Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?


Sugar Ape
 Share

Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?  

218 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?



Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

 

EHjvceKWsAAVx6z.jpg

 

 

 

9 minutes ago, Captain Turdseye said:

giphy.gif

 

Fucking hell. The likeness is uncanny. Never noticed that before. At least one of them took a bit of time to put some slap on. 

 

48 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Nah, she'd just attract misogynistic comments about her appearance.

 

Lying again, SD. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

I would rather sleep with Rachel Riley than Jo Swinson. That being said, I wouldn’t say no to either if I was single. If that makes me a misogynist then so be it.

It doesn't make you misogynist mate. It does however make you one awfully sick bastard.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

I think it’s fair to say few people on here have argued with, taken to task, debated with, and sneered at Stronts more than I have, and have done so over many years. I see things very differently on a number of important things, significantly and especially Israel.
 

That said, there’s a difference between strong disagreements (which is where we are now) or heated arguments and insults (which is where we once were), and what’s going on now, which is a fucking pile on. I strongly disagree with some of the things he has said in this thread but haven’t even bothered picking up on it as it would just be another voice going in on him. He takes it from all angles, which I can take as he puts forward some controversial opinions, but fuck me, mate, it now seems open house on him calling him subhuman and vermin. That’s out of line, in my opinion. 
 

Us lads aren’t young kids any more - many are in there 30s and 40s - and honestly, some of this stuff has crossed the line. Between Stig following him around the forum abusing pretty much every post he makes and calling him subhuman and vermin, to a load of people arguing with him, it’s becoming... unsightly. I dunno, some of it really is becoming hard to read. 

 

He’s posted some genuinely disgusting things on here today, any response he gets from me is entirely in reaction to things he posts. I very much disagree it’s open house on calling him vermin, and am frankly baffled that you suggest this is the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

And now he's posting Hitler gifs, why you...

Hahaha fuck sake I genuinely didn't mean that at all. I just typed in "how dare you gif into google images and it was a toss up between that or giphy.gif

 

I should have gone with Greta. 

 

I give up x 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, moof said:

There’s absolutely no doubt Swinson has had misogynistic abuse, that’s not on. Abuse her on her disgusting record by all means but anyone giving out misogyny needs to give their head a wobble, and I include myself in that

That may be the case.  Is it still misogyny towards Swinson though if referencing the ugly fat fuck Johnson's looks also, ie that they've both hit every branch on the ugly tree? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

It's not my call.

 

If Labour lose, then I would probably expect that he'd want to step to down, to give a new elected leader a good run-up for the next General Election.

I think he was just asking if there was a party rule that said he had to step down, wasn’t he?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

It's not a cop out, it's just there's no agreement on what is and isn't antisemitic.

 

Some people won't accept that anything short of outright hatred against Jews is antisemitism.

The main reason "there's no agreement" is that the opponents of democratic Socialism (who pretend to be opponents of anti-Semitism) blocked the NEC's proposed Code of Conduct, which fully adopted and built on the IHRA Working Definition.

https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/app/uploads/2018/07/ASdoc3.pdf

 

(In any case, it's bollocks to say "there's no agreement": 99% of anti-Semitic incidents can be clearly and unequivocally recognised as such.  People occasionally split hairs about the remaining minutiae.)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Let us say that there is a case to answer.

 

  • Jawad Botmeh and Samar Alami were two men convicted for their part in the car bombing of the Israeli embassy and a Jewish charity in Kensington. Corbyn campaigned for their release.

Same old re-hashed misrepresentation, unsubstantiated allegations and "guilt by association", much of which has already been discredited by facts (on this thread, if I recall).

 

I just looked up one of these, selected at random and - guess what - it's also bollocks (unless you count his support for the Birmingham Six as proof of his loyalties to the IRA).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_London_Israeli_Embassy_bombing#Convicted

 

Alami and Botmeh were convicted of conspiracy to cause explosions in the United Kingdom.[13] During the trial Alami and Botmeh were accused of being part of a team that had planned the bombing but were not accused of planting the bomb themselves or being present at the scene of the crime.[14] There was no direct evidence linking the suspects to the bombing. Another woman involved in carrying out the bombing has never been found. In the course of the trial, both suspects did admit that they had conducted experiments using home made explosives in order to pass information back to Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territories. Botmeh and Alami were convicted of the charges in December 1996, receiving 20-year sentences.[15]

 

Both Alami and Botmeh have maintained their innocence; Amnesty International stated that Mr Botmeh had been "denied [his] right to a fair trial",[16] Numerous groups and individuals campaigned on behalf of the pair, including the government of Palestine, Amnesty International, Unison (Britain's largest trade union),[17] human right activist Gareth Peirce, investigative journalist Paul Foot, and Miscarriages of JusticeUK (MOJUK),[18] Support for Alami and Botmeh's appeal attracted cross-party support in Parliament – five early day motions raised by John Austin MP were supported by a total of 71 Members of Parliament, including Labour Party MPs Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell, Conservative Party MPs Peter Bottomley and Robert Jackson, and Liberal Democrats Tom Brake and Colin Breed. Beyond the early day motions, further support for a review of the conviction by parliamentarians included Ian Gilmour, Baron Gilmour of Craigmillar and Harry Cohen.[19][20]

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...