxie]

Yes, it was a wonderful speech.

They thought wrong then didn't they?

Is it any different to Priti Patel meeting Israeli officials off the record?
That was poor judgement from a minister wasn't it?

Essentially what you are saying is MPs and diplomats shouldn't meet with anyone... how then are international relations to improve?
What do we pay our representatives to do then?

It was indeed poor judgement and Priti Patel had to resign her cabinet position. I assume Jezza's resignation as leader of his party is imminent?

[MTVN]

Yes, it was a wonderful speech.

They thought wrong then didn't they?

Is it any different to Priti Patel meeting Israeli officials off the record?
That was poor judgement from a minister wasn't it?

Essentially what you are saying is MPs and diplomats shouldn't meet with anyone... how then are international relations to improve?
What do we pay our representatives to do then?

Corbyn tends to be more interested in picking sides than genuinely improving relations though, and those sides are basically anyone who opposes the West

[joeysteele]

Personally I agree it showed anything from poor judgement to inexperience on his part.

He really could not be that much use to them,he only became an MP in 1983,was a lowly,irrelevant really backbencher in the opposition party,an opposition in the years 1983 to 1991 particularly,that looked a world away from power too anyway.

Judging politicians on bad judgement however opens up many doors,I doubt few politicians could escape the charge in their political careers,of having bad judgement at times.

There are still many reservations I hold myself as to Corbyn,however I've still not come across anything with full evidence of concrete substantiated fact,that paints him as the demon some of the media portray him as.
I still agree with then,(at this time),those on the BBC press review and sky press review last night,which was this was more a non story.

[Kizzy]

Corbyn tends to be more interested in picking sides than genuinely improving relations though, and those sides are basically anyone who opposes the West

Have you ever been privvy to any meeting either in the mid 80s or today?...
No you haven't therefore your suggestion is as ridiculous as it is irrational.

[Kizzy]

It was indeed poor judgement and Priti Patel had to resign her cabinet position. I assume Jezza's resignation as leader of his party is imminent?

Why?... Ms Patel had covert meetings with these representatives. Corbyns meetings with the person in question are well documented so where is the subterfuge?

[MTVN]

Have you ever been privvy to any meeting either in the mid 80s or today?...
No you haven't therefore your suggestion is as ridiculous as it is irrational.

Nice

Sorry for daring to question the integrity of Saint Jez

[jaxie]

Nice

Sorry for daring to question the integrity of Saint Jez

Welcome to tibb SD.

[jaxie]

Why?... Ms Patel had covert meetings with these representatives. Corbyns meetings with the person in question are well documented so where is the subterfuge?

You were the one who said it was no different.

[joeysteele]

It was indeed poor judgement and Priti Patel had to resign her cabinet position. I assume Jezza's resignation as leader of his party is imminent?


Priti Patel was in government as a Minister,when she made bad judgement AND set out to deceive her Prime Minister by not telling her the full account of things.

A world away from a lowly backbencher barely in parliament for only a few years,who on paper met some people,some not all,considered possibly unsavoury.
A backbencher of a weak opposition party at the time too.

Now people can decide not to vote for him due to rumour and dubious sources of the information against him.

However Priti Patel's deliberate deceit to her Prime Minister is what got her sacked.
She was still originally left in position even after the questionable judgement of her meetings on a holiday were known, until it became known she had not informed her leader and PM everything.

Totally different to this,as yet unsubstantiated as to anything done wrong at all story,relating to Corbyn.

[jet]

Corbyn, a suspected anti - British, anti establishment figure has several meetings with an eastern bloc ‘diplomat’, and some see nothing at all dodgy there. It was the time of the Cold War, and large numbers of previous ‘diplomats’ had been expelled for espionage. Politicians and civil servants were warned about their activities and were wary of any approaches because of those previous discoveries.
Any politician would have had to be thick to not automatically suspect any approach by an eastern bloc ‘diplomat’, unless they supported their cause of course. So which was it - in this instance was Corbyn corrupt or blindingly stupid? Take your pick.
I’d go for both. Shady as hell as usual, and there is probably a record of a note somewhere by the diplomat saying ‘met a stupid idiot called Corbyn today - could be a useful idiot'....

[Kizzy]

Nice

Sorry for daring to question the integrity of Saint Jez

You're forgiven, just remember to apply a little objectivity eh? :)

[Kizzy]

You were the one who said it was no different.

And... What's your point here?

[bots]

Jeremy Corbyn should be "open and transparent" about his alleged contacts with a Communist spy during the 1980s, Theresa May has suggested.

Asked about claims a Czech intelligence officer met and tried to recruit Mr Corbyn during the Cold War, she said MPs must "account" for past actions.

The Labour Party has said claims he was an agent were a "ridiculous smear".

Czech officials say files show he was a "person of interest" but was never a secret collaborator or an informer.

Files held by the Czech Security Service Archive, first reported by the Sun, detail contacts Mr Corbyn is alleged to have had with a Czechoslovakian diplomat and agent in London in 1986 and 1987.

Jan Sarkocy told the newspaper he met Mr Corbyn on several occasions, including in the House of Commons, while he was working undercover in the London Embassy under the name of Jan Dymic.

At an event in Derby, the prime minister was asked whether she agreed with her defence secretary Gavin Williamson that Mr Corbyn's file - which reportedly gives insights into his character and views on foreign policy issues from the time - should now be released so people could make up their own mind about the claims.

"It is for individual members of Parliament to be accountable for their actions in the past," she replied.

"Where there are allegations of this sort, MPs should be prepared to be open and transparent."

'Possible contact'
The director of the Czech Security Service Archive told the BBC that their files suggest Mr Corbyn was seen as a possible "contact" but no more than that.

"Mr Corbyn was not a secret collaborator working for the Czechoslovak intelligence service," Svetlana Ptacnikova said. "The files we have on him are kept in a folder that starts with the identification number one.

"Secret collaborators were allocated folders that start with the number four. If he had been successfully recruited as an informer, then his person of interest file would have been closed, and a new one would have been opened, and that would have started with the number four."

She added: "He stayed in that basic category - and in fact he's still described as that, as a person of interest, in the final report issued by the StB agent shortly before he [the agent] was expelled from the UK."

Labour has acknowledged Mr Corbyn met Czechoslovakian and other diplomats "for a cup of tea" but said Mr Sarkocy's accounts of his meetings with him had "no credibility whatsoever".

In a statement released when the Sun's initial report was published, Labour said "the claim that Jeremy Corbyn was an agent, asset or informer for any intelligence agency is entirely false and a ridiculous smear".

"Jeremy neither has nor offered any privileged information to this or any other diplomat," it added.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43111794
------

Jeremy does seem to share a cup of tea with lots of dodgy characters, whether that be middle eastern terrorists, ira terrorists or communist states :idc:

[joeysteele]

I think most politicians of all parties in their time will share cups of tea over the years even a meal with people they know little about,or who may even be dubious characters.

If that's the real worst he's done here,the nit picking is really sliding into deeper than just a gutter.

[Northern Monkey]

Would love to be a fly on the wall at one of Jezzas ‘tea’ parties.Bet his pals have some right stories to tell

[Oliver_W]

Would love to be a fly on the wall at one of Jezzas ‘tea’ parties.Bet his pals have some right stories to tell

Especially the terrorists such as the IRA and Hamas!

[Kizzy]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/20/no-evidence-corbyn-was-spy-for-czechoslovakia-say-intelligence-experts

[Mystic Mock]

The source that it's coming from is dodgy as these Newspapers have a clear pro-Tory agenda that most of us can see.

However Corbyn does hold alot of Communist views so it wouldn't be a massive surprise if he supported the Russians at the time.

[MTVN]

Stasi files obtained by Guido reveal that a peace group run by Jeremy Corbyn was infiltrated by East German spies and was encouraged by East German officials into promoting GDR policies at Labour conference and in the House of Commons. The group was also infiltrated by a spy from the Czech security service who stood as a Labour candidate.

Full story: https://order-order.com/2018/02/21/stasi-file-reveals-corbyns-peace-group-was-infiltrated-by-east-german-spies/

[jet]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/20/no-evidence-corbyn-was-spy-for-czechoslovakia-say-intelligence-experts

That doesn't mean much. Comrade Cobb is confident that nothing will come of his meetings with an Eastern bloc spy because, fortunately for him, he likely had zilch of any use to pass on to them. However, the fact that he was targeted by an agent speaks volumes about where they knew his sympathies lay, though the supposedly naive like to gloss over this with all sorts of excuses for their bearded saviour, as per usual.

The 68-year-old Opposition Leader admits meeting “a Czech diplomat” in Parliament, but denies passing him any privileged information.
Speaking to The Sun, former head of MI6 Sir Richard Dearlove described the approaches to Mr Corbyn as “a classic cultivation”, after studying the archive documents that we published.

Sir Richard, who was one of Britain’s best Czechoslovakia experts during the Cold War, said: “Either Jeremy Corbyn was incredibly naïve or he knew exactly what was happening to him, so he was complicit in all this”.
Sir Richard, who lead MI6 from 1999-2004, was also the Secret Intelligence Service’s head of station in Prague in the 1970s…...
…..The ex-spymaster added: “These are genuine documents which shows he was targeted and the case was advanced, at a time when a very unpleasant Czech regime was persecuting dissidents. They were the enemies of the West.
“They wouldn’t have targeted him unless they believed he was a Communist fellow traveller.”



https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5590233/jeremy-corbyn-links-soviet-spy-claims-labour/

Indeed...and quite rightly all these growing pointers that he was vehemently anti British and consorted with all sorts of undesirables will inevitably lose Labour the next election (if they don't find somebody decent to oust him in time).
The pointers, in big neon lights, will only be ignored by the wilfully stubborn and purposefully naive, which thankfully most people aren't inclined to be. The old duffer (who never had a proper job) can retire and sip tea to his hearts content and reminisce about his Commie and terrorist supporting days.

[Kizzy]

Stasi files obtained by Guido reveal that a peace group run by Jeremy Corbyn was infiltrated by East German spies and was encouraged by East German officials into promoting GDR policies at Labour conference and in the House of Commons. The group was also infiltrated by a spy from the Czech security service who stood as a Labour candidate.

Full story: https://order-order.com/2018/02/21/stasi-file-reveals-corbyns-peace-group-was-infiltrated-by-east-german-spies/

And... Even if it was how is that anything to do with Corbyn?
Groups were infiltrated with spies all the time there was an expose a while ago how govt agents infiltrated groups married the members and had families with them.

How are you to counter that, don't start any progressive groups, do a in depth study on every member?

There is no evidence to suggest that there was any pro East Germany lobbying at the time is there?

This is yet another Labour leader that the right wing media are portraying as pro Russian militants they've done it with every one! Someone is getting very worried at the possibility of Labour being back in power and this is the tried and tested method to sway public confidence..Only this time not as many are as gullible.

