[user104658]

Originally Posted by jet

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

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

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


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

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

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


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