[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Christmas treeza

Let's hope this tory inspired fascism is a fad then

Youtube video

[DemolitionRed]

They borrow from fascism and if you don't understand that, then you simply have no idea about what fascism is or how it can be implemented into a society.

Nobody knows if Corbyn is lying... yet. What we do know is, the Tory party have used neoliberal policies in a nihilistic fashion.

https://off-guardian.org/2016/07/13/...es-of-fascism/

[LeatherTrumpet]

the thread is about Ed Sheeran not "the Tories"

please keep on topic

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

They borrow from fascism and if you don't understand that, then you simply have no idea about what fascism is or how it can be implemented into a society.

Nobody knows if Corbyn is lying... yet. What we do know is, the Tory party have used neoliberal policies in a nihilistic fashion.

https://off-guardian.org/2016/07/13/...es-of-fascism/

Some would say better the devil you know - such expressions have some logic behind them! Dissatisfaction with something is no valid reason to leap uncontrollably into the unknown, potentially into a black hole of no return. No thanks!

He has too much of a dubious history as do many of his ‘comrades’ and sycophants. Far too many question marks hovering over him for my liking.

This rather child-like belief that many seem to have that he is some kind of Second-coming is just desperation from some and blatant manipulation from others and why those more recently out of nappies than others are being targeted.

The rich are not going to struggle and the poor are not going to suddenly become comfortable and well-off - Politics and fairy tales don’t go hand-hand and there will be no happy ever after for the poor - it’s all a fallacy being sold to the more susceptible.

[LeatherTrumpet]

"But it’s in his reasoning for Corbyn that Sheeran gives us a dread glimpse of the future. Corbyn cares. Not Corbyn is right about tax or Corbyn has better ideas for solving the housing crisis. No, he cares. He emotes in an appealing way. He is for things that are good, against things that are bad, and makes us feel warm and fuzzy. When this is your politics, when good intentions trump policy impact, when the world is made up of the caring and the callous, you will be drawn to the swaggering, contentless radicalism of a Jeremy Corbyn or a John McDonnell. Corbynism is a spasm of moral superiority masquerading as a cult of personality pretending to be a movement for social justice. "

Caring absolves you of the need to show judgement, grace, or moral intelligence. Caring is a licence to behave any way you want to whomever you don’t like.

Just as the hard-right is made up of radicals who have convinced themselves they are traditionalists, the hard-left is home to conservatives who believe themselves to be subversives. Look how they flirt with the symbols and rhetoric of 20th-century totalitarianism. Jeremy Corbyn is not so much a leader as a comforting figure of righteous inertia. He doesn’t challenge, take uncomfortable decisions, take any decisions at all for that matter. He cares and suddenly that’s enough.




Source: Current ish of The Spectator

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Isaiah 7:14

"But it’s in his reasoning for Corbyn that Sheeran gives us a dread glimpse of the future. Corbyn cares. Not Corbyn is right about tax or Corbyn has better ideas for solving the housing crisis. No, he cares. He emotes in an appealing way. He is for things that are good, against things that are bad, and makes us feel warm and fuzzy. When this is your politics, when good intentions trump policy impact, when the world is made up of the caring and the callous, you will be drawn to the swaggering, contentless radicalism of a Jeremy Corbyn or a John McDonnell. Corbynism is a spasm of moral superiority masquerading as a cult of personality pretending to be a movement for social justice. "

Caring absolves you of the need to show judgement, grace, or moral intelligence. Caring is a licence to behave any way you want to whomever you don’t like.

Just as the hard-right is made up of radicals who have convinced themselves they are traditionalists, the hard-left is home to conservatives who believe themselves to be subversives. Look how they flirt with the symbols and rhetoric of 20th-century totalitarianism. Jeremy Corbyn is not so much a leader as a comforting figure of righteous inertia. He doesn’t challenge, take uncomfortable decisions, take any decisions at all for that matter. He cares and suddenly that’s enough.




Source: Current ish of The Spectator

All true.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

All true.

yep

sadly so

[Kizzy]

Inertia... renationalisation? That is going to take some locomotion I can tell you!

[jet]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Some would say better the devil you know - such expressions have some logic behind them! Dissatisfaction with something is no valid reason to leap uncontrollably into the unknown, potentially into a black hole of no return. No thanks!

He has too much of a dubious history as do many of his ‘comrades’ and sycophants. Far too many question marks hovering over him for my liking.

