Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

So the news reports are sketchy? Thanks.

Yes. On the reasons why she's facing censure. But not on the fact that she's facing censure, as opposed to a no confidence vote.

[Gnasher]

It's a pattern of behaviour, there's been several times he's released statements on antisemitism timed to coincide with shabbat, after it's happened four or five times it starts to look deliberate.

Fucking right it's deliberate stronts the jew hating cunt.

[A Red]

It is widely said that Corbyn is a man of principle and therefore can be trusted. What about Trident?

 

My understanding is, whilst being against Trident, he will go with the democratic wish of his party and will sanction its ordering. He has also said that there will be a complete review of the armed forces including Trident. My issue is, if he was asked as an MP or member of CND, whether he could lead the country and order nuclear weapons, I reckon as a man of principle, he would have said that he couldnt. I know i'm guessing but isnt that what a man of principle would say? What if the review was to recommend cancelling Trident would he go back on a manifesto policy?

 

I'm not having a dig, i'm asking genuine questions. My suspicion is that he will never order Trident and fully expects to change the policy electors in sufficient numbers not to have to. Have I got this totally wrong?

[Jairzinho]

It is widely said that Corbyn is a man of principle and therefore can be trusted. What about Trident?

 

My understanding is, whilst being against Trident, he will go with the democratic wish of his party and will sanction its ordering. He has also said that there will be a complete review of the armed forces including Trident. My issue is, if he was asked as an MP or member of CND, whether he could lead the country and order nuclear weapons, I reckon as a man of principle, he would have said that he couldnt. I know i'm guessing but isnt that what a man of principle would say? What if the review was to recommend cancelling Trident would he go back on a manifesto policy?

 

I'm not having a dig, i'm asking genuine questions. My suspicion is that he will never order Trident and fully expects to change the policy electors in sufficient numbers not to have to. Have I got this totally wrong?

 

I think you're right. It's a bit of a mess. I think Corbyn realises it's an unwinnable argument at the moment.

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

Having read up on it, I'm sitting on the fence on the Duffield censure.

 

The letter from the CLP is clear. She's not being censured for attending a protest against antisemitism. She's being censured for attending a protest against antisemitism in which a central theme of the protest was that the party and its leader was antisemitic. I can appreciate why her CLP might take her attendance at this protest as her implicit agreement with these claims against her party and the leader.

 

On this basis, I can fully understand why the CLP members find her words uhelpful and untrue and worthy of censure. It takes me to the Lord Dubs criticism of Rabbi Sacks, where he in essence said it's fine to criticise antisemitism but it's also fine to call out criticism of antisemitism if it's untrue, politicised or OTT (such as Sacks' ridiculous Enoch Powell analogy). Also, her CLP don't seem too happy with her threat to go on strike if the IHRA definition wasn't adopted.

 

But, I also think there's every chance that she believed that she was doing the right thing in attending an antisemitism protest and her attendance didn't necessarily mean that she agreed with the untrue claims made about the party and leader.

 

I'd give her the benefit of the doubt and see if there was any means of overriding the motion.

[Gnasher]

It is widely said that Corbyn is a man of principle and therefore can be trusted. What about Trident?

 

My understanding is, whilst being against Trident, he will go with the democratic wish of his party and will sanction its ordering. He has also said that there will be a complete review of the armed forces including Trident. My issue is, if he was asked as an MP or member of CND, whether he could lead the country and order nuclear weapons, I reckon as a man of principle, he would have said that he couldnt. I know i'm guessing but isnt that what a man of principle would say? What if the review was to recommend cancelling Trident would he go back on a manifesto policy?

 

I'm not having a dig, i'm asking genuine questions. My suspicion is that he will never order Trident and fully expects to change the policy electors in sufficient numbers not to have to. Have I got this totally wrong?

Yep it's awkward. Trident and the Eu are both dead ducks but at this moment in time he has to support them, I hope both will go as events unfold.

[Numero Veinticinco]

As somebody that wants to stay in the EU and keep trident, I would prefer if he just... did exactly as I wanted. Cheers.

[Creator Supreme]

Why keep trident?

[Numero Veinticinco]

Makes it easier to blow people up if needed.