[Kizzy]

That doesn't mean much. Comrade Cobb is confident that nothing will come of his meetings with an Eastern bloc spy because, fortunately for him, he likely had zilch of any use to pass on to them. However, the fact that he was targeted by an agent speaks volumes about where they knew his sympathies lay, though the supposedly naive like to gloss over this with all sorts of excuses for their bearded saviour, as per usual.



https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5590233/jeremy-corbyn-links-soviet-spy-claims-labour/

Indeed...and quite rightly all these growing pointers that he was vehemently anti British and consorted with all sorts of undesirables will inevitably lose Labour the next election (if they don't find somebody decent to oust him in time).
The pointers, in big neon lights, will only be ignored by the wilfully stubborn and purposefully naive, which thankfully most people aren't inclined to be. The old duffer (who never had a proper job) can retire and sip tea to his hearts content and reminisce about his Commie and terrorist supporting days.

Exactly he had nothing to offer them he knew nothing... nothing about thatchers wardrobe nothing about live aid, nothing!
So why is he under so much scrutiny?

He was just one of many diplomats and MPs meeting people to facilitate better communication between governments, that's what they do.
That's how the cold war ended, that's how the Irish peace process developed with representatives discussing issues of mutual importance.

I fail to see what he has done here, as far as I can see it's just the right wing media throwing **** in the vain hope that some sticks!

If this was a one off incident then I could see the concern but it happens every single time Labour are close to power, the guy had met with these people years ago so where was the furore then, he has stood as an MP in his constituency countless times... why was it not an issue then a matter of national importance?..... Because it isn't!

[jet]

And... Even if it was how is that anything to do with Corbyn?
Groups were infiltrated with spies all the time there was an expose a while ago how govt agents infiltrated groups married the members and had families with them.

How are you to counter that, don't start any progressive groups, do a in depth study on every member?

There is no evidence to suggest that there was any pro East Germany lobbying at the time is there?

This is yet another Labour leader that the right wing media are portraying as pro Russian militants they've done it with every one! Someone is getting very worried at the possibility of Labour being back in power and this is the tried and tested method to sway public confidence..Only this time not as many are as gullible.

I'm afraid its some Corbyn supporters who are looking very gullible, and have been for some time. He didn't do this, he didn't do that, he's innocence personified, he's wonderful, I love him etc etc etc.
Plenty of people who want Labour back in power can no longer stomach him and Labour are doomed with Corbyn at the helm. There will be plenty more to come out the nearer he gets to Downing St, mark my words. There is many a story being sat on at present because it is believed he is going to do the job for them and hang himself. Labour needs to find a strong candidate sooner rather than later and get rid of their downfall Corbyn pronto.

[jet]

Exactly he had nothing to offer them he knew nothing... nothing about thatchers wardrobe nothing about live aid, nothing!
So why is he under so much scrutiny?

He was just one of many diplomats and MPs meeting people to facilitate better communication between governments, that's what they do.
That's how the cold war ended, that's how the Irish peace process developed with representatives discussing issues of mutual importance.

I fail to see what he has done here, as far as I can see it's just the right wing media throwing **** in the vain hope that some sticks!

If this was a one off incident then I could see the concern but it happens every single time Labour are close to power, the guy had met with these people years ago so where was the furore then, he has stood as an MP in his constituency countless times... why was it not an issue then a matter of national importance?..... Because it isn't!

:facepalm: Are you really that naive and clueless about Corbyn's agenda's? STILL?

[Northern Monkey]

The PM made a funny about this today at PMQ’s.

Something about Labour wanting to sign a blank cheque and we all know he likes Czechs.

[jet]

The PM made a funny about this today at PMQ’s.

Something about Labour wanting to sign a blank cheque and we all know he likes Czechs.

:hee:

[joeysteele]

The PM made a funny about this today at PMQ’s.

Something about Labour wanting to sign a blank cheque and we all know he likes Czechs.

I left saying anything as to that to 2 of my Conservative supporting friends watching it with me but like me irritated she'll never really answer questions.


They however said and I now sort of agree with them,she played into his hands with that.
They believe,and they can't stand him,that this will do him no harm at all.
Just like when he stood his ground in the Labour leadership challenges.
They believe many voters will admire his dignified aporoach to dealing with same,while their party raise the issue,drawing the attention to the rabid press playing the game too.

Which actually worries them immensely.

[Kizzy]

The PM made a funny about this today at PMQ’s.

Something about Labour wanting to sign a blank cheque and we all know he likes Czechs.

Oh the PM is attempting to give credence to fake news now?...

Tries to be surprised....fails :/

[Kizzy]

:facepalm: Are you really that naive and clueless about Corbyn's agenda's? STILL?

I'll ask you again..

the guy had met with these people years ago so where was the furore then, he has stood as an MP in his constituency countless times... why was it not an issue then a matter of national importance?.

If he is so dangerous why has he not been 'exposed' before now... why has he been allowed a seat in parliament and in positions of influence and trust all the while rising to the top job through he Labour ranks if he is such a liability?....

Get some perspective.

[jet]

I'll ask you again..

the guy had met with these people years ago so where was the furore then, he has stood as an MP in his constituency countless times... why was it not an issue then a matter of national importance?.

If he is so dangerous why has he not been 'exposed' before now... why has he been allowed a seat in parliament and in positions of influence and trust all the while rising to the top job through he Labour ranks if he is such a liability?....

Get some perspective.

Well, its obvious, nobody knew about it then - neither was he aiming to become a PM.
You do know he is anti - British, don't you? And that his top aids and McDonnell and Abbot are also Anti - British.
Do you not mind this at all?

Also, he'll only be dangerous if he becomes PM, which he won't. At present he's just an continuing embarrassment.

[Kizzy]

Well, its obvious, nobody knew about it then - neither was he aiming to become a PM.
You do know he is anti - British, don't you? And that his top aids and McDonnell and Abbot are also Anti - British.
Do you not mind this at all?

Ah it's only come to light now, 30yrs later? They were just flicking through some old files and ...oops! what have we here?

What a load of balls, seriously... you think people devote their entire lives and careers to politics, advocating progressive beneficial policies for the good of society because they are anti British?!

I suppose you're going to tell me selling arms to regimes for whom human rights are an unspeakable myth, selling off any and all infrastructure, whilst imposing decades of crippling austerity plunging families into a bottomless pit of debt that sees the use of food banks explode 2700% is very 'British'?....Pffffft!!!

[Twosugars]

You do know he is anti - British, don't you? And that his top aids and McDonnell and Abbot are also Anti - British.
Do you not mind this at all?


ftr, I'm neutral re. Corbyn
but
the language you used is very disturbing. You basically call these three politicians as acting against British interests and holding views harmful to Britain.
You know, there are political differences between people where they sincerely believe that the aim of making a country better and stronger can be achieved in different ways. But you claim these people intend to harm the country they serve.
That is a very serious accusation. Prove it.

[jet]

Ah it's only come to light now, 30yrs later? They were just flicking through some old files and ...oops! what have we here?

What a load of balls, seriously... you think people devote their entire lives and careers to politics, advocating progressive beneficial policies for the good of society because they are anti British?!

I suppose you're going to tell me selling arms to regimes for whom human rights are an unspeakable myth, selling off any and all infrastructure, whilst imposing decades of crippling austerity plunging families into a bottomless pit of debt that sees the use of food banks explode 2700% is very 'British'?....Pffffft!!!

Is this a load of balls too? .....


Diane Abbott backed victory for the IRA in an interview with a pro-republican journal, The Sunday Times has found.
Abbott, who will become home secretary if Labour wins the election, said in the 1984 interview that Ireland “is our struggle — every defeat of the British state is a victory for all of us. A defeat in Northern Ireland would be a defeat indeed.”
The interview was found during research by The Sunday Times in Irish and republican archives

What do you say about that?

The same files disclose that the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, personally led or took part in at least 72 separate events or actions with Sinn Fein and pro-republican groups during the years of the IRA’s armed struggle — far more than previously known.
These included a petition to Downing Street on behalf of Hugh Doherty, a member of the IRA’s Balcombe Street gang convicted of killing seven people, and protests against the extradition of Dessie Ellis, a top IRA bomb maker who has denied links to about 50 deaths.

Your comment on this?

The archives also show the main IRA-sympathising groups in Britain held private strategy meetings in Corbyn’s former constituency office — owned by the Labour Party and part-funded by taxpayers from his MP’s allowance.


And this?

The interview was published in Labour and Ireland, the journal of the Labour committee on Ireland (LCI), a small pro-republican support group in the party that operated at the height of the IRA’s armed struggle in the 1980s and early 1990s.
The archives disclose that LCI was chaired for some of the period by John McDonnell, now the shadow chancellor. Corbyn and Abbott were also regular speakers..
There were close links between LCI and the Troops Out Movement [Tom], another IRA-sympathising body with which Corbyn was closely associated. He spoke at more than 20 Troops Out events or meetings.



All anti British actions, supporting murderers trying to bomb their way out of N. Ireland staying part of the UK, as democratically voted by the people themselves.

Yet you repeatedly deny that Corbyn was an IRA sympathiser. So really you're not going to believe anything negative about your hero, are you? You seem to just block it out.

McDonnell also said 'it was the guns and bombs that brought the British to the negotiating table'.

Great pro - British people Corbyn chooses as his closest allies, eh?
And the above is just his IRA anti British connections.....there are ample examples - he was a well known Commie sympathiser, as well as a supporter of other anti - British causes, but you obviously don't do your research. With a record like that and with those he keeps close to him, he's not a good candidate at all to become a British PM, and he won't.

[Maru]

All you Corbynators and your Corbynation...

[Kizzy]

All you Corbynators and your Corbynation...

Corbynistas, sjw, pc, snowflake the lable is irrelevant the message is the same, for the many not the few maru. :)

[jet]

No answers to my post above then Kizzy? Speaks volumes.


Poverty strikes dead the very souls of all who come within sight, sound or smell of it.

So does the sight, sound or smell of children and babies blown to pieces by the Corbyn sympathising IRA.
The IRA who he refuses to condemn outright without qualification.

[Livia]

How does the slogan "for the many, not the few" sit with the fact that Labour have just voted against cutting stamp duty for first time buyers?

[Kizzy]

No answers to my post above then Kizzy? Speaks volumes.




So does the sight, sound or smell of children and babies blown to pieces by the Corbyn sympathising IRA.
The IRA who he refuses to condemn outright without qualification.

What it 'speaks' is that I work 12hrs a day Jet.

That happened on both sides, you are not objective enough on this issue he did condemn it on both sides.

Nobody was the better or worse killer, there was killing, the end.

[Kizzy]

How does the slogan "for the many, not the few" sit with the fact that Labour have just voted against cutting stamp duty for first time buyers?

And the value of the properties is?...

[jet]

What it 'speaks' is that I work 12hrs a day Jet.

That happened on both sides, you are not objective enough on this issue he did condemn it on both sides.

Nobody was the better or worse killer, there was killing, the end.

No, not the end. I'm bloody furious and sick of this sh**.
You still haven't answered the questions I asked in my post above, and your slithering out of doing so says enough for me.

As does your opinion that nobody was a better or worse killer.
Are you fking serious?

The IRA and their affiliated groups killed just short of 2,000 people, many of them innocent civilians, men, women, children and babies. Most of them blown to pieces by bombs.
Loyalist paramilitaries killed 896 people, most of them innocent adult Catholics.
The British Army and RUC between them killed 355 people.

Every single life matters. I guess it doesn't matter to you whether 355 or 896 or nearly 2000 people lose their lives, it's all the same to you then? Well it bloody well matters to those 'extra' 1000 families whose loved ones lie cold in their graves....and it certainly matters to the families of children and babies blown to bits...which was almost exclusively the IRA's way of operating.