This rather child-like belief that many seem to have that he is some kind of Second-coming is just desperation from some and blatant manipulation from others and why those more recently out of nappies than others are being targeted.

The rich are not going to struggle and the poor are not going to suddenly become comfortable and well-off - Politics and fairy tales don’t go hand-hand and there will be no happy ever after for the poor - it’s all a fallacy being sold to the more susceptible.

Great post Brillo. All so true.

[jet]

Caring? - about the wrong people:

https://order-order.com/2017/06/08/1...-corbyn-sided-
terrorists/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...xtremists.html


How anyone can support this ******* which can only be for their own gain I have no idea.

[Kizzy]

As a diplomat you have to talk to subversives... you can't trot around the globe doling out bombs blowing everyone up! It's not a viable long term strategy.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Christmas treeza

As a diplomat you have to talk to subversives... you can't trot around the globe doling out bombs blowing everyone up! It's not a viable long term strategy.

Diplomat AND caring. When it comes to Corbyn, people just put their hands over their ears and go la - la - la. He really is a cult. Scary stuff.

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/08/07...total-fantasy/

I guess he could give stirring talks at ISIS rallies, attend the funerals of ISIS terrorists shot by the authorities, be pictured whispering into the ear of an ISIS leader which is all exactly what he did with IRA terrorists and the cult followers would still be denying he was anything but being diplomatic and caring.
He's a wishy washy brown bread and open toed sandal nutter who had no influence whatsoever on any diplomatic talks with anybody, quite the opposite, except in his own head and the heads of his cult followers.
Diplomat.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by jet

Diplomat AND caring. When it comes to Corbyn, people just put their hands over their ears and go la - la - la. He really is a cult. Scary stuff.

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/08/07...total-fantasy/

I guess he could give stirring talks at ISIS rallies, attend the funerals of ISIS terrorists shot by the authorities, be pictured whispering into the ear of an ISIS leader which is all exactly what he did with IRA terrorists and the cult followers would still be denying he was anything but being diplomatic and caring.
He's a wishy washy brown bread and open toed sandal nutter who had no influence whatsoever on any diplomatic talks with anybody, quite the opposite, except in his own head and the heads of his cult followers.
Diplomat.

Now you're just talking ****e

[jet]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

Now you're just talking ****e

Anything his followers don't want to believe about Corbyn is ****e. It's why they have the reputation of cultists.

But do tell why it's ****e.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Some would say better the devil you know - such expressions have some logic behind them! Dissatisfaction with something is no valid reason to leap uncontrollably into the unknown, potentially into a black hole of no return. No thanks!

So... err... like the EU / Brexit, then?

[LeatherTrumpet]

why am i hearing people on the radio call it Breg sit

what the actual fck is wrong with people?

[jet]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

Now you're just talking ****e

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.” Sean O’Callaghan, an ex-IRA terrorist, said Corbyn “played no part ever, at any time, in promoting peace in Northern Ireland”, and any suggestion otherwise is “a cowardly, self-serving lie”.

Cowardly and self-serving: fitting words for Jeremy Corbyn, who has exposed himself as an unscrupulous liar with a warped moral compass.

http://www.cityam.com/265655/jeremy-...le-ira-history

[Chero]

Originally Posted by Isaiah 7:14

when you cant pay bills, buy anything nice for yourself, get public transport and canbt heat your home

surely you can see a difference there?

Being charitable should be a given when all of the above are not an issue

not a virtue

Wait a minute. Are you talking about the same guy who was homeless a few years ago, but wrote a song to benefit a place for *****s to get help? Surely the homeless shouldn't help people? Oops, now he's a millionaire, he must automatically change all his points of view to reflect the elite. Hmm...

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by jet

Anything his followers don't want to believe about Corbyn is ****e. It's why they have the reputation of cultists.

But do tell why it's ****e.

Let’s get one thing straight, Corbyn does not take the side of terrorists, he takes the side of something he considers an injustice he’s a rebel with a cause but he’s a rebel who is always looking at ways to find a peace process and the one thing that’s apparent to those of us who support him is, he’s the person who will stand up and fight against injustice and inequality in our society.

When Cameron was supplying arms to South Africa Corbyn was demonstrating against apartheid. When Blair was all for war in Iraq, Corbyn was on the front line of the million-man march. Justice is a double-edged sword. He doesn’t support terrorism and he doesn’t support ISIS but he is willing to stand up and talk about the cause and effect.

