Jeremy Corbyn

http://foundation4peace.org/our-projects/

I get your point, but I'm picking up a definite change of mood out there - Corbyn's stuff is starting to land with people, I think.

thing is, corbyn doesn't have to win. nobody expects him to, not even corbyn I reckon.

May does though. she's pitched it all on a 'back me, you can trust on me' campaign, and its turns out people don't...

and have you noticed the increase of jamba/ninfan/chewkw attacks on corbyn? three weeks ago they were cock-a-hoop about a 150 seat majority. I think they are actually worried that May is really going to **** this up.

I bet Boris is plotting already.

Anyone think it was unreasonable to negotiate with Sinn Fein?

Never unreasonable to negotiate about negotiations - but it was right to withhold both sides a seat at the table until they abandoned violence and committed to the ceasefire. Was it right to demand a significant gesture of decommissioning before talks, or agree to a dual track basis? I'm still undecided, my heart says decommissioning first, but my head says compromise.

The key principle however remains that the ceasefire had to be in place for those negotiations to take place - the British and Irish government rightly held that to the Mitchell principles, the IRA/SF and other parties had to commit to a ceasefire and the peaceful settlement of the dispute, to either the armalite OR the ballot box, rather than continuing both at the same time.

Thats were Corbyn was wrong, the public political platform he gave the IRA [u]while[/u] they were still committed to violence as a solution was wrong, and undermined the chances of peace rather than enhanced them.

Perhaps he thought that by engaging them in the political process he could influence them to give up the armed resistance bit ....you know just like all the others* who "negotiated" with them whilst they were still engaged in armed struggle

Essentially he did what they did talked to them to bring about a peace process ; there was no other solution at all and he just saw it/interacted with them sooner than most, openly, and publicly.

* crosses all parties and goes all the way to the PM

PS I like your well reasoned cogent points. Sadly they are rare

you know just like all the others* who "negotiated" with them whilst they were still engaged in armed struggle

Doesn't that undermine Corbyn's justification for his own involvement though?

If, behind the scenes 'negotiations about negotiations' were taking place, then surely Corbyn's involvement was nothing more than public grandstanding!

Well I enjoyed that. Corbyn kept his cool better than I would have, and came across as affable, knowledgeable and earnest. I'm biased though, and having read this thread I may have found the "IRA IRA IRA IRA IRA" section more hectoring than a casual watcher. Would've been nice if he'd just admitted he thinks trident is a bag of **** though, and perhaps said "listen" less.

The whole corbyn badgering about the IRA is an embarrassment to "political discussion". (As is Andrew Neil, in general.)

The whole corbyn badgering about the IRA is an embarrassment to "political discussion".

I think that what McDonnell and Abbott said was far more concerning, and that article posted above shows the 'more radical left' in their true light.

Why the obsession with what people said 30 years ago. Don't see the same level of scrutiny over the crap May has done within the last 5 years...

There can be no doubt that western intervention in Iraq and Libya has created the vacuum which brought about IS.
Western policy in the middle east has been appalling since WW1.
There is another side to the story though: I think the rise of Islamism (Turkey, ****stan, Indonesia etc)is really just popularism, very much what we've had in Britain & the US this last year; just identity being expressed through religion rather than nationalism.

Doesn't that undermine Corbyn's justification for his own involvement though?

I've yet to see any evidence Corbyn had any involvement whatsoever. Or MacDonnell. They certainly get no mention in Blair's book or Mo Mowlam's book and google turns up nothing.

Seems to me they needed to explain why they'd been telling a load of terrorists what a great idea terrorism was and came up with the idea that they'd claim it was all part of the peace process.

They were never trusted with even the most junior of ministerial roles, yet something as important and dear to Blair's heart as the peace process and all of a sudden he picked up the phone to them.

I accept it's the Argument from Silence fallacy but I'd have thought some documentation of some kind would be available to verify their story. Blair could confirm it, surely?

Don't see the same level of scrutiny over the crap May has done within the last 5 years...

You reckon? This election *is* scrutiny. She needs a big enough majority to deal with some nightmare issues. The polls are making that look unlikely. How much more scrutiny do you want?

Doesn't that undermine Corbyn's justification for his own involvement though?

He's only had to "justify" it in the first place because of the witch-hunts and smear campaigns about it in the Right Wing press - I doubt there'd have been a squeak out of him otherwise...

