He spoke the truth if you are referring to the terrorist sympathiser comment. Corbyn has a history of being a terrorist sympathiser over numerous occasions and his behaviour recently does nothing to dispel that.

...it's like one of those really, really difficult decisions that you may be faced with in life and you can see all the reasons why this and why that, type thing...and people sometimes say to you...well, how would you feel if this was how it was/if that was the thing you decided on..?..all I know and what my heart tells me is that I'd feel much happier with the thought of a no than with the thought of a yes...


...what will be, will be I guess...

I agree. No amount of PR can conceal the truth when Corbyn himself continues to commit one 'faux pas' after another. He is what he has always been, and what he will always be - a terrorist sympathiser.

When a person doesn't want to go to war...and that's what this is...but try and find other routes/methods to this madness, that doesn't make them a terrorist sympathiser. If he is a sympathiser, like yourself and all the right wing press propaganda keep pointing out, that makes me a sympathiser too. It makes Kizzy and Joey terrorist sympathisers and it makes the many thousands of us that marched against this war terrorist sympathisers.

Without exception, those keenest on the war, if they were in parliament, voted for the occupation of Iraq in 2003, widely regarded as the worst foreign policy disaster since Suez.

Hundreds of thousands of civilians died and the country was plunged into the very chaos from which Isis emerged.

Those voting for that war include David Cameron, Michael Fallon, Philip Hammond and George Osborne for the Tories and leading figures of the minority hawks in Labour, Hilary Benn, Tom Watson, Yvette Cooper, Maria Eagle and Angela Eagle.

Almost all the key players voted for the catastrophic bombing of Libya which led to the deaths of up to 50,000 people and created a failed state, now recognised as a breeding ground for terrorism.

All the above named Tories also voted for Britain to bomb the other side in the Syrian civil war in 2013 - a move that would undoubtedly have strengthened Isis.

This record not only raises fundamental questions about these leaders' judgements on matters of war, it also puts the whole drive to war into context. The main promoters of the war plan are people with a strong commitment to Britain's role as a global military player,and as an unquestioning junior partner to the US as global policeman, whatever the concrete situation.

This is the reason why the weakness of the case for war - the fact that it is based on mythical troops on the ground, that there is no political plan for the aftermath of the bombing, that there is no evidence bombing can work - is not deterring them.

Let their record speak for them, we should not follow them into another catastrophe.
http://stopwar.org.uk/index.php/news...w-war-on-syria.

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/List_of...d_for_Iraq_War

It is a very hard thing to decide on and it should be too, no one should be gung ho about this and deriding others for their stance.
That is why I hail the free vote for labour MPs in that it is a free vote and
no way should those who vote against have the shocking judgement of being termed as terrorist sympathisers as the PM put it,just because they do not support war and action.
At least all Labour MPs will be voting as and with their consciences tonight which is more than can be said for the government MPs.

Every single vote and the way anyone is really able to vote as to their conscience for me has to be respected.
I have gone to and fro on this issue for weeks, had a referendum been held, I would have had the same dilemma as many decent MPs have in the Commons from all parties.

I need to hear the full motion but if there really was little or nothing as to plans for the clean up afterwards and for that to be acceptable plans too, I think myself I likely after the terminology now being thrown about at people who are against action that I could have leaned more to voting against it.

I feel sorry for the MPs having to vote on this tonight,those who have not a free vote on the issue, will have to vote even against their own wishes and conscience and likely even against the wishes of their constituents too to follow the whip on Party lines only.
That should not be right as to a decision as to war or conflict.

We had rammed at us on here the other day an opinion poll saying the public supported air strikes in Syria by the UK,as if that should herald the result of this vote, I put little faith in polling nowadays at all, however in the Times today is a poll saying the public are just against the action now.
Over 3 days 2 totally different results.
We will not hear much on here about the Times poll so I have thrown it in for balance and good measure.

If the plans are flawed and in any way not planned to near perfection, all this can go really wrong for the UK in a greater way possibly than even Iraq.
This is a decision I have no envy for MPs on,I care less as to now how the Labour MPs vote as they all have the freedom to do as their conscience dictates, for the other MPs they have my sympathy that they are thought of as non thinking and non feeling to just have to follow a Party whip and support this PM in his,in my view, rushed and desperate move to get this vote done as hastily as possible.

I'd have wanted a 3 day debate on this,not 2 days as Corbyn asked for but was refused,I would want to hear from every single MP elected to Westminster as to how they felt,that is how they really felt,and then have the vote at the end of all that.
A free vote for all because this to me is wrong how this is being done tonight, on such a personal,risk taking and dangerous decision having to be made as to the action we now send our forces again to try to sort out.

As you say, what will be will be I guess but often we reap what we sow and I still hold partly the view this is another Middle east mistake we will end up making and far from making things better,could make things far worse in the area itself and here at home too.
I hope that part of my thinking is wrong but it wasn't as to Libya so I have little confidence this is going to be a positive move by the UK.

I agree with all you said and am used to the happy generalising as to people opposed to certain views on here, so it was little surprise to see such strong and hailed support for the PM from Kirk and others after this shocking outburst from a serving PM.
Had Corbyn called those voting for the action warmongers or anything else, there would have been uproar at how he should curb his language as a lader of a party.
However the PM calling those who vote against the lobbies terrorist sympathisers is acceptable.
Despicable,that is all it was and any fair minded person would agree it was too in my opinion.

