Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

27 minutes ago, sir roger said:

Wondering whether it might be worth Corbyn asking this Human rights shower to make sure they do an investigation, and promise to implement any extra recommendations made as surely even the LFI arseholes would struggle to suggest they are not independent and I would be amazed if any massively damaging criticisms would be made.

... and ask them to broaden the investigation to all parties. 

[Rico1304]

1 hour ago, arthur friedenreich said:

pay yer subs...

To the Regiment! 

[A Red]

1 hour ago, A Red said:

Fair play to Rico for reminding us that there are long term freeloaders in our midst.

 

The problem is, because they have been called out for the leeches that they are, by their arch enemy, their egos cant allow them be seen to give in by paying. More palatable to suck it up or ignore it than do the decent thing. 

 

Anyway, thats enough of that, what about Corbyns position on Trident?

 

 

TK421 paid up just to neg me. And now he feels....

 

[Rico1304]

Human Rights shower... 

[Dr Arthur De Sabre]

20 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

To the Regiment! 

I'm glad I'm over here!

[The Guest]

1 hour ago, sir roger said:

Wondering whether it might be worth Corbyn asking this Human rights shower to make sure they do an investigation, and promise to implement any extra recommendations made as surely even the LFI arseholes would struggle to suggest they are not independent and I would be amazed if any massively damaging criticisms would be made.

 

1 hour ago, M_B said:

Thought the same myself. Get them to sign off on the Labour Party being free of anti-semitism, or at least that the party has the right processes in place. Then everyone can move on.

I think people are uneasy about it because they don’t know if this body has any political bias.  The fact they’re talking about an investigation at all suggests they clearly do.  Especially when you consider they haven’t been bothered to investigate the tories for anything.  Who has made this decision?  Do they have to reveal if they receive any donations or have any related party transactions etc?

 

People can tell me if I’m wrong but I don’t think these bodies should be investigating political party’s.  We live in the age of social media now.  If somebody has been racist or acted in a racist manner for a political party then the police can deal with and the party have to deal with being accountable in a democratic election.  If somebody wants to make an allegation and they think it’s been dealt with incorrectly or covered up then put it online with the evidence.

 

It’s all well and good saying tell them to do an investigation but you’re opening yourself up to being shafted by some unaccountable member of the elite who’s been sorted a job at this body.  If I was Corbyn I’d tell them to fuck off but that’s obviously not his style.

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 hour ago, A Red said:

Anyway, thats enough of that, what about Corbyns position on Trident?

Is there something new? Is it just the same old ‘doesn’t want to renew it but will’?

[Denny Crane]

It's called a gaffe when Conservative MPs use clumsy language, although Bradley specifically should have been an instant dismissal. Still astonished a politician who had no knowledge of Irish politics is allowed to hold such a role. 

 

 

 

 

[Rico1304]

10 minutes ago, The Guest said:

 

I think people are uneasy about it because they don’t know if this body has any political bias.  The fact they’re talking about an investigation at all suggests they clearly do.  Especially when you consider they haven’t been bothered to investigate the tories for anything.  Who has made this decision?  Do they have to reveal if they receive any donations or have any related party transactions etc?

 

People can tell me if I’m wrong but I don’t think these bodies should be investigating political party’s.  We live in the age of social media now.  If somebody has been racist or acted in a racist manner for a political party then the police can deal with and the party have to deal with being accountable in a democratic election.  If somebody wants to make an allegation and they think it’s been dealt with incorrectly or covered up then put it online with the evidence.

 

It’s all well and good saying tell them to do an investigation but you’re opening yourself up to being shafted by some unaccountable member of the elite who’s been sorted a job at this body.  If I was Corbyn I’d tell them to fuck off but that’s obviously not his style.

It was set up by Labour wasn’t it?  

[SasaS]

33 minutes ago, Hank Moody said:

Is there something new? Is it just the same old ‘doesn’t want to renew it but will’?

I feel his pain. Just like me and subscription.

[Jose Jones]

2 hours ago, A Red said:

Fair play to Rico for reminding us that there are long term freeloaders in our midst.

 

The problem is, because they have been called out for the leeches that they are, by their arch enemy, their egos cant allow them be seen to give in by paying. More palatable to suck it up or ignore it than do the decent thing. 

 

Anyway, thats enough of that, what about Corbyns position on Trident?

 

 

Bit of a crap post that one Arthur.

[Mook]

The subscription chat is fucking brutal & needs knocking on the head.

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

Here's a bit of information about the totally politically neutral, non-biased group who lodged the EHRC complaint against Labour. 

 

https://electronicintifada.net/content/campaign-against-antisemitism-campaign-against-palestinians/19916

 

Here's an online petition they're sharing which change.org have flagged and advised users to do research on the matter before signing due to the preamble containing contested (many) claims. 