Enjoying Ninfan debating rather than trolling. Just wished it happened more often as he's good at it and adds to the forum.

thing is, corbyn doesn't have to win. nobody expects him to, not even corbyn I reckon.

Yep, agreed. But stuffing up May's "Hard Brexit Mandate by election Majority" agenda - which is looking hugely likely - will be nearly as good.

And we only need the Tories to drop one more major bollock between now and the election (and I have every confidence in their ability to do so) and things could end up [i]very, very[/i] close...

and undermined the chances of peace rather than enhanced them.

I really don't think history supports that view at all.

I've said it somewhere else - if I was a betting man I'd put a tenner on May not being the next PM

(very left wing) Blog claims Corbyn spoke to both sides & was Mo Mowlams envoy

https://skwawkbox.org/2017/05/25/world-exclusive-corbyn-mowlams-envoy-to-ira-and-loyalists/

regardless negotiations could only have taken place where trust already existed,
also mustve taken balls to go be an MP and go and talk to the IRA at that time

Corbyn also apparently travelled to Nicaragua to work with the Sadninistas against the Contras, (acording to this months issue of British Archaeology)

If, behind the scenes 'negotiations about negotiations' were taking place, then surely Corbyn's involvement was nothing more than public grandstanding!

Corbyn's constituency at the time had/has a significant Irish contingent, and it was talking to them and hearing their concerns about The Troubles that pulled him into the wider conversation - and in doing so he was acting on behalf of his constituents.

Which is what an MP is supposed to do.

But "public grandstanding"? Was there any? Again, he's only started to talk about it since the right has started to harangue him about it and his supposed IRA sympathies/apologism.

That was an awful interview from Neil's side. Dreadful negative questioning, hanging on words from years gone by about what so and so said.

Corbyn has a genuine conviction for a better country and they are at least willing to have a game plan.

I will happily pay my 26% Corp tax if these policies came into being.

You reckon? This election *is* scrutiny

I was talking about scrutiny from the media (but you knew that). I don't see the election as scrutiny of what May has done at all.

May's "Hard Brexit Mandate by election Majority" agenda

I thought the whole point of this election (amongst other things) was to get a few more europhile Tory MPs in and a workable majority so she can stick the finger up to her hardline eurosceptics and do a cash for access deal.

If she wanted a hard brexit she could do that with her existing miniscule majority.

ninfan - Member

I think that what McDonnell and Abbott said was far more concerning, and that article posted above shows the 'more radical left' in their true light.

Mo Mowlams envoy

Evidence?

I thought the whole point of this election was to get a few more europhile Tory MPs in and a workable majority so she can stick the finger up to her hardline eurosceptics and do a cash for access deal.

yeah thats what I kind think May the 'pragmatic remainer' is aiming for

but then she has the slightly batshit rightwing stuff like Grammar Schools and Fox Hunting
and then you wonder.....?

either way shes certainly not admitting that

Evidence?

a bloke on a blog says........

If she wanted a hard brexit she could do that with her existing majority.

Fair point, but it's a pretty nuanced affair.

Quite a few commentators have argued that she's gone to the polls in the hope that she'll get a hefty majority this time round, then she'll be able say "[i]but it's what you voted (us back in) for...[/i]" if/when the Brexit excrement hits the air-conditioning.

Corbyn has always been an outsider in particular within the Labour Party. It's absolutely laughable anyone would think his involvement in anything at all would have made much difference let alone a complex area like the Troubles. Corbyn can't lead the Labour Party despite being the elected leader, its ridiculos to suggest he could have made any difference to the pursuit of peace. Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbot where just playing poltics with Northen Ireland.

Daz the polls are meaningless, we are looking at a 75-100 seat Tory majority and possibly very much worse for Labour.

Quite a few commentators have argued that she's gone to the polls in the hope that she'll get a hefty majority this time round, then she'll be able say "but it's what you voted (us back in) for..." if/when the Brexit excrement hits the air-conditioning.

Maybe, but, as above,the alternative view (and I am on record as s being my prediction) that she went for strong 'hard brexit' comments and called the election to strengthen her majority and kill UKIP, precisely in order to then go back and make big concessions in the negotiations, leading to a much, much softer Brexit and retention of the single market without a small number of loons in the party ranks holding power.