As for objectivity - this discussion is about Corbyn and he didn't support the Loyalists, did he, he supported the IRA. So its a moot point. If he had supported Loyalists in their murders, I would feel exactly the same about him. My mother was Protestant, my father Catholic, and I was brought up Catholic, though I no longer practice my religion. My family and I have always been neutral, having many relatives and friends on both sides, and we all detest Corbyn and others of his ilk. But he is the one vying to be the next PM. So don't talk to me about not being objective, YOU are the one who isn't objective with your endless excuses and twisting and turning in your 'Corbyn can do no wrong fairytale land' and IMO your chilling attitudes towards terrorism...

...and Poor you, working 12 hours a day. Thank your lucky stars you didn't have to work 16 a day, like my wife did in the midst of the Troubles in the Royal Victoria Hospital, working with surgeons to save the lives of IRA bomb victims. Victims, including children with their eyes blown out, their legs and arms hanging off, their stomachs and intestines spilling out.

Have you ever witnessed the carnage of a bomb, the screaming, the blood, the terror? Have you ever personally lost best friends to these atrocities, have your friends ever lost their children, gone forever? That is what the IRA did for them and me.
My nieces, aged 5 and 7, on a charity Fun Run, in the midst of a family fun day out, were seconds away from being killed, but witnessed the killing of 5 young soldiers. In front of their eyes, they seen a young soldier, no more than 18 years old, trying to frantically escape but he couldn't because he didn't realise his legs had been blown off. He later died. My nieces innocence was gone forever, with nightmares and crippling anxiety their legacy from the IRA.

That is the reality of the IRA's operandi and they are the bastards that Corbyn supported and sipped his tea with.
It was up to the Government to broker talks, which they did, not a half assed non - entity opposition back bencher who had no business consorting with terrorists to puff up his self importance, attending their rallies and funerals and whose only delusional contribution to the peace process was in his own head and an escape route excuse for having anything to do with them in the first place.

Find any book you like on the N.I peace process. There are quite a few excellent accounts which mention all the big and little players in the unfolding drama. Look up the index for Corbyn's name. You'll not find it anywhere. He's a liar, a fraud and a chancer - these are his past legacies which will always impact on his present because he hasn't changed one iota.

He has always refused to condemn the IRA without qualification, and so do you, in every post. Nobody is a better or worse killer, you say. Well, I disagree. No killing of innocent people is ever acceptable, but there are those than target mostly adults like Loyalist paras, there are those that mostly target terrorists like the security forces, and then there are those that target ANYONE with a bomb who just happens to be in the vicinity going about their daily business, like Corbyn's muses the IRA - children and babies included. You are just Corbyn's parrot really; when you say something re terrorism, I hear him bleating his usual apologist garbage. Sickening.

[Maru]

Guys, at the end of the day, it's just a forum and they're only opinions. Remember that.

[Oliver_W]

And the value of the properties is?...

What?

The value of property is that someone can own the place they live in. And if they own more than one property, they can make a bit of money for themselves too :) but that probably doesn't really apply to those buying their first home.

[James]

On This Week last night I saw a video of him responding to this. He was really threatening the press. :umm2:

It was a lot like the way Trump deals with allegations, actually.

[jet]

On This Week last night I saw a video of him responding to this. He was really threatening the press. :umm2:

It was a lot like the way Trump deals with allegations, actually.

Yes, it is, and I agree with the Telegraph who found the Corbyn warning 'creepy'.

http://www.theweek.co.uk/jeremy-corbyn/91802/jeremy-corbyn-rejects-spy-story-with-chilling-media-threat

The Telegraph finds Corbyn’s warning “rather creepy”, and asks whether he intends to use force. “Such implicit compulsion is worthy of a leader in Moscow, not London,” the newspaper adds.

The Sun says Corbyn is clearly spooked, having avoided media questions yesterday by slipping out of a meeting through an underground car park, while the Express agrees that Corbyn’s “sinister” video shows he is “rattled”.

The Daily Mail adds that by dodging questions, the Labour leader is feeding suspicions that he has something to hide.

Other newspapers are also less than impressed. While Corbyn may have a right to be angry about spy claims splashed across the front pages, says The Spectator, his response has been to undermine the press as a vital part of democracy - a tactic also used “from Russia to Venezuela to Donald Trump”.

[Kizzy]

On This Week last night I saw a video of him responding to this. He was really threatening the press. :umm2:

It was a lot like the way Trump deals with allegations, actually.

Come on now James don't be silly, like trump! :laugh:

If someone prints lies about you you have the right to request a redaction as there are regulatory bodies for the printed word,you yourself should know you have to be very careful about what you say about people even on a little discussion forum, so imagine how important it is in the nationals?...
Anyone even Corbyn has the right to demand the record be set straight or they risk legal action, and rightly so.

[Brother Leon]

Yes, it is, and I agree with the Telegraph who found the Corbyn warning 'creepy'.

http://www.theweek.co.uk/jeremy-corbyn/91802/jeremy-corbyn-rejects-spy-story-with-chilling-media-threat

Or he has no time for the ****ing sun and their bs.

[Kizzy]

No, not the end. I'm bloody furious and sick of this sh**.
You still haven't answered the questions I asked in my post above, and your slithering out of doing so says enough for me.

As does your opinion that nobody was a better or worse killer.
Are you fking serious?

The IRA and their affiliated groups killed just short of 2,000 people, many of them innocent civilians, men, women, children and babies. Most of them blown to pieces by bombs.
Loyalist paramilitaries killed 896 people, most of them innocent adult Catholics.
The British Army and RUC between them killed 355 people.

Every single life matters. I guess it doesn't matter to you whether 355 or 896 or nearly 2000 people lose their lives, it's all the same to you then? Well it bloody well matters to those 'extra' 1000 families whose loved ones lie cold in their graves....and it certainly matters to the families of children and babies blown to bits...which was almost exclusively the IRA's way of operating.

As for objectivity - this discussion is about Corbyn and he didn't support the Loyalists, did he, he supported the IRA. So its a moot point. If he had supported Loyalists in their murders, I would feel exactly the same about him. My mother was Protestant, my father Catholic, and I was brought up Catholic, though I no longer practice my religion. My family and I have always been neutral, having many relatives and friends on both sides, and we all detest Corbyn and others of his ilk. But he is the one vying to be the next PM. So don't talk to me about not being objective, YOU are the one who isn't objective with your endless excuses and twisting and turning in your 'Corbyn can do no wrong fairytale land' and IMO your chilling attitudes towards terrorism...

...and Poor you, working 12 hours a day. Thank your lucky stars you didn't have to work 16 a day, like my wife did in the midst of the Troubles in the Royal Victoria Hospital, working with surgeons to save the lives of IRA bomb victims. Victims, including children with their eyes blown out, their legs and arms hanging off, their stomachs and intestines spilling out.

Have you ever witnessed the carnage of a bomb, the screaming, the blood, the terror? Have you ever personally lost best friends to these atrocities, have your friends ever lost their children, gone forever? That is what the IRA did for them and me.
My nieces, aged 5 and 7, on a charity Fun Run, in the midst of a family fun day out, were seconds away from being killed, but witnessed the killing of 5 young soldiers. In front of their eyes, they seen a young soldier, no more than 18 years old, trying to frantically escape but he couldn't because he didn't realise his legs had been blown off. He later died. My nieces innocence was gone forever, with nightmares and crippling anxiety their legacy from the IRA.

That is the reality of the IRA's operandi and they are the bastards that Corbyn supported and sipped his tea with.
It was up to the Government to broker talks, which they did, not a half assed non - entity opposition back bencher who had no business consorting with terrorists to puff up his self importance, attending their rallies and funerals and whose only delusional contribution to the peace process was in his own head and an escape route excuse for having anything to do with them in the first place.

Find any book you like on the N.I peace process. There are quite a few excellent accounts which mention all the big and little players in the unfolding drama. Look up the index for Corbyn's name. You'll not find it anywhere. He's a liar, a fraud and a chancer - these are his past legacies which will always impact on his present because he hasn't changed one iota.

He has always refused to condemn the IRA without qualification, and so do you, in every post. Nobody is a better or worse killer, you say. Well, I disagree. No killing of innocent people is ever acceptable, but there are those than target mostly adults like Loyalist paras, there are those that mostly target terrorists like the security forces, and then there are those that target ANYONE with a bomb who just happens to be in the vicinity going about their daily business, like Corbyn's muses the IRA - children and babies included. You are just Corbyn's parrot really; when you say something re terrorism, I hear him bleating his usual apologist garbage. Sickening.

Did she not tend to any victims of unionist violence then?...

I don't understand your need to paint this rather one sided graphic picture it's unnecessary as I'm not going to agree that there was one worst terrorist group than another. There were child victims on both side they were both to blame for the actions they took, bombs and violence is wrong it was wrong in Ireland and it was wrong in the middle east...

I am just a bit surprised that the person that has only ever advocated peace in all conflicts over decades is the one person who is the epicentre for all your rage, not the people bombing, or the govts or the decision makers :/

I'm not going to accept you making all kinds of accusatory statements, I have my views and I appreciate you don't agree.

[jet]

Did she not tend to any victims of unionist violence then?...

I don't understand your need to paint this rather one sided graphic picture it's unnecessary as I'm not going to agree that there was one worst terrorist group than another. There were child victims on both side they were both to blame for the actions they took, bombs and violence is wrong it was wrong in Ireland and it was wrong in the middle east...

I am just a bit surprised that the person that has only ever advocated peace in all conflicts over decades is the one person who is the epicentre for all your rage, not the people bombing, or the govts or the decision makers :/

I'm not going to accept you making all kinds of accusatory statements, I have my views and I appreciate you don't agree.

You mean did my wife not tend to victims of Loyalist Paramilitary violence? No, she didn't actually, she worked in the bomb victim operating theatres and there were very few paramilitary bombs. There were also very few child victims of Loyalist paramilitaries. It was almost exclusively the IRA who targeted vulnerable and helpless civilians in mass bomb killings, including children, but if that doesn't make them worse to you, then I can only come to one conclusion.....

As for why Corbyn is at the 'epicentre of my rage' - he is vying to be the next PM, not some other IRA man or IRA supporter and friend like he was. Why I need to point that out again is beyond comprehension. I see you are no longer denying he was an IRA supporter...

Your ignorance about the troubles makes it futile to say any more to you, and your mindset creeps me out anyway, so....

[Kizzy]

You mean did my wife not tend to victims of Loyalist Paramilitary violence? No, she didn't actually, she worked in the bomb victim operating theatres and there were very few paramilitary bombs. There were also very few child victims of Loyalist paramilitaries. It was almost exclusively the IRA who targeted vulnerable and helpless civilians in mass bomb killings, including children, but if that doesn't make them worse to you, then I can only come to one conclusion.....

As for why Corbyn is at the 'epicentre of my rage' - he is vying to be the next PM, not some other IRA man or IRA supporter and friend like he was. Why I need to point that out again is beyond comprehension. I see you are no longer denying he was an IRA supporter...

Your ignorance about the troubles makes it futile to say any more to you, and your mindset creeps me out anyway, so....

