About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

DemolitionRed · 16-09-2015, 10:08 PM

One thing that's baffling me is Corbyn's decision to keep Charlie frigging Forkbender. This toff reeks appallingly of Blairite past and just looks and acts like an odious sleaze bag. Why not Helena Kennedy? does anyone know if she turned the position down?

empire · 16-09-2015, 11:09 PM

labour are living in a time warp bubble, the factory worker, the ship builder, the coal miners, all voted for them, but today they clam that they still get voted by these people, inturn it is pure pigs in the sky talk from them, the truth is that minority groups is where they get a good amount of core base votes from, because under labour they gave special dispensation and favoritism to minority groups, this is something that the new leader will dare not admit to,

Benjamin · 16-09-2015, 11:29 PM

I can't believe I got tetter totters and tata tots mixed up.

At least I know what both are now.

Benjamin · 16-09-2015, 11:30 PM

Oh dear God I'm in a political thread, how did I end up in here?

MB. · 16-09-2015, 11:32 PM

Let's hope you know the national anthem

MTVN · 17-09-2015, 09:30 AM

The graphics are pretty corny and it is overdramatic but it's not that misleading really. The Bin Laden quote is the main one which has been misrepresented. Yes I've heard why he called Hamas and Hezbollah friends but I don't think his explanation is very satisfactory really. He says 'you don't achieve peace unless you talk to all sides' but Corbyn never speaks to 'the other side'. If you do have to be civil to all sides in these conflicts then why has he never associated with loyalists in Northern Ireland or pro-Israeli campaigners and politicians? He doesn't, yet time and time again he has broken bread with extreme Islamists, anti-semites and hardline republicans. In fact he has called for Israel's leader, Netanyahu, to be tried for war crimes and he has opposed the Israeli football team playing a match in Cardiff. Hamas and Hezbollah are worthy of associating with and calling 'friends' yet professional sportsmen shouldn't even be allowed to partake in a non-political event? The army abolition comments is not that far wide of the mark either seeing as he has heralded the example of Costa Rica who gave up their army and considers it something to emulate.

Ultimately people can rage about the Conservatives and the media's smearing all their like but if you're in the position that Corbyn now is then you can't give them the ammo. He will never have been subject to this much scrutiny before and he seems completely unprepared for it. He needs to get himself a spin doctor, and a good one.

kirklancaster · 18-09-2015, 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN

The graphics are pretty corny and it is overdramatic but it's not that misleading really. The Bin Laden quote is the main one which has been misrepresented. Yes I've heard why he called Hamas and Hezbollah friends but I don't think his explanation is very satisfactory really. He says 'you don't achieve peace unless you talk to all sides' but Corbyn never speaks to 'the other side'. If you do have to be civil to all sides in these conflicts then why has he never associated with loyalists in Northern Ireland or pro-Israeli campaigners and politicians? He doesn't, yet time and time again he has broken bread with extreme Islamists, anti-semites and hardline republicans. In fact he has called for Israel's leader, Netanyahu, to be tried for war crimes and he has opposed the Israeli football team playing a match in Cardiff. Hamas and Hezbollah are worthy of associating with and calling 'friends' yet professional sportsmen shouldn't even be allowed to partake in a non-political event? The army abolition comments is not that far wide of the mark either seeing as he has heralded the example of Costa Rica who gave up their army and considers it something to emulate.

Ultimately people can rage about the Conservatives and the media's smearing all their like but if you're in the position that Corbyn now is then you can't give them the ammo. He will never have been subject to this much scrutiny before and he seems completely unprepared for it. He needs to get himself a spin doctor, and a good one.

bots · 18-09-2015, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN

The graphics are pretty corny and it is overdramatic but it's not that misleading really. The Bin Laden quote is the main one which has been misrepresented. Yes I've heard why he called Hamas and Hezbollah friends but I don't think his explanation is very satisfactory really. He says 'you don't achieve peace unless you talk to all sides' but Corbyn never speaks to 'the other side'. If you do have to be civil to all sides in these conflicts then why has he never associated with loyalists in Northern Ireland or pro-Israeli campaigners and politicians? He doesn't, yet time and time again he has broken bread with extreme Islamists, anti-semites and hardline republicans. In fact he has called for Israel's leader, Netanyahu, to be tried for war crimes and he has opposed the Israeli football team playing a match in Cardiff. Hamas and Hezbollah are worthy of associating with and calling 'friends' yet professional sportsmen shouldn't even be allowed to partake in a non-political event? The army abolition comments is not that far wide of the mark either seeing as he has heralded the example of Costa Rica who gave up their army and considers it something to emulate.

Ultimately people can rage about the Conservatives and the media's smearing all their like but if you're in the position that Corbyn now is then you can't give them the ammo. He will never have been subject to this much scrutiny before and he seems completely unprepared for it. He needs to get himself a spin doctor, and a good one.

I think its right that his views are questioned. This man could do all sorts, if by some complete fluke he does get in to power. Thing is, its only just started, so Corbyn will need to get used to it pretty quickly. Michael Foot and to a lesser extent, William Hague, were subjected to media scrutiny for years, not days.

