[user104658]

Originally Posted by jet

I have never said, anywhere, that he is violent himself, but that he has supported those that are is out there for all to see. Except for those who refuse to see it.

I don't know that it's a matter of refusing to see it... but like I said, if we had to automatically disqualify any politician who has kept company with other dodgy political figures in the past then there wouldn't be any politicians at all. Politics - and especially the rise through politics to anywhere near the top - is murky. Should it be? In an ideal world, no, but this idea that Corbyn has done anything worse than any other high-profile political figure in the past is just straight up false . I mean, let's not forget how many high profile Western politicians broke bread with Saddam Hussein. Let's not pretend that supporting the Israeli establishment isn't supporting violence. Let's not forget that the current Conservative government, and other past UK governments - without apology - sell military equipment in the middle east followed by a cosy dinner with the buyers.

I disagree that Corbyn has supported or endorsed violent action. I will agree that it seems like he has overlooked violence at times, perhaps put on the blinkers to suit a political agenda. And I genuinely do understand that you have a personal connection to this issue that makes it seem more serious than the "accepted" overlooking of violence within politics that occurs across the board (including right now with ConDUP)

So all you can really do is look at the bare facts; would Corbyn, if he became PM, realistically, invite or condone terrorism or violence in the UK? The answer is a flat "no".