My Father talking to me late last night likened it to Churchill in 1945, after working with the Attlee led opposition Labour party during the war, in the election campaign of 1945,he was likening Labour as to the Nazi's.

Although my Dad is a usual Conservative supporter, he was,(thankfully) disgusted with Cameron's comment last night.


Brilliant and fair post again Demolition Red.

PM Criticised Over 'Terrorist Sympathisers' Jibe
http://news.sky.com/story/1598091/pm...pathisers-jibe

a Covert reporter got that.

The comments don't really bother me as he said it in a private meeting of Conservatives. (1922 committee). However it won't do him any good at all.
Had he made it a personal slur to one individual it would have been worse.
I am not at all sure how I feel about the vote, other than I am pleased they are having one.
Obviously the thought of targeting IS is fine, but I worry for any innocents involved.

Corbyn's proposed solution to ISIS is to find a political agreement with them.

How exactly does one come to a political agreement with people whose only wish is to enslave, torture and murder anyone that doesn't subjugate themselves to their will.

ISIS cannot be negotiated with, Corbyn is a pacifist fool

Yes by that logic that would make Cameron a warmonger, and all those who agree with him warmonger sympathisers.
Excellent points DR and Joey, there is no substance to anything from the govt on this, none.
Even on the eve of the vote last night the situation was described as 'fluid' on the news as nobody knows what to do for the best.
All this bluster, insults and hot air gives no credence to the situation, it smacks of frustration is all and as stated from Corbyn he is a party leader not a dictator. This is why the free vote is the fairest option, ridiculous accusations like that are best left as right wing headlines as that's all they appear to be. Dysphemism is another example of doublespeak and is instantly recognisable as such.

It was, it was a direct insult at Corbyn and an indirect insult at anyone who agrees with him.

Not so Red - None of your actions, words and deeds are on irrefutable public record over the past 30 years defining yourselves as 'terrorist sympathisers', and being 'anti-war' is not the same thing at all.

Dave Cam might be at fault for saying what he did, where he did, and when he did, but that does not mean that what he said was false.

I'm sure Corbyn constantly uses terms like 'warmonger' when he's amongst like-minded colleagues. He was after all chair of the Stop of the War coalition until very recently, an organisation that claimed Paris 'reaped the whirlwind' of French foreign policy by having dozens of its citizens slaughtered and he is best pals with Ken Livingstone who blames Blair for four extremists blowing themselves up in central London.

No lies spotted from Cameron.He only said what everyone else knows.

More a case of if the hat fits then wear it I think.

More of a case of 'oh it's only Corbyn'... If he was shot it seems many would say he threw himself in front of the bullet :/

I really don't think this will get passed,there seem to be so many against it, I just hope it doesn't come back and bite us in the arse.as for what Cameron said it's just another stick to beat him with,it wasn't so terrible,they are big blokes they can take it!

We are already at war. A war thrust upon us by the inhuman acts of ISIL - not Dave Cameron.

You seem to have great difficulty in differentiating between 'Warmongering' and defending ourselves to preserve our way of life and life itself.

You cannot 'reason' with or appease these evil bastards no more than you can appeal to their human sensibilities - they are inhuman and do not possess any.

I have SEEN the true evil of what these demons do daily to innocent HUMAN beings - EVIL which transcends the headlines and is utterly beyond comprehension. From playing football and tenpin bowling with severed heads, to dancing mockingly with the freshly beheaded body of a little girl of about 12 years old while her bloodied head is on the floor at their feet, to MUTILATING THE GENITALS of children as young as 3 years old while they ARE STILL ALIVE.

You think Corbin is right to propose TALKING to such inhuman scum?

Not on my watch sister.

As a statesman, as THE top statesman I would say you should temper your language to address issues correctly. Being the leader of a political party and indeed the country is a little different to being the leader of an organisation which represents your own views on one issue.
I believe Corbyn has done this, he has given a free vote whilst maintaining his own stance, there is nothing in either parties manifesto on airstrikes therefore neither can be accused of going against the party line.
Of course the conservative MPs will be expected to vote for as they are not afforded their own conscience on this situation.

All the anti-Government pro-Corbyn supporters in this country bleat continually about 'Right Wing Media' and 'Right Wing Propaganda', when REALLY - it is the Anti-Government, anti-Democratic, pro-Terrorist Appeasers and Apologists who CONTROL this PC infected country.

It is THEIR propaganda machine which sways the public.

I think there is much more support for Corbyn on this forum than there is in the country. The support here is disproportionate, in my opinion. I think the vote will be to join the air strikes, I'd be ashamed of us as a country if we turned our backs on our allies.

IF ONLY.

That's why they're Conservative MPs and not independents. It's nothing to do with being afforded their own conscience. If Corbyn had asked that his MPs stuck to the party line no one would have blamed him for that. But of course, he couldn't do that. He's a weak leader who has tried, and failed, to impress his own views on the whole party.

I so hope you are correct Liv. Why should WE allow other countries to fight IS and do NOTHING?

Most of the 'No War' lobby on here seem to be the same ones who do not want us to exit the EU because it means us being 'Isotaionist' - they do not seem to be concerned about 'Isolationism' when it comes to this matter though.

I don't think the feeling on here is reflective. Maybe about Big Brother, but not about this.