 

https://www.change.org/p/jeremy-corbyn-is-an-antisemite-and-the-labour-party-must-act

 

Also, it's important to note that the EHRC have NOT launched an investigation into the Labour Party. They've acknowledged that the complaints lodged MAY be legitimate but are waiting for a response from the Labour Party before they decide whether or not to pursue the matter further. It's pretty much at an informal they said this about you, do you have anything to say about these claims stage. Despite many media sources incorrectly reporting that the EHRC have launched an investigation against Labour. They haven't. Fake news. Bigly

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

Uuge 

[A Red]

21 minutes ago, Jose Jones said:

Bit of a crap post that one Arthur.

Oooh you've given me a nickname, I like that.

 

[Strontium]

55 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

It was set up by Labour wasn’t it?  

 

Equality and human rights is a Blairite plot.

[Section_31]

How long before Maureen Lipman and that new bird on countdown equate him to Amon Goeth. 

 

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders came to Rep. Ilhan Omar’s defense, calling the recent treatment of the freshman congresswoman over her allegedly anti-Semitic remarks “wrong.”

 

Sanders, who is Jewish, acknowledged in a statement Wednesday that “anti-Semitism is a hateful and dangerous ideology which must be vigorously opposed in the United States and around the world.”

But the independent Vermont senator added: “We must not, however, equate anti-Semitism with legitimate criticism of the right-wing, Netanyahu government in Israel. Rather, we must develop an even-handed Middle East policy which brings Israelis and Palestinians together for a lasting peace.”

 

Sanders then took issue with how the House has handled Omar for controversial comments she’s recently made about Israel.

“What I fear is going on in the House now is an effort to target Congresswoman Omar as a way of stifling that debate. That’s wrong,” he said.

[A Red]

1 hour ago, Hank Moody said:

Is there something new? Is it just the same old ‘doesn’t want to renew it but will’?

I think its much wider than that. How can someone who is often lauded as a man of principle and life long CND member be the man responsible for ordering it? I know he doesnt want to and says he will go with the will of the party, but surely a principle against nuclear weapons cannot be worked around? Or is he lying and wouldnt order it? How could a CND member authorise the purchase  of nuclear weapons, will he leave?

 

Its a tricky one for me and far more relevant to his ability to govern than the anti-Semitic slurs that are thrown at him. His opponents should perhaps spend more time looking at his policies and principles than lying about his being a racist

[Numero Veinticinco]

6 minutes ago, A Red said:

I think its much wider than that. How can someone who is often lauded as a man of principle and life long CND member be the man responsible for ordering it? I know he doesnt want to and says he will go with the will of the party, but surely a principle against nuclear weapons cannot be worked around? Or is he lying and wouldnt order it? How could a CND member authorise the purchase  of nuclear weapons, will he leave?

 

Its a tricky one for me and far more relevant to his ability to govern than the anti-Semitic slurs that are thrown at him. His opponents should perhaps spend more time looking at his policies and principles than lying about his being a racist

It’s a dilemma, but I think you can personally be against something and still go with the will of parliament and the party. Whether CND has a problem with it or not is not that important to me. 

 

I highly doubt doubt that he is telling lies and would try to cancel it. I agree with your last remarks though, people should be looking at the policies rather than smearing him with clearly ridiculous accusations. If they did that, they’d find he’s.m not all that much of a mental commie Islamic fundamentalist Jew hater after all. 

 

Mad I’ve said a billion times on here, I don’t think he is a good leader, I don’t think he will win an election, and I disagree with him on trident. I can do all of that without thinking he’s a bad person, a racist, or whatever other nonsense is thrown around. He’d be a way better PM than May, Boris, or their ilk. 

 

[Scooby Dudek]

7 minutes ago, A Red said:

I think its much wider than that. How can someone who is often lauded as a man of principle and life long CND member be the man responsible for ordering it? I know he doesnt want to and says he will go with the will of the party, but surely a principle against nuclear weapons cannot be worked around? Or is he lying and wouldnt order it? How could a CND member authorise the purchase  of nuclear weapons, will he leave?

 

Its a tricky one for me and far more relevant to his ability to govern than the anti-Semitic slurs that are thrown at him. His opponents should perhaps spend more time looking at his policies and principles than lying about his being a racist

I would argue when his policies and principles were looked at people seemed to like them, hence the reason they are going after the man. 

 

On trident, I do not think being opposed is as radical as the media/politicians imply, like most of his radical policies.

 

Whilst trying to find polls I found this article; 

 

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/majority-of-britons-back-keeping-trident-poll-shows/

 

The Majority in favour of renewal is 51%, so not exactly a massive majority. 