Your one sided argument creeps me out, I'm being objective here.

[jet]

Your one sided argument creeps me out, I'm being objective here.

Well, most people would feel that the murders of vulnerable children and babies is the worst sort of crime, but you have made it clear you do not. I think it is -and if that means I'm one sided on that aspect of the Troubles, then I'm proud to be.

[Kizzy]

Well, most people would feel that the murders of vulnerable children and babies is the worst sort of crime, but you have made it clear you do not. I think it is -and if that means I'm one sided on that aspect of the Troubles, then I'm proud to be.

Were none of almost 1000 people killed by the other terrorist organisations active at that time young, none pregnant?

[jet]

Were none of almost 1000 people killed by the other terrorist organisations active at that time young, none pregnant?

Your glibness and pretence is chilling. I've already said that Loyalist Para's mainly targeted individual adults, and as horrible as that was, few children where their victims. Dear Lord, can you even understand plain English - yes, you can, you are just being deliberately insensitive and obtuse.

So I'll play along and spell it out for you again. The IRA planted bombs that killed anyone who happened to be in the vicinity, they didn't care if children and babies were among the carnage, as they inevitably were.

They bombed families out for a days shopping, they bombed families eating in restaurants, they bombed families at Charity fun days, they bombed families at Cenotaph remembrance gatherings, they bombed families waiting for buses at bus stations, they bombed families at fast food outlets just getting fish and chips for their supper. Has that penetrated your brain yet or do you need more fking examples.

And to add to all that, they even recruited youngsters aged 12 - 16 to their ranks, which is illegal, and covered up 19 deaths of these child soldiers.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/troubles-the-children-killed-in-line-of-fire-in-northern-ireland-31136428.html

All water off a ducks back to you, of course. Your vision of Corbyn, the IRA supporter, as a man of peace and saviour of the down trodden can't be disturbed, and you'll do anything and say anything to protect his persona at the expense of placing the blame of dead children and babies firmly where in belongs...at the hands of those he sympathised and supported, the IRA.

[Livia]

Your glibness and pretence is chilling. I've already said that Loyalist Para's mainly targeted individual adults, and as horrible as that was, few children where their victims. Dear Lord, can you even understand plain English - yes, you can, you are just being deliberately insensitive and obtuse.

So I'll play along and spell it out for you again. The IRA planted bombs that killed anyone who happened to be in the vicinity, they didn't care if children and babies were among the carnage, as they inevitably were.

They bombed families out for a days shopping, they bombed families eating in restaurants, they bombed families at Charity fun days, they bombed families at Cenotaph remembrance gatherings, they bombed families waiting for buses at bus stations, they bombed families at fast food outlets just getting fish and chips for their supper. Has that penetrated your brain yet or do you need more fking examples.

And to add to all that, they even recruited youngsters aged 12 - 16 to their ranks, which is illegal, and covered up 19 deaths of these child soldiers.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/troubles-the-children-killed-in-line-of-fire-in-northern-ireland-31136428.html

All water off a ducks back to you, of course. Your vision of Corbyn, the IRA supporter, as a man of peace and saviour of the down trodden can't be disturbed, and you'll do anything and say anything to protect his persona at the expense of placing the blame of dead children and babies firmly where in belongs...at the hands of those he sympathised and supported, the IRA.

Everyone understands your point of view, jet, and most people respect your unique viewpoint based on your first-hand experience. No point in flogging a dead horse when an opinion is so fixed that nothing will budge it. You've done your best.

[Kizzy]

Your glibness and pretence is chilling. I've already said that Loyalist Para's mainly targeted individual adults, and as horrible as that was, few children where their victims. Dear Lord, can you even understand plain English - yes, you can, you are just being deliberately insensitive and obtuse.

So I'll play along and spell it out for you again. The IRA planted bombs that killed anyone who happened to be in the vicinity, they didn't care if children and babies were among the carnage, as they inevitably were.

They bombed families out for a days shopping, they bombed families eating in restaurants, they bombed families at Charity fun days, they bombed families at Cenotaph remembrance gatherings, they bombed families waiting for buses at bus stations, they bombed families at fast food outlets just getting fish and chips for their supper. Has that penetrated your brain yet or do you need more fking examples.

And to add to all that, they even recruited youngsters aged 12 - 16 to their ranks, which is illegal, and covered up 19 deaths of these child soldiers.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/troubles-the-children-killed-in-line-of-fire-in-northern-ireland-31136428.html

All water off a ducks back to you, of course. Your vision of Corbyn, the IRA supporter, as a man of peace and saviour of the down trodden can't be disturbed, and you'll do anything and say anything to protect his persona at the expense of placing the blame of dead children and babies firmly where in belongs...at the hands of those he sympathised and supported, the IRA.

There were planned attacks everywhere...funerals fgs, were there not women, kids old people all innocent there?

Again I feel you are trying to downplay the ills of other terrorist organisations. Not once have I suggested one side was any better or worse.
There is nothing to suggest that Corbyn supported any terrorist activity.

That really is the end of this discussion now, I resent the character assasination due to the fact I recognise faults on both sides.

[Kizzy]

xIlA8Ib1NgY

[Kizzy]

L_Vym9RZjy8

[jet]

There were planned attacks everywhere...funerals fgs, were there not women, kids old people all innocent there?

Again I feel you are trying to downplay the ills of other terrorist organisations. Not once have I suggested one side was any better or worse.
There is nothing to suggest that Corbyn supported any terrorist activity.

That really is the end of this discussion now, I resent the character assasination due to the fact I recognise faults on both sides.

Oh I could tell you plenty about other terrorist organisations - if they were the ones Corbyn supported...but the IRA, the most prolific and callous killers, were his chosen buddies.

There is nothing to suggest that Corbyn supported any terrorist activity.

:laugh2:

Yes, end of discussion.

[jet]

Everyone understands your point of view, jet, and most people respect your unique viewpoint based on your first-hand experience. No point in flogging a dead horse when an opinion is so fixed that nothing will budge it. You've done your best.

Ah Livia. :love:
Thank goodness for those who have higher levels of comprehension.

[Kizzy]

Oh I could tell you plenty about other terrorist organisations - if they were the ones Corbyn supported...but the IRA, the most prolific and callous killers, were his chosen buddies.



:laugh2:

Yes, end of discussion.

The simple fact you acknowledge they exist is good enough, not sure I find anything about the topic to laugh about however there's no insulting of my view I can be satisfied with that.

[Kizzy]

Ah Livia. :love:
Thank goodness for those who have higher levels of comprehension.

Thank goodness for people who agree with you,in order for you to feel to validated in your stance?..anyone with a counter view are in no way 'lesser' Jet, it is an important factor in a debate to recognise this.

Let's not forget the thread has been dragged from it's initial topic, one where the media and establishment conspire to demonise a threat to the status quo by planting false information.

[Kizzy]

Lies, lies and damned lies.

Result?..

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-poll-corbyn-czech-spy-claims-smear-lead-yougov-latest-a8226406.html

[Kizzy]

Result!!!

A Tory MP has been forced issue a grovelling apology and to make a "substantial" donation to charity after making false claims about Jeremy Corbyn's links with communist spies.

Ben Bradley, a Conservative Party vice chair, said his comments were "wholly untrue and false" and agreed to pay out an undisclosed sum to a homeless charity and a foodbank in his Mansfield constituency.

Lawyers acting for the Labour leader contacted Mr Bradley this week over a potentially libellous tweet, where he made unsubstantiated allegations about Mr Corbyn's interactions with a Czech agent, who was posing as a diplomat. He has since deleted the tweet.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-ben-bradley-tory-mp-apology-spy-tweet-donation-homeless-charity-false-foodbank-labour-a8226661.html

[jet]

The simple fact you acknowledge they exist is good enough, not sure I find anything about the topic to laugh about however there's no insulting of my view I can be satisfied with that.

I've always acknowledged they existed and condemned them on here, you must have a bad memory. I lived in the midst of them for 30 years ffs.

The discussions on this forum concern the topical Corbyn and his love - in with his buddies the IRA and their actions, not other terrorists. But I get that you have to keep bringing up the 'other side' to shift the focus away from Corbyn and the IRA by trying to lessen their and his sins. "But what about what the other side did?" etc.
Corbyn didn't support the other side, he supported the IRA, so the other side are irrelevant to the discussion.
Unless you can stick to the topic (and we are already off - topic here) , can I ask you not to respond to me again please, I would prefer to have nothing more to do with you really.

[Ammi]

..I hate politics...so often people only ‘see’ others in either their support of or condemnation of a political party or party leader...fellow people are lost, their life experiences and their pain become lost in it all...people just don’t see or feel each other and their lives anymore quite often with politics...


...jet..:hug:..:hug:..:hug:...and your wife also sounds like a pretty incredible lady..:love:..

[Kizzy]

I've always acknowledged they existed and condemned them on here, you must have a bad memory. I lived in the midst of them for 30 years ffs.

The discussions on this forum concern the topical Corbyn and his love - in with his buddies the IRA and their actions, not other terrorists. But I get that you have to keep bringing up the 'other side' to shift the focus away from Corbyn and the IRA by trying to lessen their and his sins. "But what about what the other side did?" etc.
Corbyn didn't support the other side, he supported the IRA, so the other side are irrelevant to the discussion.
Unless you can stick to the topic (and we are already off - topic here) , can I ask you not to respond to me again please, I would prefer to have nothing more to do with you really.

Sins?... he has no sins your emotive language does nothing to make me believe he is guilty of anything. The fact you are still speaking of 'sides' is more political than emotive.
I'm on topic, he was guilty of nothing then and he is guilty of nothing now.

[Kizzy]

..I hate politics...so often people only ‘see’ others in either their support of or condemnation of a political party or party leader...fellow people are lost, their life experiences and their pain become lost in it all...people just don’t see or feel each other and their lives anymore quite often with politics...


...jet..:hug:..:hug:..:hug:...and your wife also sounds like a pretty incredible lady..:love:..

Agreed there there people across the social, religious and political spectrum affected by the troubles across the board...
Maybe it helps to be an outsider to see that?

[jet]

..I hate politics...so often people only ‘see’ others in either their support of or condemnation of a political party or party leader...fellow people are lost, their life experiences and their pain become lost in it all...people just don’t see or feel each other and their lives anymore quite often with politics...


...jet..:hug:..:hug:..:hug:...and your wife also sounds like a pretty incredible lady..:love:..

She is incredible Ammi, she's been a trauma nurse all of her adult life. She says she couldn't do it without me to hold her at night, but I'm the luckiest man alive to have her. How I got that lucky, I'll never know.

[Ammi]

...no Kizzy..you ‘see’ what you ‘see’ in respect of politics and people../..people’s life experiences and their realities and pain...and I’ll see what I see in this thread..we’ll leave it at that with both of our ‘vision’...

[Ammi]

She is incredible Ammi, she's been a trauma nurse all of her adult life. She says she couldn't do it without me to hold her at night, but I'm the luckiest man alive to have her. How I got that lucky, I'll never know.

...hmmm, I think I might have a little idea how you got that lucky, jet..:hug:...

[Livia]

Thank goodness for people who agree with you,in order for you to feel to validated in your stance?..anyone with a counter view are in no way 'lesser' Jet, it is an important factor in a debate to recognise this.

