(one of which claimed Daesh was more like the International Army Hilary Benn referenced positively in his speech than the Labour Party !)

That’s correct, though. Benn’s comparison was historically inept: you can’t compare air raids by a state military to individuals volunteering to fight others’ battles. If there is a comparison to the Spanish Civil War, then the headcases going from overseas to Raqqa are the volunteers, and Russia or the UK is Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. But really Benn’s bringing in the Spanish Civil War was just stupid and misconceived.
http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2015/12/03/michael-chessum/hilary-benns-internationalism/

(Also, it was the International Brigades to which Benn referred, not International Army).

Jambyfacts dont heed to such trifling things as being actually true or accurate

If he did he would need to use another hand to count how many times he got things wrong and we cannot be having that now can we.

Quite something when the Green Party withdraw their supoort for an anti-war campaign group.

It hasn’t. The Green Party is still affiliated to the Stop the War Coalition.

Corbyn supported fhe bail application of a fraudster who had been arrested for and was today convicted of defrauding 140 old age pensioners out £1m of their savings by posing as police officers. The matter came to light after counter terrorism police traced suspicious flows of cash to one individual gang member who is known to have travelled to Syria.

So lets be quite clear here, Corbyn supported the bail application of someone using crimnal activity to fund terrorism. The BBC piece below doesn’t say how it is Corbyn knew this individal sufficiently well to personally suport his bail application.

BBC News

Cast iron Jambafact ?

Neither fact nor jambafact, perhaps.

The terrorism suggestion was an assertion about a belief that detectives had about some payments. There were no terrorist finance charges brought and no suggestion that the fraudsters had actually known that one the payee was going to go to Syria and engage in terrorism. At the time of the bail application the applicant was innocent and the terrorism allegations hadn’t been tested (or even aired, possibly). So actually there’s nothing “quite clear” about what Jamba said at all.

As for the relationship between Corbyn and the defendant, just ask the Daily Mail:

Last night a Labour spokesman said Mr Corbyn had been approached by the constituent prior to the trial, and wrote a letter on his behalf as is standard for a constituency MP.

This is not an uncommon practice and the judge will not have placed much reliance on it for exactly that reason. Bail was granted and complied with.

HOWEVER I actually agree with Jamba that it’s an outrageous protocol no matter how common it is and MPs shouldn’t be doing it unless they actually have personal knowledge of the bail applicant.

as in not at all supported by the facts Then its a resounding yes.

So lets be quite clear here, Corbyn supported the bail application of someone using crimnal activity to fund terrorism. The BBC piece below doesn’t say how it is Corbyn knew this individal sufficiently well to personally suport his bail application. i am just making shit up

FTFY

9/10 as even the DM disagrees with you

Good effort though.

For somebody who is rarely wrong on the internet jam is having a really shit few days this week.
Can we do Corbyn quoting Enver Hodger next to which the correct answers are 1 it was a joke 2 it was funny 3 it was even funny when Enver Hodger said it …

I doubt Corbyn knew he was a fraudster at that point…

Jam are you actually campaigning against Corbyn via this thread?

Crankboy,

Jambalaya makes sense.

Yes, he is just one arguing against you lot the lefties but he is doing well IMO. Holding his ground.

Although you lot are very capable of articulating your views somehow somewhere something is just not right … 😆

edit:

molgrips – Member

I doubt Corbyn knew he was a fraudster at that point…

Jam are you actually campaigning against Corbyn via this thread?

JC(not Jesus Christ) is just a half baked commie … why not simply come out by saying he is a commie? Instead of pretending who he is not. JC(not Jesus Christ) should simply say “I am a commie and I am proud of it.” At least be honest … bear in mind I can see a commie miles away (I usually see them coming …) coz my grandpa was a commie … bloody womanising commie as well.

I think the correct question is are you lot campaigning FOR JC(not Jesus Christ) … 😯 You know using all the “social media” interweb shite at every opportunity as a platform to influence?

chewkw – Member

Jambalaya makes sense.

I really can’t think of a more damning indictment.

ernie_lynch – Member

chewkw – Member
Jambalaya makes sense.

I really can’t think of a more damning indictment. [/quote]

Ya, it’s a bit like Pol Pot endorsing Mao innit. 😆

Very simple he presented his logic and you lot lefties presented your logic, I just think his logic make sense better to me rather then the lefties lot.

Logic that makes sense is one thing but view on entire mankind is another and I bet you lot know my view on mankind … 😆 None come close.