As for his involvement in NI... What Corbyn supported was the end of British rule in Ulster but he did condemn both sides of the conflict and he did put particular pressure on the British government to face up to the Ulster Unionists. It was Brooke, a Tory Minister who started the peace talks in Northern Ireland. Further to that, John Hume, an Irish Social Democrat and Gerry Adams, under a huge amount of scrutiny, sat down and started talking about a ceasefire. In 97 when Blair was elected, Mo Mowlam was asked by the Labour government to go to Northern Ireland and have further talks with Gerry Adams. Mo Mowlam asked Corbyn to accompany her as go between, which is what he did on many occasions. Regardless of what anyone says, Jeremy Corbyn played a key role in bringing about the Good Friday agreement. That had always been Corbyns intension.

Good Friday was, without a doubt, a historic achievement but it would never of come about if people like Corbyn and Mowlam hadn’t been able to sympathize with the Republicans. That though, doesn’t, as the right so jubilantly like to point out, mean that he sympathized with terrorism. He has always stated categorically that he didn’t.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by jet

http://www.cityam.com/265655/jeremy-...le-ira-history

Oh come on, this is an article written by none other than a board member of 'Conservatives for Liberty'.

If you think such articles are vote losers, think again. The only people interested in this naive style of alarmist journalism are those who wouldn't vote for him anyway.

Whilst it may add fuel to your fire, it just made me laugh.

[jet]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

Let’s get one thing straight, Corbyn does not take the side of terrorists, he takes the side of something he considers an injustice he’s a rebel with a cause but he’s a rebel who is always looking at ways to find a peace process and the one thing that’s apparent to those of us who support him is, he’s the person who will stand up and fight against injustice and inequality in our society.

When Cameron was supplying arms to South Africa Corbyn was demonstrating against apartheid. When Blair was all for war in Iraq, Corbyn was on the front line of the million-man march. Justice is a double-edged sword. He doesn’t support terrorism and he doesn’t support ISIS but he is willing to stand up and talk about the cause and effect.

As for his involvement in NI... What Corbyn supported was the end of British rule in Ulster but he did condemn both sides of the conflict and he did put particular pressure on the British government to face up to the Ulster Unionists. It was Brooke, a Tory Minister who started the peace talks in Northern Ireland. Further to that, John Hume, an Irish Social Democrat and Gerry Adams, under a huge amount of scrutiny, sat down and started talking about a ceasefire. In 97 when Blair was elected, Mo Mowlam was asked by the Labour government to go to Northern Ireland and have further talks with Gerry Adams. Mo Mowlam asked Corbyn to accompany her as go between, which is what he did on many occasions. Regardless of what anyone says, Jeremy Corbyn played a key role in bringing about the Good Friday agreement. That had always been Corbyns intension.

Good Friday was, without a doubt, a historic achievement but it would never of come about if people like Corbyn and Mowlam hadn’t been able to sympathize with the Republicans. That though, doesn’t, as the right so jubilantly like to point out, mean that he sympathized with terrorism. He has always stated categorically that he didn’t.

Lets get this straight - Corbyn was an out and out IRA sympathiser who spoke at IRA rallies in the 70's, cheering on their bombing campaign and attending the funerals of IRA terrorists. That is well known here in N. Ireland. I know people who knew him well. He was a ****ty wet little nobody who liked playing and associating with the big boys in their 'struggle', which really means 'murderous campaign'. He was a rebel alright - one whose sympathies lay with those who murdered innocent woman and children in cold blood.

It's a shame you can't get N.Ireland local TV which has talked with politicians from all N.I parties at one time or another this past year about the UK elections and Corbyn and none of them, when the topic comes up - not a single one - have cited Corbyn as being in any way involved, never mind influential in the peace process and the Good Friday agreement. Many of them laugh.
In fact, their perception and knowledge of him is very much the same as the countless articles telling of his rewriting of history and how he was very much an IRA supporter, hanging around them and Gerry Adams like a pathetic fanboy, bigging himself up as having importance.

Even members of Sinn Fein scoff and Nationalist Duputy Minister Seamus Mallon, who at the time stepped into John Humes shoes when he became ill, repeatedly says Corbyn had nothing whatsoever to do with the peace process. The consensus is that Corbyn inserted himself into a complex conflict as nothing more than a irrelevant serial glory seeker, and on one side only - the Republican side.