Let's not forget the thread has been dragged from it's initial topic, one where the media and establishment conspire to demonise a threat to the status quo by planting false information.

What's also important in debate is to recognise that sometimes, someone knows more about something than you do.

[Beso]

They were all run by paedos anyway.

[Jack_]

967526680188375040

screaming

the pathetic grovelling ****ing **** :cheer2: :cheer2:chxtdgd

[Tom4784]

What's also important in debate is to recognise that sometimes, someone knows more about something than you do.

Well, no. You are basically saying that nobody can question what Jet is saying because he claims to know more about something than anyone else whilst showing little to no evidence of his claims. His responses and arguments are ones rooted in emotion rather than logic or fact.

[Kizzy]

What's also important in debate is to recognise that sometimes, someone knows more about something than you do.

I don't need any guidance thank you Livia, I will comment where I see fit.

What is the point of this debate forum if the only persons qualified to comment are those with direct personal experience of one perspective on any given topic?

[Ammi]

..I guess I can only speak for myself with the ‘reveals, that jet has made in Corbyn discussions...obviously there is no firm ‘proof’, no firm ‘evidence’ to things he has witnessed and any link of support from Jeremy Corbyn to an IRA ‘cause’ he has personally known to be discussed etc... but it would seem bizarre also ..(..and not make sense to me..)...that the things he says would have no foundation either or very little../..flimsy foundation...these things are not carried with such intense pain through life on ‘flimsy’ or incorrect..?...it is for me though a bit like a ‘jigsaw puzzle’ and seeing which bits seem to fit...Jeremy Corbyn seems to have inconsistencies in what he will speak out about more readily and what he refuses to condemn../..seems reluctant to openly condemn...jet knows I also have Northern Ireland connections, my dad was from Northern Ireland...he didn’t live through the troubles like jet did though, because he had already moved to England...but he did feel the personal loss of some people in his life, so I’m aware of quite a few ‘IRA discussions and references’ through my younger life...anyways, I have absolutely no reservations whatsoever in condemning the IRA and the slaughter of lives they were guilty of...so I can’t understand that reluctance in Jeremy which he appears to display...it just doesn’t sit right for me...yes, I am anti all violence but I can also be specific as well when a specific violence/..terrorist group is being discussed../..when that’s the actual question being asked..’do you condemn’....

...anyways, there are lots of things for me that don’t sit right about Jeremy...he feels quite the opportunist, feels quite disingenuous and inconsistent...that’s not to say though, would he be the right person to lead the country as PM in the upcoming future...?..maybe he would, I honestly don’t know because we feel stuck between a rock and a hard place in politics with the choices we have and the two party values we have...but it would be nice to feel more assured about him as a potential leader...there is so much said about Jeremy and has always been.. his ‘attachments’ to terrorist groups...with no ‘evidence’ to support any ‘truth’, so how can they be true because there would be evidence over the years, I mean surely..?...but then why are things consistently and persistently said and continue to be said if there was no ‘truth’ or links either...so many questions and very important to be more certain than I am atm of the answers to those...I personally find jet’s posts and thoughts very interesting...and they’ve made me think a lot...


...on a personal note though...there are many times that ‘personal life experiences’ have been noted by members on the forum to explain their views and their stances etc..which also obviously explains the emotion felt by them also because the nature is more personal experience...I have seen much understanding shown by others and understandably so...and even from time to time..’well they have personal experience, so a greater insight’../type thing...but not so much with jet and his own personal life experiences, which are more widely dismissed I would say...which I guess goes back to my thoughts...where politics are concerned../..political parties../..political leaders etc...people become lost in the defence of or condemnation of...we stop ‘seeing’ and we stop ‘feeling’ people’s emotional pain and we stop seeing and feeling each other...I don’t think I’ve ever seen a pain so ‘laid bare’ on the forum as jet has done in revealing the worst times of his life...always very difficult to read...but then lovely as well when you read the support that person gets and never ..’well prove it then, otherwise you’re nothing more than an emotive person and too closely attached’...there’s a reason he’s closely attached...:laugh:..because he’s lived it and because he’s lived Jeremy’s name being attached in support of what he’s lived through...

...I goddamn hate politics...

[bots]

Well, no. You are basically saying that nobody can question what Jet is saying because he claims to know more about something than anyone else whilst showing little to no evidence of his claims. His responses and arguments are ones rooted in emotion rather than logic or fact.

I class my self as someone with a lot of experience who can spot someone that is reciting something parrot fashion or has lived through it and experienced it. Jet has consistently spoken with passion about his experiences and I personally rate them as genuine. It's a forum, so not everyone is going to agree, but I think as a moderator you should be able to respect the posters viewpoint without trying to question and diminish his input.You say his arguments don't come from fact, yet he has stated things that are all available in the public domain. They are factual.

What dismays me more than anything is that a large proportion of labour supporters seem to have pledged blind allegiance to jeremy and can't accept the remotest possibility that he may have done wrong at any time in his career... staggering gullibility to the current labour leaderships spin.

[Tom4784]

I class my self as someone with a lot of experience who can spot someone that is reciting something parrot fashion or has lived through it and experienced it. Jet has consistently spoken with passion about his experiences and I personally rate them as genuine. It's a forum, so not everyone is going to agree, but I think as a moderator you should be able to respect the posters viewpoint without trying to question and diminish his input.You say his arguments don't come from fact, yet he has stated things that are all available in the public domain. They are factual.

What dismays me more than anything is that a large proportion of labour supporters seem to have pledged blind allegiance to jeremy and can't accept the remotest possibility that he may have done wrong at any time in his career... staggering gullibility to the current labour leaderships spin.

Me being a mod has nothing to do with it and I resent that, like so many other people, your first port of call to attack me is the fact that I am a mod. If someone's going to try to shut down someone's opinion, not through reasoned debate but by basically saying 'I know more about this than you, shut up'' then I will take an issue with that and that does not contradict me being a mod at all no matter how much you try to twist it to be that way.

I don't care about Corbyn, I'm bored of the same old **** discussions involving him, I just wanted to voice my opposition to this mentality that nobody can question or have an opposing opinion to Jet on this issue.

[Kizzy]

..I guess I can only speak for myself with the ‘reveals, that jet has made in Corbyn discussions...obviously there is no firm ‘proof’, no firm ‘evidence’ to things he has witnessed and any link of support from Jeremy Corbyn to an IRA ‘cause’ he has personally known to be discussed etc... but it would seem bizarre also ..(..and not make sense to me..)...that the things he says would have no foundation either or very little../..flimsy foundation...these things are not carried with such intense pain through life on ‘flimsy’ or incorrect..?...it is for me though a bit like a ‘jigsaw puzzle’ and seeing which bits seem to fit...Jeremy Corbyn seems to have inconsistencies in what he will speak out about more readily and what he refuses to condemn../..seems reluctant to openly condemn...jet knows I also have Northern Ireland connections, my dad was from Northern Ireland...he didn’t live through the troubles like jet did though, because he had already moved to England...but he did feel the personal loss of some people in his life, so I’m aware of quite a few ‘IRA discussions and references’ through my younger life...anyways, I have absolutely no reservations whatsoever in condemning the IRA and the slaughter of lives they were guilty of...so I can’t understand that reluctance in Jeremy which he appears to display...it just doesn’t sit right for me...yes, I am anti all violence but I can also be specific as well when a specific violence/..terrorist group is being discussed../..when that’s the actual question being asked..’do you condemn’....

...anyways, there are lots of things for me that don’t sit right about Jeremy...he feels quite the opportunist, feels quite disingenuous and inconsistent...that’s not to say though, would he be the right person to lead the country as PM in the upcoming future...?..maybe he would, I honestly don’t know because we feel stuck between a rock and a hard place in politics with the choices we have and the two party values we have...but it would be nice to feel more assured about him as a potential leader...there is so much said about Jeremy and has always been.. his ‘attachments’ to terrorist groups...with no ‘evidence’ to support any ‘truth’, so how can they be true because there would be evidence over the years, I mean surely..?...but then why are things consistently and persistently said and continue to be said if there was no ‘truth’ or links either...so many questions and very important to be more certain than I am atm of the answers to those...I personally find jet’s posts and thoughts very interesting...and they’ve made me think a lot...


...on a personal note though...there are many times that ‘personal life experiences’ have been noted by members on the forum to explain their views and their stances etc..which also obviously explains the emotion felt by them also because the nature is more personal experience...I have seen much understanding shown by others and understandably so...and even from time to time..’well they have personal experience, so a greater insight’../type thing...but not so much with jet and his own personal life experiences, which are more widely dismissed I would say...which I guess goes back to my thoughts...where politics are concerned../..political parties../..political leaders etc...people become lost in the defence of or condemnation of...we stop ‘seeing’ and we stop ‘feeling’ people’s emotional pain and we stop seeing and feeling each other...I don’t think I’ve ever seen a pain so ‘laid bare’ on the forum as jet has done in revealing the worst times of his life...always very difficult to read...but then lovely as well when you read the support that person gets and never ..’well prove it then, otherwise you’re nothing more than an emotive person and too closely attached’...there’s a reason he’s closely attached...:laugh:..because he’s lived it and because he’s lived Jeremy’s name being attached in support of what he’s lived through...

...I goddamn hate politics...

That's quite contradictory to your last statement to me that we should all have our own individual 'vision', I do respect Jet and the experiences he has had. My only issue being that I feel the anger displayed is directed in the wrong places, and (from my perspective) with a slight touch of bias.

I reject your opportunist suggestion, as someone who has until recently stayed on the back benches for decades that does not smack to me of your common or garden career politician.

He has genuinely and consistently condemned all forms of terrorism, conflict and war... I don't know how else to demonstrate that when there are news reports stretching back over recent governments campaigning on those issues available for all to see.

It doesn't sit right with me that we have to be so specific if a certain group is being discussed that there can be no counter and that must remain the focus... that is not an open debate is it?
It matters not how interesting posts are if they close down debate how objective are they?

On the issue in question there has been nothing but a smear campaign, designed specifically to further defame Corbyn again found to be nothing but rubbish, why isn't this the focus of the thread as intended?

[Livia]

Well, no. You are basically saying that nobody can question what Jet is saying because he claims to know more about something than anyone else whilst showing little to no evidence of his claims. His responses and arguments are ones rooted in emotion rather than logic or fact.

Dezzy... here you are again... telling me what I mean when I have posted something in response to Kizzy. It really is annoying having to explain my self to you every time I respond to Kizzy, but here goes...

Jet's arguments are rooted in emotion, and so would Kizzy's be if she had been through Jet's life. He's lived the troubles.... Kizzy has not. If I make a statement about the law, or about Judaism, or about something I know more about than you do, I would not expect you to assume your argument is as well informed as mine. Which is what Kizzy assumes about everything.

[Livia]

I don't need any guidance thank you Livia, I will comment where I see fit.

What is the point of this debate forum if the only persons qualified to comment are those with direct personal experience of one perspective on any given topic?

Everyone can debate. You must accept, however, that your own opinion about the troubles is not nearly as well-informed at jet's. He's explained and posted and replied until he's blue in the face and you've been your usual self. I merely said he'd done enough, if you're still arguing for the last word he's kind of wasting his time because you stopped listening long ago, if you ever were listening.