It's absolutely laughable anyone would think his involvement in anything at all would have made much difference let alone a complex area like the Troubles

So once again, this reinforces the view that his 'justification' for meeting with Adams etc. was bobbins and he was simply grandstanding.

It's absolutely laughable anyone would think his involvement in anything at all would have made much difference let alone a complex area like the Troubles.

so wait

either he was in bed with the IRA or had nothing to do with them??

make up your mind!

as for polls..........

Im sure May will win her majority will probably be healthy, but its nice to see the rightwingers getting twitchy 😉

you know that gove, johnson, etc are sharpening their knives just in case...

possibly correct but the only think i am certain of is that she did no want to face the electorate post brexit

Given how much she has made of immigration and her failure as the Home secretary how do you think she will achieve the reduction in immigration with that approach?

Free movement is a line in the sand for the EU be it in ETA or just free access. I very much doubt they will barter it away for a fee and I very much doubt we will pay to keep the foreigners out....actually she might mightn't she

much softer Brexit and retention of the single market without a small number of loons in the party ranks holding power.

Davis' comments that we wont be losing the EMA, EU patent office & EIB would back that up as we'd have to stay under jurisdiction of the ECJ & be in the single market

would seem to back that up, The trouble is that Weak & Wobbly Lady U-turn could flip flop at any second

Given how much she has made of immigration and her failure as the Home secretary how do you think she will achieve the reduction in immigration with that approach?

Is that why she made it a wishy washy pledge?

the IFS reckons getting immigration numbers that low would cost 6bn?

but then she has the slightly batshit rightwing stuff like Grammar Schools and Fox Hunting
and then you wonder.....?

Grammar schools to pull back the 'kippers
Hunting for two reasons - very strong issue in the south west (lib dem marginals) plus this fantastic discussion:

https://mobile.twitter.com/TristanCorkPost/status/863106419415019522

Free movement is a line in the sand for the EU be it in ETA or just free access. I very much doubt they will barter it away for a fee and I very much doubt we will pay to keep the foreigners out....actually she might mightn't she

Agreed, but the thought is that she can't 'sell out' on EU immigration in return for free trade with the current group of vocal opposition and UKIP sitting on the sidelines saying 'she betrayed us all' into the next election in 2020 - by pushing that back till a couple of years after Brexit has settled, and we've retained free trade, the party is safe from ukip

Hunting for two reasons - very strong issue in the south west (lib dem marginals) plus this fantastic discussion:

https://mobile.twitter.com/TristanCorkPost/status/863106419415019522

That does seem to explain a seemingly incomprehensible decision.

That does seem to explain a seemingly incomprehensible decision.

Mays voting history has always been pro-hunting?, according to they work for you

could be tactical too though, how many votes would it actually win though? surely itd alienate as many as please, it is so unpopular according to polls

As the bloke says, It's not about hunting, it's about campaigning

blimey, even the spectator are rejecting Maybot, and even (faint) praise for the Corbynator

or are they trying a bit of reverse psych?

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/this-is-the-worst-tory-election-campaign-ever/

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/theresa-may-blow-general-election/

See. I told you they should have picked either Rees-Mogg or Ruth Davidson for leader

Just stirring the potentially complacent Tory voters to turn out come June 8th 🙂

This thread needs a gif.

[img] [/img]

🙂

Ill give you Davidson but Rees-Mogg???

the thought is that she can't 'sell out' on EU immigration in return for free trade with the current group of vocal opposition and UKIP sitting on the sidelines saying 'she betrayed us all' into the next election in 2020 - by pushing that back till a couple of years after Brexit has settled, and we've retained free trade, the party is safe from ukip

"I think that it is important that we do say and continue to say that we do want to bring migration to sustainable levels. We believe that is the tens of thousands."
She added: "Once we leave the EU, we will of course have the opportunity to ensure we have control of our borders. We will be able to establish our rules for people coming from the EU. That is a part of the picture we have not been able to control before."

CaptainFlashheart - Member

This thread needs a gif.

That's so good so funny I nearly fell off my chair laughing ... 😆

Make my day that gif.

😆 😆 😆

edit: I am going to learn to dance like that from now on ... 😆

corbyn may be sexy, but may is scary

[img] [/img]