[A Red]

Ok so the policy on Trident is all over the place.

 

Another major concern I have is the policy on council tax. My understanding from the last manifesto is that it would be reviewed once they were in government. Would this be a garden/mansion tax? If true how would it be calculated and on what criteria? 

 

How could I vote for it if i dont know how much it would cost me?

[aRdja]

This is encouraging.

 

https://skwawkbox.org/2018/09/10/orthodox-rabbis-statements-in-support-of-jeremy-corbyn/

 

In a statement issued by twenty-nine leading rabbis from the group last week, they supported “respected” Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and distanced themselves from “irresponsible” claim in the media that the Jews of Britain are outraged towards the Labour party’s respected leader Jeremy Corbyn.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

The wrong kind of rabbis, obviously.

[Jairzinho]

Anti Semitic Rabbis.

 

If only I had the inclination to start a band.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Why keep trident?

For two perfectly rational reasons.

 

1. To fire it first and start a nuclear war.

 

2. For a retaliatory strike, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians, after it has already failed to act as a deterrent and there are no military, political or economic gains to be made by firing it.

 

It's certainly the best use of tens of billions of our money that I can think of.

[Creator Supreme]

For two perfectly rational reasons.

1. To fire it first and start a nuclear war.

2. For a retaliatory strike, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians, after it has already failed to act as a deterrent and there are no military, political or economic gains to be made by firing it.

It's certainly the best use of tens of billions of our money that I can think of.

So a waste of time and money then? As I thought!

[Rico1304]

Having read up on it, I'm sitting on the fence on the Duffield censure.

 

The letter from the CLP is clear. She's not being censured for attending a protest against antisemitism. She's being censured for attending a protest against antisemitism in which a central theme of the protest was that the party and its leader was antisemitic. I can appreciate why her CLP might take her attendance at this protest as her implicit agreement with these claims against her party and the leader.

 

On this basis, I can fully understand why the CLP members find her words uhelpful and untrue and worthy of censure. It takes me to the Lord Dubs criticism of Rabbi Sacks, where he in essence said it's fine to criticise antisemitism but it's also fine to call out criticism of antisemitism if it's untrue, politicised or OTT (such as Sacks' ridiculous Enoch Powell analogy). Also, her CLP don't seem too happy with her threat to go on strike if the IHRA definition wasn't adopted.

 

But, I also think there's every chance that she believed that she was doing the right thing in attending an antisemitism protest and her attendance didn't necessarily mean that she agreed with the untrue claims made about the party and leader.

 

I'd give her the benefit of the doubt and see if there was any means of overriding the motion.

They’ve withdrawn it.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

They’ve withdrawn it.

So, for once, the phrase "nothing to see here" would be applicable.

[Scooby Dudek]

This is encouraging.

 

https://skwawkbox.org/2018/09/10/orthodox-rabbis-statements-in-support-of-jeremy-corbyn/

 

In a statement issued by twenty-nine leading rabbis from the group last week, they supported “respected” Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and distanced themselves from “irresponsible” claim in the media that the Jews of Britain are outraged towards the Labour party’s respected leader Jeremy Corbyn.

 

 

They’ve withdrawn it.

 

 

Surprisingly I haven't heard either of these stories on the news this morning.

[Rico1304]

So, for once, the phrase "nothing to see here" would be applicable.

Not really, because they did table it.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Not really, because they did table it.

They didn’t table what you said. Do, nothing to see there. They did want to vote to censure, but didn’t. Very little to see there.

[aRdja]

 

She seems ace.

[Jairzinho]

She seems much improved.

[Section_31]

The wrong rabbis grommet

[Strontium]

This is encouraging.

 

https://skwawkbox.org/2018/09/10/orthodox-rabbis-statements-in-support-of-jeremy-corbyn/

 

In a statement issued by twenty-nine leading rabbis from the group last week, they supported “respected” Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and distanced themselves from “irresponsible” claim in the media that the Jews of Britain are outraged towards the Labour party’s respected leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Forging documents about Jews always ends up well.

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/jccnorthlondon/status/1039665253687209985

[Strontium]

The Press TV journalist who filmed the Joan Ryan confidence vote has been suspended from the Labour Party.