[Twosugars]

Well-informed does not mean right or the only right pov. Especially when the issue is emotive.
I'm gay and I know how it feels to be gay, but don't claim to have universal overview of the issue.
In court of law for example, one side doesn't judge the issue, it's the judge and a panel of strangers. It's for a reason.
In this case, imo, yes there was terrorism, on both sides. IRA's brutal activities are the latest in a long struggle of the Irish for independence. Britain inflicted more than enough neglect and exploitation of Ireland throughout centuries of occupation. Countless Irish died in famine and struggle, countless emigrated.

[Tom4784]

Dezzy... here you are again... telling me what I mean when I have posted something in response to Kizzy. It really is annoying having to explain my self to you every time I respond to Kizzy, but here goes...

Jet's arguments are rooted in emotion, and so would Kizzy's be if she had been through Jet's life. He's lived the troubles.... Kizzy has not. If I make a statement about the law, or about Judaism, or about something I know more about than you do, I would not expect you to assume your argument is as well informed as mine. Which is what Kizzy assumes about everything.

Yeah, none of this changes the fact you're essentially telling people that they can't argue against what Jet is saying just 'cus.

[jet]

Yeah, none of this changes the fact you're essentially telling people that they can't argue against what Jet is saying just 'cus.

That is just utter nonsense and not what Livia is saying at all. She’s saying that I have more knowledge and experience of the troubles because I lived in the midst of them for 30 years, therefore I will know more than someone who hasn’t so my words shouldn’t just be summarily dismissed as you and Kizzy have dismissed them. That is just common sense.
You choose to cast aside anything I say as emotive and not based on fact - well, you are wrong. Emotion and facts are not exclusive of one another.

Whereas this quote from Kizzie about Corbyn:
he was guilty of nothing then and he is guilty of nothing now.

Is based on nothing at all but an opinion with no personal knowledge or experience or any facts to support it. Surely you see the difference and yet you say nothing as to this. Why not?

But really, I don’t need or want your support. In fact I’d be in shock if you ever agreed with me on anything, or had a kind word to say to me.


Those I respect and admire on here give my posts consideration and thought and that is more than enough for me.
A big thank you to them all. :love:

[Tom4784]

That is just utter nonsense and not what Livia is saying at all. She’s saying that I have more knowledge and experience of the troubles because I lived in the midst of them for 30 years, therefore I will know more than someone who hasn’t so my words shouldn’t just be summarily dismissed as you and Kizzy have dismissed them. That is just common sense.
You choose to cast aside anything I say as emotive and not based on fact - well, you are wrong. Emotion and facts are not exclusive of one another.

Whereas this quote from Kizzie about Corbyn:


Is based on nothing at all but an opinion with no personal knowledge or experience or any facts to support it. Surely you see the difference and yet you say nothing as to this. Why not?

But really, I don’t need or want your support. In fact I’d be in shock if you ever agreed with me on anything, or had a kind word to say to me.


Those I respect and admire on here give my posts consideration and thought and that is more than enough for me.
A big thank you to them all. :love:

Because I don't really give a **** about this grating argument, I just take issue with the fact that people think your views can't be argued against because they sure as hell can.

It's actually got very little to do with you in all honesty and more to do with Livia using your apparent experiences to try to shut down someone she hates without putting in the effort of an actual argument.

[Kizzy]

Dezzy... here you are again... telling me what I mean when I have posted something in response to Kizzy. It really is annoying having to explain my self to you every time I respond to Kizzy, but here goes...

Jet's arguments are rooted in emotion, and so would Kizzy's be if she had been through Jet's life. He's lived the troubles.... Kizzy has not. If I make a statement about the law, or about Judaism, or about something I know more about than you do, I would not expect you to assume your argument is as well informed as mine. Which is what Kizzy assumes about everything.

Everyone can debate. You must accept, however, that your own opinion about the troubles is not nearly as well-informed at jet's. He's explained and posted and replied until he's blue in the face and you've been your usual self. I merely said he'd done enough, if you're still arguing for the last word he's kind of wasting his time because you stopped listening long ago, if you ever were listening.

This is getting really silly now, I have for years had to battle to have a say on this forum without having to run the gauntlet of yourself and others who presume to be the forum oracle on any given topic.

I have and do appreciate Jets experience, however that does not exclude me from having an opinion specifically as in the main the responses I received were as time quite insulting... I accepted that due to the emotive subject whilst still attempting a reasoned debate.

Let it be known AGAIN that I do NOT require your input, not to mediate not to referee and not to judge, this following me around the forum has to stop.

[Kizzy]

That is just utter nonsense and not what Livia is saying at all. She’s saying that I have more knowledge and experience of the troubles because I lived in the midst of them for 30 years, therefore I will know more than someone who hasn’t so my words shouldn’t just be summarily dismissed as you and Kizzy have dismissed them. That is just common sense.
You choose to cast aside anything I say as emotive and not based on fact - well, you are wrong. Emotion and facts are not exclusive of one another.

Whereas this quote from Kizzie about Corbyn:


Is based on nothing at all but an opinion with no personal knowledge or experience or any facts to support it. Surely you see the difference and yet you say nothing as to this. Why not?

But really, I don’t need or want your support. In fact I’d be in shock if you ever agreed with me on anything, or had a kind word to say to me.


Those I respect and admire on here give my posts consideration and thought and that is more than enough for me.
A big thank you to them all. :love:


I haven't dismissed them, all I have suggested is that yours is an emotive response due to your life. Your perspective will be more one sided due to the impact on your community.

There will be though another man sat a few miles away who has had similar experiences to you aside from the fact he is catholic and all the trauma he has suffered at the hands of unionists?.... He may know victims young and old of the troubles, we shouldn't just whitewash those away because you don't feel that the groups who created tragedy in his life weren't as bad.

I appreciate too that you feel betrayed that a British MP shared a platform with the IRA, yet reading of plans for the repartition of Northern Ireland I wonder if this wasn't to highlight the urgency needed to stave of what would effectively be a full blown civil war?

Had the IRA not been willing to commit to peace wouldn't they have just killed Corbyn as a representative of the unionist establishment?

[jet]

I haven't dismissed them, all I have suggested is that yours is an emotive response due to your life. Your perspective will be more one sided due to the impact on your community.

There will be though another man sat a few miles away who has had similar experiences to you aside from the fact he is catholic and all the trauma he has suffered at the hands of unionists?.... He may know victims young and old of the troubles, we shouldn't just whitewash those away because you don't feel that the groups who created tragedy in his life weren't as bad.

I appreciate too that you feel betrayed that a British MP shared a platform with the IRA, yet reading of plans for the repartition of Northern Ireland I wonder if this wasn't to highlight the urgency needed to stave of what would effectively be a full blown civil war?

Had the IRA not been willing to commit to peace wouldn't they have just killed Corbyn as a representative of the unionist establishment?

See, you really don't listen, do you?
I have whitewashed nothing away, I will repeat that elsewhere on this forum, as well as in this thread, I have condemned the actions of the Loyalist Para's, my argument was that they didn't deliberately and consistently target civilians including young children in mass bomb atrocities. How many times have I said it, what is it about that that you don't get?

You also ignore that I am Catholic myself and not unionist, I am and always have been SDLP, like my father before me. You have no idea how many Catholics hate the IRA with a passion. They killed and maimed as many Catholics as they did Protestants.

The IRA committed to peace because they were running out of new recruitments and materials for mass murder and most of their own side had long turned vehemently against them. They knew the government would never give in to their demands against what the majority of people in N.Ireland wanted and voted for democratically. The Gov. had stood firm against them for 30 years and they knew their time was up. They had nowhere else to go.

You also don't seem to get that I talk about Corbyn and the IRA because that is who he supported. If he had supported the Loyalist Paramiltaries instead I'd be talking about Corbyn and how he supported those murderers, but as he didn't, they are not the topic. You keep bringing other organizations up to avert the discussion away from Corbyn and the IRA.

The IRA used Corbyn as a useful mp with known anti British sentiments (along with his great friend McDonnell) who wanted the same as they did - a United Ireland against the will of the majority of the people.

This says it well:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/jeremy-corbyn-should-not-be-allowed-to-rewrite-the-history-of-his-support-for-the-ira/


It cannot be said too often that there is nothing intrinsically objectionable about supporting the idea of a united Ireland. But if you did – or still do – support that goal you had a choice. You could ally yourself with the SDLP or you could chum around with Sinn Fein and the IRA. The choice mattered because it was a choice between decency and indecency, between constitutional politics and paramilitary politics. Corbyn, like his Shadow Chancellor, made his choice and chose indecency.

There is no room for doubt about this and no place for after-the-fact reinterpretations of Corbyn’s ‘role’ in the Irish peace process. That role was limited to being a cheerleader for and enabler of the Republican movement. No-one who was seriously interested in peace in the 1980s spoke at Troops Out rallies. The best that could be said of those people was that they wanted ‘peace’ on the IRA’s terms.

I and others in N. Ireland knew of Corbyn in the 80's and 90's, I suspect before many here ever heard of him. N. Ireland was a surprisingly small place when it came down to who was who in the Troubles. He, (and his great friend McDonnell) along with others were well known avid IRA supporters. Some people not believing it or not caring won’t change that. I forgot he even existed until he came to the fore as a future PM, and the memories of him came rushing back.
I have no interest in politics in general, just N. Ireland politics, and had never posted in any of the serious debate political threads in all the time I have been a member here, not even during any elections and not during Brexit. I’m pretty uninformed about all that. Whether a Conservative or Labour Gov. was in power has never made one iota of difference to my life. So really, why would I out of the blue start posting about Corbyn and his IRA affiliations?

Like Ammi wisely said:
because he’s lived it and because he’s lived Jeremy’s name being attached in support of what he’s lived through…

That's it, and the hero worship of the man quite naturally makes me sick. The thought of such a man becoming the PM makes me sick and I really don't believe he would be up to the job. Corbyn's forte has always been in opposition to this or that, never in charge; always railing against something or other to boost his morale and self importance but never in the dangerous position of the front line himsef. Be careful what you wish for.

[Kizzy]

See, you really don't listen, do you?
I have whitewashed nothing away, I will repeat that elsewhere on this forum, as well as in this thread, I have condemned the actions of the Loyalist Para's, my argument was that they didn't deliberately and consistently target civilians including young children in mass bomb atrocities. How many times have I said it, what is it about that that you don't get?

You also ignore that I am Catholic myself and not unionist, I am and always have been SDLP, like my father before me. You have no idea how many Catholics hate the IRA with a passion. They killed and maimed as many Catholics as they did Protestants.

The IRA committed to peace because they were running out of new recruitments and materials for mass murder and their own side were turning vehemently against them. They knew the government would never give in to their demands against what the majority of people in N.Ireland wanted and voted for democratically. The Gov. had stood firm against them for 30 years and they knew their time was up. They had nowhere else to go.

You also don't seem to get that I talk about Corbyn and the IRA because that is who he supported. If he had supported the Loyalist Paramiltaries I'd be talking about Corbyn and how he supported those murderers, but as he didn't, they are not the topic. You keep bringing other organizations up to avert the discussion away from Corbyn and the IRA.

The IRA used Corbyn as a useful mp with known anti British sentiments (along with his great friend McDonnell) who wanted the same as they did - a United Ireland against the will of the majority of the people.