I admit I laughed out loud when I read that you said he was a 'key figure' in it all. But you have obviously ignored the myriad of articles and essays to the contrary and found a few somewhere that insist he was a key figure, like that fake letter on DS a while back, so that is that.
Perhaps you should post those links that give historic accounts of his great contribution to the Good Friday Agreement - if he was a key figure, as you insist, there must be plenty of them about - I have failed to find any, but surely you just don't take his word for it? There are official accounts listing all the key figures, but the Great Jeremy is nowhere to be found.

The actual people and politicians of N.Ireland who know a hellava lot more about the Troubles and what went on than you possibly can are all wrong and you are right. And for the record, as for your 'history lesson' above on my own small country, you've got some of that wrong and left out some very important people who were involved in the process.

[jet]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

Oh come on, this is an article written by none other than a board member of 'Conservatives for Liberty'.

If you think such articles are vote losers, think again. The only people interested in this naive style of alarmist journalism are those who wouldn't vote for him anyway.

Whilst it may add fuel to your fire, it just made me laugh.

A N.I Nationalist Deputy Minister and an IRA man aren't Conservative, are they?
But those that should know are just liars and every word Corbyn utters to cover for his shady past is the gospel truth, right?

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.” Sean O’Callaghan, an ex-IRA terrorist, said Corbyn “played no part ever, at any time, in promoting peace in Northern Ireland”, and any suggestion otherwise is “a cowardly, self-serving lie”.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Chero

Wait a minute. Are you talking about the same guy who was homeless a few years ago, but wrote a song to benefit a place for *****s to get help? Surely the homeless shouldn't help people? Oops, now he's a millionaire, he must automatically change all his points of view to reflect the elite. Hmm...

Lol

Ed Sheeran has never been "homeless" - he admitted that once for a very short time he did not have a place he called home but that this has been taken out of context but that to call him homeless was wrong and a bit insulting to those who really are. He "chose" to be like that but always had a home to go to.

Unless you have evidence to the contrary?

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by jet

Lets get this straight - Corbyn was an out and out IRA sympathiser who spoke at IRA rallies in the 70's, cheering on their bombing campaign and attending the funerals of IRA terrorists. That is well known here in N. Ireland. I know people who knew him well. He was a ****ty wet little nobody who liked playing and associating with the big boys in their 'struggle', which really means 'murderous campaign'. He was a rebel alright - one whose sympathies lay with those who murdered innocent woman and children in cold blood.

It's a shame you can't get N.Ireland local TV which has talked with politicians from all N.I parties at one time or another this past year about the UK elections and Corbyn and none of them, when the topic comes up - not a single one - have cited Corbyn as being in any way involved, never mind influential in the peace process and the Good Friday agreement. Many of them laugh.
In fact, their perception and knowledge of him is very much the same as the countless articles telling of his rewriting of history and how he was very much an IRA supporter, hanging around them and Gerry Adams like a pathetic fanboy, bigging himself up as having importance.

Even members of Sinn Fein scoff and Nationalist Duputy Minister Seamus Mallon, who at the time stepped into John Humes shoes when he became ill, repeatedly says Corbyn had nothing whatsoever to do with the peace process. The consensus is that Corbyn inserted himself into a complex conflict as nothing more than a irrelevant serial glory seeker, and on one side only - the Republican side.

I admit I laughed out loud when I read that you said he was a 'key figure' in it all. But you have obviously ignored the myriad of articles and essays to the contrary and found a few somewhere that insist he was a key figure, like that fake letter on DS a while back, so that is that.
Perhaps you should post those links that give historic accounts of his great contribution to the Good Friday Agreement - if he was a key figure, as you insist, there must be plenty of them about - I have failed to find any, but surely you just don't take his word for it? There are official accounts listing all the key figures, but the Great Jeremy is nowhere to be found.

The actual people and politicians of N.Ireland who know a hellava lot more about the Troubles and what went on than you possibly can are all wrong and you are right. And for the record, as for your 'history lesson' above on my own small country, you've got some of that wrong and left out some very important people who were involved in the process.

Its not all the Irish who think like this though is it? The Irish Republicans generally support Corbyn because they know he was involved in fighting for the Catholic cause. I’m not talking abortion laws, I’m talking community concerns and the Irish reunification and the miscarriages of justice with the Guildford Four and Birmingham six.

You say he was involved in extremism and I say he was involved in meaningful Northern Irish dialogue and advocating a peaceful solution. He didn’t march with Sinn Fein because he was a terrorist supporter, he marched with Sinn Fein because of the endemic bigotry, oppression and persecution of the catholic people.
This wasn’t good against evil, though the Nationalists and the British press would have us think that. There were two evils in that long war; one was the IRA, the other was the British Government.