I doubt Corbyn knew he was a fraudster at that point…

Jam are you actually campaigning against Corbyn via this thread?

But he knew he was arrested on suspision of committing fraud against pensioners – I mean as an MP if you are going to vouch for someone particularly on a case like this you must have a very good reason, or a relationship, or been lobbied ? I really don’t know but you must have some reason.

I was just gobsmacked when I heard the piece.

@chew frankly with Corbyn its pretty easy to hold my ground, every day it seems there’s another incident or revelation even more incredible than the last. I really couldn’t make stuff up anyhting like as damning as this. This was a fraud and extortion ring taking money from pensioners and giving some at least some to a Jihadi going to fight in Syria.

. I really couldn’t make stuff up

That is the jamby that i expect 9/10 excellent trolling up there with your best efforts

Its very good the way you do the thing you are saying you couldn’t do

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/12044641/Jeremy-Corbyn-writes-letter-pleading-for-fraudster-Mohamed-Dahir-to-be-freed-for-Christmas.html

I couldn’t be sarcastic about this

Northwind – Member
I couldn’t be sarcastic about this

Ya, I think you should try but make it a good one coz I am bored … bored … coz they are repeating Family Guy and American Dad … FFS I want to see new episodes … 🙄

@Jambalaya … If that is the case I guess my view on mankind is rather accurate … JC(not Jesus Christ). 😀

Since Jambalaya’s vilification of of JC is counterbalanced by his spirited defence of Alistair Carmichael, I have decided to change my opinion of both based on the fact he has only been wrong 4 times and he will have friends in high places feeding him inside knowledge to pass on to the masses.

so Jeremy writes letter to magistrate saying he should be allowed to have bail because he’s not a flight risk, and he turns up at court and is convicted. As he’ll end up serving exactly the same time in prison with or without bail I don’t see the issue.

There is a troubling agenda to Jam’s selection and presentation of material the Terrorism connection is one the police rule out “an unconnected investigation” and one that was not made in the case no terrorism charges. The question as to why Corbyn was motivated to write the letter is clearly answered in the link he is the local MP AND knows the family.
The worst is the suggestion of misjudgement and ” vouching ” for the defendant . Corbyn wrote a letter for his Bail Application supporting that every accused has the right to bail see The Bail Act and the presumption of innocence . Bail can only be withheld if there are substantial grounds to believe the accused will run away offend on bail or interfere with a witness. So Corbyn wrote a letter in support of a friends sons fundamental rights before the law , his judgement has been entirely vindicated given the accused did not fun away offend or interfere with witnesses. What Corbyn did not do was in any way give character evidence to suggest that the accused could not be guilty.
Jam why are you so offended by the idea of an MP standing up for a constituent’s fundamental rights?

There is a troubling agenda to Jam’s selection and presentation of material the Terrorism connection is one the police rule out “an unconnected investigation” and one that was not made in the case no terrorism charges. The question as to why Corbyn was motivated to write the letter is clearly answered in the link he is the local MP AND knows the family.
The worst is the suggestion of misjudgement and ” vouching ” for the defendant . Corbyn wrote a letter for his Bail Application supporting that every accused has the right to bail see The Bail Act and the presumption of innocence . Bail can only be withheld if there are substantial grounds to believe the accused will run away offend on bail or interfere with a witness. So Corbyn wrote a letter in support of a friends sons fundamental rights before the law , his judgement has been entirely vindicated given the accused did not fun away offend or interfere with witnesses. What Corbyn did not do was in any way give character evidence to suggest that the accused could not be guilty.

Too many facts spoil the wrath.

Because he is attacking Corbyn, because Corbyn is one of the other side.

He thinks politics is some kind of game that has to be played and won, so he is joining in.

Its an interesting moral code that gets you to this stance.

Jam why are you so offended by the idea of an MP standing up for a constituent’s fundamental rights?

Because he is a terrorist sympathiser is this not obvious to you?
Dont you be using facts and logic against Jambyfacts as that is just not fair.

he has only been wrong 4 times

Yep. He’s been expressing his opinions on here since 2011 and as far as I’m concerned he has been wrong 4 times….all of 2011, all of 2012, all of 2013, and all of 2014. There’s still a few days left to see if he makes all of 2015.

Edit.

But he knew he was arrested on suspision of committing fraud against pensioners – I mean as an MP if you are going to vouch for someone particularly on a case like this you must have a very good reason, or a relationship, or been lobbied ? I really don’t know but you must have some reason.