This says it well:

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/jeremy-corbyn-should-not-be-allowed-to-rewrite-the-history-of-his-support-for-the-ira/




I and others in N. Ireland knew of Corbyn in the 80's and 90's, I suspect before many here ever heard of him. N. Ireland was a surprisingly small place when it came down to who was who in the Troubles. He, (and his great friend McDonnell) along with others were well known avid IRA supporters. Some people not believing it or not caring won’t change that. I forgot he even existed until he came to the fore as a future PM, and the memories of him came rushing back.
I have no interest in politics in general, just N. Ireland politics, and had never posted in any of the serious debate political threads in all the time I have been a member here, not even during any elections and not during Brexit. I’m pretty uninformed about all that. Whether a Conservative or Labour Gov. was in power has never made one iota of difference to my life. So really, why would I out of the blue start posting about Corbyn and his IRA affiliations?

Like Ammi wisely said:


That's it, and the hero worship of the man quite naturally makes me sick. The thought of such a man becoming the PM makes me sick and I really don't believe he would be up to the job. Corbyn's forte has always been in opposition, never in charge; always railing against something or other to boost his morale and self importance but never in the dangerous position of the front line himsef. Be careful what you wish for.

Sorry I didn't mean to suggest you were a unionist I was just using that analogy to make my point in that post.
I do understand you condemn the killings on both sides, the only issue I have is that there is a demarcation drawn there in relation to the victims, which looking at the history of the troubles doesn't seem to be as clearly defined as you are saying here.

Whether you are Catholic or not is irrelevant my point was and is that there will be those who feel as passionately as you do but due to experiences of violence from other terrorist organisations.
I don't feel a spectator blog would be impartial in this matter, it's not an excuse either that source clearly has an evident political leaning therefore can't be relied upon if you want to look at an issue with any degree of objectivity.

I understand you see him and others as collaborators, I can see why and yet there may be have been a reason, to facilitate change? should there have been a definitively sinister motive then that surely would have more doggedly been seized upon by the opposition and the media now as they have dug and dug into his past affiliations and have come up with nothing that can with any clarity say that this man was instrumental in anything.
He may have been the only MP who publicly was seen to be in talks with the IRA that is not to say he was the only govt representative in discussion with them at that time.

With politics and violence being so intertwined both then and now it would be impossible to say who was wrong to support any individual? And with the passing of time even those convicted and jailed have been admonished, those who campaigned at the time for justice will have been seen as simply sympathisers and yet today it wold seem they are entirely vindicated in their judgement.

Far from hero worship this would appear that many still have in my vision blind faith when it comes to decisions taken by the establishment, it takes a lot to push for what you believe to be right if it is counter to what the majority are suggesting, that said if it goes against your personal ethics not to then I feel it is important to do so.

Corbyn is now very much in charge and is railing against more things than ever... Although as far as I can see these are all things that to coin a phrase benefit the many not the few, as a morale boosting exercise what have the opposition got, nothing there is nothing whatsoever moral or ethical about anything they have pushed as policy for almost a decade.... Least of all the 'deal' with the DUP, which surprisingly hasn't had a mention yet in this thread, the affiliations there are a grey area I've read, however it was a means to an end for the govt and they were happy to compromise any principles they may have to secure a majority but that's another story clearly.

[jet]

I don't feel a spectator blog would be impartial in this matter, it's not an excuse either that source clearly has an evident political leaning therefore can't be relied upon if you want to look at an issue with any degree of objectivity.


Why is objectivity needed here? They are saying it is wrong to go the route of a terrorist organization and their official represenatives, Sinn Fein, like Corbyn did, rather than the route of a consitutional political party wanting to achieve their aims by peaceful means. Do you disagree with that?





I understand you see him and others as collaborators, I can see why and yet there may be have been a reason, to facilitate change? should there have been a definitively sinister motive then that surely would have more doggedly been seized upon by the opposition and the media now as they have dug and dug into his past affiliations and have come up with nothing that can with any clarity say that this man was instrumental in anything.
He may have been the only MP who publicly was seen to be in talks with the IRA that is not to say he was the only govt representative in discussion with them at that time.



https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/jeremy-corbyn-should-not-be-allowed-to-rewrite-the-history-of-his-support-for-the-ira/

For the truth, we need to listen to the real architects of the peace process who insist that these men had nothing at all to do with it.

Former deputy first minister of Northern Ireland, Seamus Mallon, said “I never heard anyone mention Corbyn at all. He very clearly took the side of the IRA and that was incompatible, in my opinion, with working for peace.


Even Labour sympathisers found it hard to stomach Corbyn’s infatuation with the IRA. A 1996 editorial in the left-leaning Guardian, of all places, denounces his “romantic support for Irish Republicans” and states unequivocally: “Mr Corbyn's actions do not advance the cause of peace in Northern Ireland and are not seriously intended to do so”.


Working for peace does not involve only supporting and talking to one side, attending and speaking at the rallies and funerals of only one side and talking at Troops Out meetings and rallies.
He had to find some justification for all this, so 'I was in peace talks' was the weak excuse. It's laughable.

The people in peace talks had the authority, expertise and experience to do so, they didn't need a back bencher with anti British sentiments to do it for them.

The ‘digging’, which didn’t have to go very deep, has clearly shown that he was an IRA supporter. Many people accept that. Apart from my own knowledge there is plenty out there in big neon lights pointing directly at it if you didn't just see every single word and article as all lies and some evil conspiracy against him. It just isn't feasible.

But really Kizzy, there is no point in any further discussion. I know what I know and I’m not going to say anything different as I would be lying and you have your own views which you are entitled to.

[Kizzy]

Why is objectivity needed here? They are saying it is wrong to go the route of a terrorist organization and their official represenatives, Sinn Fein, like Corbyn did, rather than the route of a consitutional political party wanting to achieve their aims by peaceful means. Do you disagree with that?

Are we to believe that Sinn Fein went from a cover for terrorism to reputable political force overnight?






https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/jeremy-corbyn-should-not-be-allowed-to-rewrite-the-history-of-his-support-for-the-ira/



[/B]

Working for peace does not involve only supporting and talking to one side, attending and speaking at the rallies and funerals of only one side and talking at Troops Out meetings and rallies.
He had to find some justification for all this, so 'I was in peace talks' was the weak excuse. It's laughable.

The people in peace talks had the authority, expertise and experience to do so, they didn't need a back bencher with anti British sentiments to do it for them.

The ‘digging’, which didn’t have to go very deep, has clearly shown that he was an IRA supporter. Many people accept that. Apart from my own knowledge there is plenty out there in big neon lights pointing directly at it if you didn't just see every single word and article as all lies and some evil conspiracy against him. It just isn't feasible.

But really Kizzy, there is no point in any further discussion. I know what I know and I’m not going to say anything different as I would be lying and you have your own views which you are entitled to.

Who else was talking... Overtly talking and trying to facilitate change and peace from within the establishment?
There was a dialogue but who was involved at that time, is Corbyn the fall guy as he openly campaigned for what we now know to be injustices to be recognised..

Here he is discussing Ireland in an interview. (from 6.35)
ihVLo5cGYEo

Is entirely feasible there is a conspiracy against him, that is being ramped up to max at the moment, it appears to me there is one slur after another in the hope that without analysis the accusations are acknowledged... That is not happening any longer which is why there is a constant change of tack in the vain hope that public confidence will be shaken in this man.
It appears however the contrary is happening in the main as nobody has the assurances they need that there has been sufficient evidence provided for any of these suggested betrayals.

I don't have views, I have researched.. I see the campaigns of violence on both sides, the innocents involved and the injustice, as well as the proposals for repartition that were frankly murderous.

[Kizzy]

Well-informed does not mean right or the only right pov. Especially when the issue is emotive.
I'm gay and I know how it feels to be gay, but don't claim to have universal overview of the issue.
In court of law for example, one side doesn't judge the issue, it's the judge and a panel of strangers. It's for a reason.
In this case, imo, yes there was terrorism, on both sides. IRA's brutal activities are the latest in a long struggle of the Irish for independence. Britain inflicted more than enough neglect and exploitation of Ireland throughout centuries of occupation. Countless Irish died in famine and struggle, countless emigrated.

True, had it been anywhere else in the world it would have been condemned as a brutal, exploitative and oppressive regime that made Ireland suffer... But it was here so as per there isn't.
I don't think there is such a sentiment as 'anti- British' as the British are anti British.

[jaxie]

True, had it been anywhere else in the world it would have been condemned as a brutal, exploitative and oppressive regime that made Ireland suffer... But it was here so as per there isn't.
I don't think there is such a sentiment as 'anti- British' as the British are anti British.

If that is your view of the troubles then the research you claim to have done was very one sided.

[jet]

Who else was talking... Overtly talking and trying to facilitate change and peace from within the establishment?
There was a dialogue but who was involved at that time, is Corbyn the fall guy as he openly campaigned for what we now know to be injustices to be recognised..

Here he is discussing Ireland in an interview. (from 6.35)
ihVLo5cGYEo

Is entirely feasible there is a conspiracy against him, that is being ramped up to max at the moment, it appears to me there is one slur after another in the hope that without analysis the accusations are acknowledged... That is not happening any longer which is why there is a constant change of tack in the vain hope that public confidence will be shaken in this man.
It appears however the contrary is happening in the main as nobody has the assurances they need that there has been sufficient evidence provided for any of these suggested betrayals.

I don't have views, I have researched.. I see the campaigns of violence on both sides, the innocents involved and the injustice, as well as the proposals for repartition that were frankly murderous.

Oh that interview where Corbyn is talking about Corbyn and the origins of his hatred of Britain, laying out all their wrongs. I’ve already seen it. The problem with him is he’s living in the past. Corbyn clearly shows here where his IRA sympathies originated from and his avid desire for a United Ireland, which was exactly what the IRA were blowing up innocent civilians to achieve.. He talks about injustices in Ireland going back 100 years and beyond. Move on, Jeremy dear, this is the 21st century, and the murderers causing massive mayhem and death in Ireland in this day and age were your friends the IRA.
What he's doing here is trying to justify the IRA's violence but its a poor excuse that innocent people were made to suffer today because of what the British did over 100 years ago.

And of course once again he slips in his self praise of being a vital player in the peace process in the early days. That's pretty impressive for a lowly backbencher in opposition who actually voted against the first peace treaty in the 80's, the Anglo - Irish Agreement, because it didn't make provisions for what the IRA wanted, a United Ireland. The actual Peace Process occurred in the 90’s.. Lol.

What you are attempting to prove isn't working, because it isn't the truth.

Just give it up now please Kizzy. We are just going round and round in circles and its pointless. We'll just have to agree to disagree once and for all.

[smudgie]

Oh that interview where Corbyn is talking about Corbyn and the origins of his hatred of Britain, laying out all their wrongs. I’ve already seen it. The problem with him is he’s living in the past. Corbyn clearly shows here where his IRA sympathies originated from and his avid desire for a United Ireland, which was exactly what the IRA were blowing up innocent civilians to achieve.. He talks about injustices in Ireland going back 100 years and beyond. Move on, Jeremy dear, this is the 21st century, and the murderers causing massive mayhem and death in Ireland in this day and age were your friends the IRA.
What he's doing here is trying to justify the IRA's violence but its a poor excuse that innocent people were made to suffer today because of what the British did over 100 years ago.