DemolitionRed · 18-09-2015, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN

He says 'you don't achieve peace unless you talk to all sides' but Corbyn never speaks to 'the other side'. If you do have to be civil to all sides in these conflicts then why has he never associated with loyalists in Northern Ireland

Sorry I heavily edited your post but this is the relevant bit I wanted to try and answer.

The Tory party were the ones who started the peace talks with NI. When Labour got elected in 1997 Corbyn was asked (on behalf of the government) to act as 'go between'. The big sticking point was the release of political prisoners because without that, there would be no peace talks. Corbyn and his staff, under direct government instruction, spent months talking to both prisoners and their reps regarding the proposed 'prisoner release scheme'

This was his key role in getting the Good Friday agreement. Without talking to the Sinn Fein the IRA could not of agreed to any peace agreement.

Corbyn is being used as the strawman here. Corbyn was just one of many who played a crucial part under the instruction of the British elected government at the time, to bring about peace in Northern Ireland.

Northern Monkey · 18-09-2015, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN

The graphics are pretty corny and it is overdramatic but it's not that misleading really. The Bin Laden quote is the main one which has been misrepresented. Yes I've heard why he called Hamas and Hezbollah friends but I don't think his explanation is very satisfactory really. He says 'you don't achieve peace unless you talk to all sides' but Corbyn never speaks to 'the other side'. If you do have to be civil to all sides in these conflicts then why has he never associated with loyalists in Northern Ireland or pro-Israeli campaigners and politicians? He doesn't, yet time and time again he has broken bread with extreme Islamists, anti-semites and hardline republicans. In fact he has called for Israel's leader, Netanyahu, to be tried for war crimes and he has opposed the Israeli football team playing a match in Cardiff. Hamas and Hezbollah are worthy of associating with and calling 'friends' yet professional sportsmen shouldn't even be allowed to partake in a non-political event? The army abolition comments is not that far wide of the mark either seeing as he has heralded the example of Costa Rica who gave up their army and considers it something to emulate.

Ultimately people can rage about the Conservatives and the media's smearing all their like but if you're in the position that Corbyn now is then you can't give them the ammo. He will never have been subject to this much scrutiny before and he seems completely unprepared for it. He needs to get himself a spin doctor, and a good one.

A very good post!

Kizzy · 18-09-2015, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTVN

The graphics are pretty corny and it is overdramatic but it's not that misleading really. The Bin Laden quote is the main one which has been misrepresented. Yes I've heard why he called Hamas and Hezbollah friends but I don't think his explanation is very satisfactory really. He says 'you don't achieve peace unless you talk to all sides' but Corbyn never speaks to 'the other side'. If you do have to be civil to all sides in these conflicts then why has he never associated with loyalists in Northern Ireland or pro-Israeli campaigners and politicians? He doesn't, yet time and time again he has broken bread with extreme Islamists, anti-semites and hardline republicans. In fact he has called for Israel's leader, Netanyahu, to be tried for war crimes and he has opposed the Israeli football team playing a match in Cardiff. Hamas and Hezbollah are worthy of associating with and calling 'friends' yet professional sportsmen shouldn't even be allowed to partake in a non-political event? The army abolition comments is not that far wide of the mark either seeing as he has heralded the example of Costa Rica who gave up their army and considers it something to emulate.

Ultimately people can rage about the Conservatives and the media's smearing all their like but if you're in the position that Corbyn now is then you can't give them the ammo. He will never have been subject to this much scrutiny before and he seems completely unprepared for it. He needs to get himself a spin doctor, and a good one.

I've read many things today that suggest Mr Corbyn was instrumental in the peace process and was chosen to have dialogue with Gerry Adams as far back as 1984, due to his obvious skills in diplomacy this makes his job as party leader a plus I would have thought... why then is it being used as a stick to beat him with?

kirklancaster · 18-09-2015, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I've read many things today that suggest Mr Corbyn was instrumental in the peace process and was chosen to have dialogue with Gerry Adams as far back as 1984, due to his obvious skills in diplomacy this makes his job as party leader a plus I would have thought... why then is it being used as a stick to beat him with?

Because as MTVN points out, it is only with the IRA and with Hamas and Hezbollah that Mr Corbyn seems to side and only their terrorist causes he seems to defend and support and align himself with.

Where is the equity?

Kizzy · 10-10-2015, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Because as MTVN points out, it is only with the IRA and with Hamas and Hezbollah that Mr Corbyn seems to side and only their terrorist causes he seems to defend and support and align himself with.

Where is the equity?

Support and align himself? the role of a diplomat is to meet people and there be some dialogue in the hope of resolving conflict peacefully.

What is the alternative to this, Warmongering..
Stomping about the globe showing countries your huge warhead?

Kizzy · 17-09-2015, 04:10 PM

“Jeremy Corbyn’s tradition of the far left has tended to be anti-Israel and supportive of boycotts and delegitimisation. The language is often inflammatory. If that radical anti-Israel, anti-Zionist tendency becomes more mainstream, what is the impact on policies such as faith schools and antisemitism?”