MPs routinely support bail applications for constituents even when they don’t know them. I’m surprised you didn’t know that.

You’re not going to be supporting many bail applications for people who aren’t accused of bad things! If they weren’t accused of doing something awful they probably wouldn’t need bail in the first place.

We know the reason Chewkw doesn’t like socialists now, don’t we.

Hate the player not the game, dude.

veedubba – Member
We know the reason Chewkw doesn’t like socialists now, don’t we.
Hate the player not the game, dude.

What? Please tell the reason. (apart from the one below)

IMO all the categorization about being socialists, communists, capitalists, imperialists, fascists, religious fascists or communists whatever shite all of them need culling including the people in them.

The world population really need to be reduced by half if possible to free up space and to let the earth rejuvenate …

🙄

molgrips – Member
Because he is attacking Corbyn, because Corbyn is one of the other side.

He thinks politics is some kind of game that has to be played and won, so he is joining in.

Crikey, so much propaganda and counter propaganda to confuse people … 😀

Keeping it in perspective – writing a letter for a constituent to support bail is not in the same ballpark as writing a letter for a serial fraudster to try and influence the sentence a court gave after conviction for an £80-‘000 fraud.

Didn’t do Nicola Sturgeon any harm though.

http://scottishlaw.blogspot.co.uk/2010/02/deputy-first-minister-nicola-sturgeon.html

Old socialist womaniser grandpappy Chewkw failing you, that’s what.

I tend to agree that there are too many people around for us to sustain our current global (/western) standards of living for too much longer. I’m agnostic when it comes to the culling though <wanders off to watch Utopia>

ps. I’ve been reading this thread for a while now, but I’m not getting drawn into the mire, so don’t be offended if I don’t reply to your reply.

I’m not reading all that guff, but I just thought I’d pop in and say what a great job I think he’s doing.

I’ll let you get back to it now, thanks.

[video]http://youtu.be/fDztLEEfN6w[/video]

veedubba – Member
Old socialist womaniser grandpappy Chewkw failing you, that’s what.

Grandpa was a womaniser communist not socialist coz he loved to share women … My aunts used to call him dirty old man …

so Jeremy writes letter to magistrate saying he should be allowed to have bail because he’s not a flight risk, and he turns up at court and is convicted. As he’ll end up serving exactly the same time in prison with or without bail I don’t see the issue.

It’s a question of judgement and whether JC actualiy looks into a case or personal history before writing such a letter, if he did then how on earth did he agree to support the application and if he did not, why not ? You can throw rocks if you like but if I where an MP and someone I’d never met asked me to support their bail application after being charged with hoaxing and defrauding old people it wouod be a polite but firm no.

Corbyn was told by a judge in another case where he was supporting bail applications (Stop the War related case) that he was attempting to “make violent criminals sound like peace protestors”

Yep. He’s been expressing his opinions on here since 2011 and as far as I’m concerned he has been wrong 4 times….all of 2011, all of 2012, all of 2013, and all of 2014. There’s still a few days left to see if he makes all of 2015.

😀 Chapeau, that’s a most excellent response.

Read your own link it answers your questions. Understand the issue he wrote about and you will see his judgement was proved right.

@crank of course I read the story and no the guy didn’t skip bail but there is still a question of judgement in involving yourself at all with such a defendent

So you don’t believe in the presumption of innocence and you would not stand up for someone’s rights even if you knew they would honour the trust of the court.

Which was the stop the war case?

Fairly sure that he wasn’t granted bail despite the (fairly standard from an MP) letter asking that the court consider bail. So a complete non story really. And as for questioning the ‘judgment’ of Corbyn; would you have him decide the chaps guilt or otherwise, with less facts than are available to a court, more quickly than a court? Sorry, I thought that was why we had courts. All he did was write a letter saying that he knew the family and they seemed like a good one (not disputed, even by the Torygraph) and that the court should probably consider bail within its legal framework. Which it did.

What would be the point of an MP writing a letter to the court, on behalf of anyone who comes through the door, asking the judge to consider bail, when the law already says that the judge has to consider bail?

“Dear judge, please uphold your oath by doing what the law says you have to do, and please only take into account those factors which the law says are relevant in the bail decision, without being influenced in any way by external pressures, such as letters from members of parliament asking you to grant bail. Yours sincerely, Jeremy Corbyn MP”