And of course once again he slips in his self praise of being a vital player in the peace process in the early days. That's pretty impressive for a lowly backbencher in opposition who actually voted against the first peace treaty in the 80's, the Anglo - Irish Agreement, because it didn't make provisions for what the IRA wanted, a United Ireland. The actual Peace Process occurred in the 90’s.. Lol.

What you are attempting to disprove isn't working, because it isn't the truth.

Just give it up now please Kizzy. We are just going round and round in circles and its pointless. We'll just have to agree to disagree once and for all.

He and his sidekicks chose who to support and befriend in the troubles, all well and good, but my way of looking at it is if you choose the side that is bombing, maiming and killing your fellow countrymen then you are a traitor.
As to him helping the peace movement, dream on.

[chuff me dizzy]

Corbyn 'The Collaborator': Czech spy reveals how he recruited Labour leader and used him as an 'asset' to create network of informants in Russian operation.

.Ex Czech secret agent Jan Sarkocy said Jeremy Corbyn was a paid informant
.Said he was rated by Russia who made plans to move him out there if discovered
.Labour leader's spokesman dismissed the allegations branding them 'smears'

Jeremy Corbyn was a paid informant of the Czech secret police at the height of the Cold War, a former Communist secret agent claims

Former spy Jan Sarkocy said he recruited the MP, codenamed Cob, in the 1980s.

Mr Corbyn was an ‘asset’ who knew he was working with the Soviet puppet state, Mr Sarkocy claimed.

Earlier this week it emerged Mr Corbyn had hosted Mr Sarkocy – who was posted to Britain as a diplomat under a fake identity – in the House of Commons.






http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5401097/Jeremy-Corbyn-paid-Czech-secret-police-spy-claims.html

I trust Corbyn as far as I could throw him, I'm not 18 I remember Corbyn from years ago,but hate to say I think he's a massive chance of getting in at next general election down to the young voters who he is targetting ,they need to look deep into him before casting their vote, he's a traitor to the Uk

[chuff me dizzy]

He and his sidekicks chose who to support and befriend in the troubles, all well and good, but my way of looking at it is if you choose the side that is bombing, maiming and killing your fellow countrymen then you are a traitor.
As to him helping the peace movement, dream on.

:clap1:

[Kizzy]

If that is your view of the troubles then the research you claim to have done was very one sided.

That's our history Jaxie, how about you educate yourself on it and get back to me.

[Kizzy]

Oh that interview where Corbyn is talking about Corbyn and the origins of his hatred of Britain, laying out all their wrongs. I’ve already seen it. The problem with him is he’s living in the past. Corbyn clearly shows here where his IRA sympathies originated from and his avid desire for a United Ireland, which was exactly what the IRA were blowing up innocent civilians to achieve.. He talks about injustices in Ireland going back 100 years and beyond. Move on, Jeremy dear, this is the 21st century, and the murderers causing massive mayhem and death in Ireland in this day and age were your friends the IRA.
What he's doing here is trying to justify the IRA's violence but its a poor excuse that innocent people were made to suffer today because of what the British did over 100 years ago.

And of course once again he slips in his self praise of being a vital player in the peace process in the early days. That's pretty impressive for a lowly backbencher in opposition who actually voted against the first peace treaty in the 80's, the Anglo - Irish Agreement, because it didn't make provisions for what the IRA wanted, a United Ireland. The actual Peace Process occurred in the 90’s.. Lol.

What you are attempting to prove isn't working, because it isn't the truth.

Just give it up now please Kizzy. We are just going round and round in circles and its pointless. We'll just have to agree to disagree once and for all.

Again that's just a silly thing to say for just relaying British history Jet. It's always the same when there is any injustice past or present that involves the British it's downplayed...

The anglo- Irish agreement was rejected by many due the many issues it had Corbyn wasn't alone in his condemnation of that.

[Cherie]

I trust Corbyn as far as I could throw him, I'm not 18 I remember Corbyn from years ago,but hate to say I think he's a massive chance of getting in at next general election down to the young voters who he is targetting ,they need to look deep into him before casting their vote, he's a traitor to the Uk

That seems to be the appeal for some

[Kizzy]

That seems to be the appeal for some

No comment on the subject, just a bit of baiting. That seems to be the appeal of SD atm for some.

[Cherie]

[QUOTE=Cherie;9894911]

No comment on the subject, just a bit of baiting. That seems to be the appeal of SD atm for some.

I did comment, if you consider that baiting that's your issue rather than mine

[Twosugars]

True, had it been anywhere else in the world it would have been condemned as a brutal, exploitative and oppressive regime that made Ireland suffer... But it was here so as per there isn't.
I don't think there is such a sentiment as 'anti- British' as the British are anti British.
Tell me about it. But of course the British are always right, because .... well, they are British. Superiority complex or stupidity? Take your pick.
After centuries of colonialism and milking other countries (Ireland included) for resources, Britan is being cut down to size - a middle-sized European country.
And in the Brexit negotiations, Britain must depend on the good will of once much looked-down upon Ireland. Oh, the irony.

[Kizzy]

Tell me about it. But of course the British are always right, because .... well, they are British. Superiority complex or stupidity? Take your pick.
After centuries of colonialism and milking other countries (Ireland included) for resources, Britan is being cut down to size - a middle-sized European country.
And in the Brexit negotiations, Britain must depend on the good will of once much looked-down upon Ireland. Oh, the irony.

:joker: True, and there will be widespread condemnation of the Irish as there is already for the Scots, it's always struck me why those who profess to be 'British' take so much pleasure from mocking the other countries in the union :/

In another thread we are asked how patriotic we are, being English I hand on heart can't say I am ... mainly due to issues like this, this piece of the world is outrs! ...we colonised there to save the savages... people of that faith are undesirable. :/

[Brillopad]

No comment on the subject, just a bit of baiting. That seems to be the appeal of SD atm for some.

Good bit of baiting on your part. Pot and kettle.

[Brillopad]

Again that's just a silly thing to say for just relaying British history Jet. It's always the same when there is any injustice past or present that involves the British it's downplayed...

The anglo- Irish agreement was rejected by many due the many issues it had Corbyn wasn't alone in his condemnation of that.

Condemnation isn't the problem - it is those that see terrorism as justification for their condemnation that is the problem. He supports terrorism and is therefore very worthy of condemnation himself on that basis. Total bloody hypocrite.

[Kizzy]

Condemnation isn't the problem - it is those that see terrorism as justification for their condemnation that is the problem. He supports terrorism and is therefore very worthy of condemnation himself on that basis. Total bloody hypocrite.

Who are propping up our government atm?

[Brillopad]

Who are propping up our government atm?

That is a situation that was enabled via politics - and needed to keep the likes of Corbyn and his IRA friends out. What were they supposed to do just let them in? Wasn't much of a choice was there.

[Kizzy]

That is a situation that was enabled via politics - and needed to keep the likes of Corbyn and his IRA friends out. What were they supposed to do just let them in? Wasn't much of a choice was there.

What does that even mean?... It ok to allow parties with proven links to terrorist organisations into positions of power 'because politics'? :/

[Twosugars]

:joker: True, and there will be widespread condemnation of the Irish as there is already for the Scots, it's always struck me why those who profess to be 'British' take so much pleasure from mocking the other countries in the union :/

In another thread we are asked how patriotic we are, being English I hand on heart can't say I am ... mainly due to issues like this, this piece of the world is outrs! ...we colonised there to save the savages... people of that faith are undesirable. :/

English superiority complex is fully responsible for the collapse of the empire. Had the English been prepared to see others as equals, more meaningful commonwealth might have been created.
The same for the UK. If the English carry on like before, Scotland may decide to secede. Can you imagine the humiliation? From controlling big chunk of the globe to a rump state in less than a century?
UK should have become a fully federal state ages ago, with Wales and Scotland fully equal to England.

[Maru]

English superiority complex is fully responsible for the collapse of the empire. Had the English been prepared to see others as equals, more meaningful commonwealth might have been created.
The same for the UK. If the English carry on like before, Scotland may decide to secede. Can you imagine the humiliation? From controlling big chunk of the globe to a rump state in less than a century?
UK should have become a fully federal state ages ago, with Wales and Scotland fully equal to England.

If it makes anyone feel better, I don't think many people in the US realize the two are intertwined. :laugh: We only know Mexico is our colorful britches and that Canada protects us from the likes of Sarah Palin

[Brillopad]

What does that even mean?... It ok to allow parties with proven links to terrorist organisations into positions of power 'because politics'? :/

You would have been ok with it if labour had needed Sinn Fein to get a majority - don’t try to deny it. You are just bitter the Tories held that labour madman at bay once again. :hehe:

[smudgie]

You would have been ok with it if labour had needed Sinn Fein to get a majority - don’t try to deny it. You are just bitter the Tories held that labour madman at bay once again. :hehe:

Hmmm, I can’t remember the DUP blowing up and killing and maiming men, children, women and pregnant women in England either.
Whereas the IRA were.

[Brillopad]

Hmmm, I can’t remember the DUP blowing up and killing and maiming men, children, women and pregnant women in England either.
Whereas the IRA were.

Indeed Smudgie. It’s just a diversion tactic and jumping on bandwagons.

[jet]

Hmmm, I can’t remember the DUP blowing up and killing and maiming men, children, women and pregnant women in England either.
Whereas the IRA were.

Yes, and Sinn Fein, were the political wing of the IRA and their former leader, Gerry Adams, was in the IRA and sat on its army council. . The late Martin McGuiness was a Commander in the IRA and was elevated to a position of power when he became Deputy First Minister of N.Ireland. Sinn Fein's ranks include convicted murderers and still do to this day.

Labour's Corbyn is a great friend of Sinn Fein, particularly Gerry Adams and was an avid IRA supporter, but that's okay to some - the hypocrisy is staggering.

[jet]

Indeed Smudgie. It’s just a diversion tactic and jumping on bandwagons.

Indeed. Divert, divert, divert. Anything to take the heat off Corbyn, or as my friend calls him, 'the hobo with a tie.' :hehe:

[Kizzy]

* disregards the red berets, the UVF, Ulster resistance.

[Brillopad]

Indeed. Divert, divert, divert. Anything to take the heat off Corbyn, or as my friend calls him, 'the hobo with a tie.' :hehe:

A fraudulent hobo! Maybe he should give up his MP salary to provide to those in need. He is only fooling those who will not see.

[jet]

* disregards the red berets, the UVF, Ulster resistance.

The UVF came into existence again in retaliation to IRA killings. The Prods were never going to sit back and let the IRA bombers get on with it. Thanks to the IRA, Catholics were being murdered by the UVF and the IRA.

To make a direct comparsion to Gerry Adams, Sinn Fein and Corbyn, picture this flip of the coin scenario:
Arlene Foster or Peter Robinson of the DUP would have had to be in the UVF, ordering killings, which they weren't, and Theresa May would have had to support the UVF, invite them to the Commons to sip tea 2 weeks after murdering 5 people and injuring over 30 at a Labour Party conference and have a recorded archival attendance at over 70 of their rallies and funerals.

Would you defend and ignore THAT, because that is what you are doing with Corbyn and his cronies.