What's next, Jeremy Corbyn ate my hamster?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...orbyn-policies

kirklancaster · 18-09-2015, 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kizzy

“Jeremy Corbyn’s tradition of the far left has tended to be anti-Israel and supportive of boycotts and delegitimisation. The language is often inflammatory. If that radical anti-Israel, anti-Zionist tendency becomes more mainstream, what is the impact on policies such as faith schools and antisemitism?”

What's next, Jeremy Corbyn ate my hamster?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...orbyn-policies

I see nothing to mock in this excellent article.

Based on Corbyn's undeniable past anti-semitic views and actions, and his highly questionable support and 'friendships' with anti-Jewish terrorist groups, I believe that Jonathan Arkush and other British Jewish leaders have every right to have some concerns now that Corbyn is the leader of the Labour Party and a potential future Prime Minister (no matter how remote that possibility is to some of us).

What is more, I applaud the fact that Arkush is being very fair to Corbyn:

“It’s unfair to pre-judge before we have spoken. [Corbyn] may be considering afresh some of his views now he’s in such a senior and responsible position. He no longer has the luxury of being a lone dissenting backbencher. But that doesn’t mean I’m naive or prepared to be soft on concerns and issues raised by the Jewish community.”

Given the unfathomable and disturbing wave of Anti-Semitism which has been increasingly sweeping through Europe - and the UK - over the past few years, these concerns are understandable.

Kizzy · 18-09-2015, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I see nothing to mock in this excellent article.

Based on Corbyn's undeniable past anti-semitic views and actions, and his highly questionable support and 'friendships' with anti-Jewish terrorist groups, I believe that Jonathan Arkush and other British Jewish leaders have every right to have some concerns now that Corbyn is the leader of the Labour Party and a potential future Prime Minister (no matter how remote that possibility is to some of us).

What is more, I applaud the fact that Arkush is being very fair to Corbyn:

“It’s unfair to pre-judge before we have spoken. [Corbyn] may be considering afresh some of his views now he’s in such a senior and responsible position. He no longer has the luxury of being a lone dissenting backbencher. But that doesn’t mean I’m naive or prepared to be soft on concerns and issues raised by the Jewish community.”

Given the unfathomable and disturbing wave of Anti-Semitism which has been increasingly sweeping through Europe - and the UK - over the past few years, these concerns are understandable.

I'm mocking it as it appears to be an article based on what may, might or could possibly happen....
Maybe to go with the hundreds that warn if, when or the consequences of things he hasn't said or done yet :/

DemolitionRed · 18-09-2015, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I see nothing to mock in this excellent article.

Based on Corbyn's undeniable past anti-semitic views and actions, and his highly questionable support and 'friendships' with anti-Jewish terrorist groups, I believe that Jonathan Arkush and other British Jewish leaders have every right to have some concerns now that Corbyn is the leader of the Labour Party and a potential future Prime Minister (no matter how remote that possibility is to some of us).

What is more, I applaud the fact that Arkush is being very fair to Corbyn:

“It’s unfair to pre-judge before we have spoken. [Corbyn] may be considering afresh some of his views now he’s in such a senior and responsible position. He no longer has the luxury of being a lone dissenting backbencher. But that doesn’t mean I’m naive or prepared to be soft on concerns and issues raised by the Jewish community.”

Given the unfathomable and disturbing wave of Anti-Semitism which has been increasingly sweeping through Europe - and the UK - over the past few years, these concerns are understandable.

But your only reading the right wing side of this story and it simply isn't truth.

http://www.leftfutures.org/2015/07/r...jeremy-corbyn/

The violent and often racist nature of Hamas and Hezbollah’s role in the region’s conflict apparently make their invitation to parliament unconscionable, whereas representatives of the (just as) violent and often (just as) racist Israeli state can be invited without so much as anyone batting an eyelid.

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs...-are-dishonest

kirklancaster · 18-09-2015, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

But your only reading the right wing side of this story and it simply isn't truth.

http://www.leftfutures.org/2015/07/r...jeremy-corbyn/

The violent and often racist nature of Hamas and Hezbollah’s role in the region’s conflict apparently make their inas you vitation to parliament unconscionable, whereas representatives of the (just as) violent and often (just as) racist Israeli state can be invited without so much as anyone batting an eyelid.

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs...-are-dishonest

Not so Red. I read as much as I can from all perspectives, but I find nothing which will change my mind - as the Left Wingers on here will never change theirs no matter how persuasive an argument is and no matter how much evidence is presented which justifies such a persuasion.

I guess that's just the way it is, the way it has always been, and the way it will stay, and that we'll just have to agree to differ until time has elapsed and events prove one right and the other wrong.

Kizzy · 18-09-2015, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Not so Red. I read as much as I can from all perspectives, but I find nothing which will change my mind - as the Left Wingers on here will never change theirs no matter how persuasive an argument is and no matter how much evidence is presented which justifies such a persuasion.

I guess that's just the way it is, the way it has always been, and the way it will stay, and that we'll just have to agree to differ until time has elapsed and events prove one right and the other wrong.

Here you are again getting all presumptuous, stick to defining your own stance and leave others to establish theirs.