He has IRA links, He supports Hamas, He is a cheerleader for anti-semites, He has funded Holocaust deniars, He has tolerated anti-semitism in the Labour party, He has been on the payroll of state funded Iranian media

An LSE survey found that 74% of newspaper articles ‘offered either no or a highly distorted account of Corbyn’s views and ideas’ and that only 9% were ‘positive’ in tone. Research carried out at Birkbeck similarly found a strong bias in 'mainstream media coverage'. So how trustworthy are those claims?
https://www.opendemocracy.net/luke-d...us-friendships
https://www.opendemocracy.net/luke-d...us-friendships


I guess you and me will just have to agree to a stalemate.

[jet]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

Its not all the Irish who think like this though is it? The Irish Republicans generally support Corbyn because they know he was involved in fighting for the Catholic cause. I’m not talking abortion laws, I’m talking community concerns and the Irish reunification and the miscarriages of justice with the Guildford Four and Birmingham six.

You say he was involved in extremism and I say he was involved in meaningful Northern Irish dialogue and advocating a peaceful solution. He didn’t march with Sinn Fein because he was a terrorist supporter, he marched with Sinn Fein because of the endemic bigotry, oppression and persecution of the catholic people.
This wasn’t good against evil, though the Nationalists and the British press would have us think that. There were two evils in that long war; one was the IRA, the other was the British Government.


He has IRA links, He supports Hamas, He is a cheerleader for anti-semites, He has funded Holocaust deniars, He has tolerated anti-semitism in the Labour party, He has been on the payroll of state funded Iranian media

An LSE survey found that 74% of newspaper articles ‘offered either no or a highly distorted account of Corbyn’s views and ideas’ and that only 9% were ‘positive’ in tone. Research carried out at Birkbeck similarly found a strong bias in 'mainstream media coverage'. So how trustworthy are those claims?
https://www.opendemocracy.net/luke-d...us-friendships
https://www.opendemocracy.net/luke-d...us-friendships


I guess you and me will just have to agree to a stalemate.

The oppression and persecution of Catholics ended centuries ago. I am a N. Irish Catholic and I, nor anyone I know, was deliberately oppressed and certainly not persecuted in our lifetime. The Catholics were poorer than Protestants simply because they refused to practise birth control and many had families of 10 or more children. Protestants had mainly 2 or 3. You can see the problem here with adequate housing, welfare and jobs, can’t you?

Many people have this romantic notion of a poor persecuted people and the IRA as freedom fighters releasing them from their hell on earth. What a load of bollocks. It all may have started off initially as civil rights marches but by the time the IRA became involved it was all about a United Ireland and a long standing historical hatred of the British, nothing more. If it was about a better life for Catholics, why did they bomb the hell out of the place, with not only the tragic loss of life, but the severe loss of jobs, the curtailing of an ordinary everyday life, the serious effects on the economy and tourism, and the fear and mistrust among once peaceful communities that only made things 100% worse than they had ever been?

Why did they bomb public places like bars, restaurants, bus stations etc. were they didn’t know the religion of anyone about to lose their lives or limbs? Catholics, Protestants, any other religion, women, children, babies. And you have the gall to talk about oppression and persecution? If there ever was any it was soon replaced by terror and grief and real poverty.

Another misconception is why how the IRA came to end their campaign. The truth is they knew they were getting nowhere by bombing and murder and never would, their resources were seriously depleted and their recruitment was faltering. They welcomed the peace talks because it was the only way forward.

To put the British Government on a par with the IRA in the N.Ireland conflict in their ‘evilness’ is mind blowingly stupid and suggests a support for terrorists at worst and a wilful ignorance at best.

I know people who seen Corbyn praising the IRA at rallies with their own eyes, not that I expect you to believe that, and I know something else too that I wouldn't put my head on the block to put out there, as much as I'd like to. Scoff all you want, but there it is for what it's worth.

In that article you linked, the author asserts that Corbyn has denounced the actions of the IRA. He's not a very good researcher at all, is he?
On the Steve Nolan show, Corbyn sits there bigging himself up in a collective ‘we’ about the ceasefire, but 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

And answer me this: why would N.I politicians and ministers on both sides and even IRA terrorists insist he had nothing to do whatsoever with the peace process but was simply an avid IRA supporter? What would be the point? Are they all secret Conservative fanatics do you think - including the former NI Nationalist Deputy First Minister?