Amongst younger people that number goes down to 33%

 

 

The narrative around nationalisation was only left wing lunatics would want to re-nationalise, despite the majority being in favour. I think the same narrative applies to Trident renewal, if you are not in favour you are a left wing, Britain hating lunatic, but the above poll shows the country is divided and the majority of younger people are not in favour of renewal.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The Guest]

17 minutes ago, A Red said:

I think its much wider than that. How can someone who is often lauded as a man of principle and life long CND member be the man responsible for ordering it? I know he doesnt want to and says he will go with the will of the party, but surely a principle against nuclear weapons cannot be worked around? Or is he lying and wouldnt order it? How could a CND member authorise the purchase  of nuclear weapons, will he leave?

 

Its a tricky one for me and far more relevant to his ability to govern than the anti-Semitic slurs that are thrown at him. His opponents should perhaps spend more time looking at his policies and principles than lying about his being a racist

It’s quite easy really.  He knows if he doesn’t agree to it then he won’t win an election.  If he doesn’t win the election then he can’t implement the socialist policies he wants to turn the country around.  Just because he’s willing to waste billions ordering it doesn’t mean he would ever have any intention using it.  I doubt he’s lying either because there would be uproar if he refused to renew it after pledging to and a vote of no confidence would be entered if he was in number 10.  Ageneral election would be called which he would subsequently lose.

[A Red]

2 minutes ago, Hank Moody said:

It’s a dilemma, but I think you can personally be against something and still go with the will of parliament and the party. Whether CND has a problem with it or not is not that important to me. 

 

I highly doubt doubt that he is telling lies and would try to cancel it. I agree with your last remarks though, people should be looking at the policies rather than smearing him with clearly ridiculous accusations. If they did that, they’d find he’s.m not all that much of a mental commie Islamic fundamentalist Jew hater after all. 

 

 

 

 

He might not be lying and fully intend to go with Trident if told to, but that raises a big doubt over him being a man of principle. Ditching his principle and being the guy that orders weapons of mass destruction, to me, is hugely different from e.g. ditching a principle of being against private education or for vegetarianism. Remember he is not just a member of CND but vice president.

 

I think he will go on the manifesto that he will order it then, when in government, try to change the party policy so that he doesnt have to. 

 

Perhaps Jeremy is no different to any other politician and will say anything to get into power? 

[The Guest]

Just now, A Red said:

He might not be lying and fully intend to go with Trident if told to, but that raises a big doubt over him being a man of principle. Ditching his principle and being the guy that orders weapons of mass destruction, to me, is hugely different from e.g. ditching a principle of being against private education or for vegetarianism. Remember he is not just a member of CND but vice president.

 

I think he will go on the manifesto that he will order it then, when in government, try to change the party policy so that he doesnt have to. 

 

Perhaps Jeremy is no different to any other politician and will say anything to get into power? 

What’s the alternative though?  Pledge to get rid of it even though the vote would never get through Parliament and subsequently lose any chance of winning a general election off the back of it which would mean it would be renewed anyway and also we would be under Tory rule again for another term?

[A Red]

2 minutes ago, The Guest said:

It’s quite easy really.  He knows if he doesn’t agree to it then he won’t win an election.  If he doesn’t win the election then he can’t implement the socialist policies he wants to turn the country around.  Just because he’s willing to waste billions ordering it doesn’t mean he would ever have any intention using it.  I doubt he’s lying either because there would be uproar if he refused to renew it after pledging to and a vote of no confidence would be entered if he was in number 10.  Ageneral election would be called which he would subsequently lose.

So no more a man/politician of principle than any of the others? 

 

The bit in bold is a good point. I know he would never authorise  the use of it, its a horrible decision to have to make that most of us couldnt. Where he is a bit silly is refusing to lie by saying he would use it if necessary. Thats the type of lie that has to be made otherwise, youre right, theres no point ordering them in the first place.

[Numero Veinticinco]

3 minutes ago, A Red said:

He might not be lying and fully intend to go with Trident if told to, but that raises a big doubt over him being a man of principle. Ditching his principle and being the guy that orders weapons of mass destruction, to me, is hugely different from e.g. ditching a principle of being against private education or for vegetarianism. Remember he is not just a member of CND but vice president.

 

I think he will go on the manifesto that he will order it then, when in government, try to change the party policy so that he doesnt have to. 

 

Perhaps Jeremy is no different to any other politician and will say anything to get into power? 

That’s a lot of maybes. Here’s another... maybe he will just do it and his principle of democracy trump his CND principles.

 

As for being no different... I think that’s a stretch. If he was willing to say anything to get into power, you’d have to question why he chose so many unpopular positions and sat on the sidelines for his entire career.