Jeremy Corbyn

Interesting article.

However, all governments manipulate the news for their own benefit. As does the Daily Telegraph!

He never actually states that 9/11 was a CIA conspiracy.

That same year, he said in Socialist Campaign Group News: “The aim of the war machine of the United States is to maintain a world order dominated by the banks and multinational companies of Europe and North America.”

That rings pretty true to me.

@duckman The comparison makes no sense. North Sea Oil is divided by international boundaries between the UK and Norway. Likewise oil in the South Atlantic. The Falklands are British territory. How North Sea oil is to be distributed in the event of Indy would be based upon negotiation as its pragmatically impossible for Scotland todo a Zimbabwe and declare UDI.

@JY have to say I don't have a huge back catalogue of reading on the Jewish centre bombing other than to say it's suspected the Argentine government of the day was most definitely involved. As for history I don't see Australia being returned to the Aboriginies or the US to the native Americans ?

I come back to my original point whatever you think about the Falklands Corbyn's stance is a vote loser for Labour and further plays to his opponents who suggest he poses a security threat to the UK

@gobuchul given we live in a capitalist society it's not surprising that large companies who provide employment and banks who lend the money we crave are important parts of our society.

@justfive, I don't believe Corbyn is anti-Semitic but he certainly chooses his "friends" and fellow speakers poorly as many most certainly are. This lack of judgement most definitely is a threat to the UK economically and otherwise

@gobuchul given we live in a capitalist society it's not surprising that large companies who provide employment and banks who lend the money we crave are important parts of our society.

I agree.

The quote from the Telegraph is supposed to show Corbyn as a conspiracy theory nut job. He stating the truth just using words the right wing wouldn't.

That same year, he said in Socialist Campaign Group News: “The aim of the [s]war machine[/s] government of the United States is to[s] maintain a world order dominated by the banks and multinational companies [/s]ensure that the economies of Europe and North America are succesful.”

Given they used 9/11 to attack a country and a leader no one thinks was involved he may well be making a reasonable point.

Sharing a platform with someone does not mean you agree with them as STW is a shared platform and clearly we dont all agree

JY have to say I don't have a huge back catalogue of reading on the Jewish centre bombing other than to say it's suspected the Argentine government of the day was most definitely involved

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMIA_bombing

Even Mossad investgated it and have never alleged what you say
I saw not even a mention of this on a quick skim reading if the wiki page just that the investigation was poorly handled

PS you forgot to say a word about all the death and murder that Israel has waged abroad with bombings
Ones that there are no doubt about
Interesting eh.

Israeli diplomatic sources who read the "final" report by SIDE on the attack said in 2003 that the attack was a suicide bombing carried out by Ibrahim Hussein Berro, a 21-year-old Hezbollah operative[24] who has been honored with a plaque in southern Lebanon for his "martyrdom" on July 18, 1994, the date of the bombing.[citation needed] This investigation was carried out jointly with the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation.[25] Hussein had been identified by FBI and Argentine intelligence, and corroborated by at least three witnesses.[24] According to official Argentine government prosecutor, Alberto Nisman, Hussein's two US-based brothers had testified that he had joined the radical Shia militant group Hezbollah. "The brothers' testimony was substantial, rich in detail and showed that he was the one who was killed," Nisman added

What you say is just not true and the refusal to even mention israel is risible

That same year, he said in Socialist Campaign Group News: “The aim of the [s]war machine[/s] government of the United States is to [s]maintain a world order dominated by the banks and multinational companies[/s] ensure that [u]the owners of[/u] the economies of Europe and North America are succesful.”

FTFY

just5minutes - Member

Next up in the Corbyn news - 9/11 was made up and had nothing to do with Osama BL:

just5minutes aren't you at least a little embarrassed with regards to making up stuff which even your own link instantly refutes ?

The Daily Telegraph article which you link to says that Corbyn claims 9/11 was manipulated by George Bush and Tony Blair as an excuse to go to war. This is an opinion which is very widely shared by the general public, including myself.

Nowhere does the article say that Corbyn claims that "9/11 was made up" as you completely falsely suggest.

In the case of Osama Bin Laden's involvement I very distinctly remember on the day of 9/11 "experts" in TV studios pointing out two important things. Firstly that Al-Qaeda wasn't a structured organisation to which you could apply for membership, in fact the claim was made that it wasn't an organisation as such at all but a very loose association of like-minded people.

The second claim made was that it was extremely unlikely that Osama Bin Laden himself was personally involved in the planning of 9/11 and very likely didn't even know beforehand that it would take place. Quite apart from anything else it is very unlikely that he could access a secure telephone line/internet connection to coordinate international operations.

There is little doubt that 9/11 was used to justify going to war - in fact Bush and Blair both clearly stated that it justified going to war, so you would have to be pretty daft to think that the event wasn't manipulated.

'The Project for the New American Century' was a right-wing think tank which completely dominated George Bush's foreign policy. 10 of the 25 founding member The Project for the New American Century served in George Bush's administration, including arch-hawks Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz.

Long before 9/11 The Project for the New American Century was arguing in favour of global "full-spectrum dominance" by the US - total global military superiority on land, sea, and air.

Long before 9/11 The Project for the New American Century was arguing in favour of attacking Iraq.

9/11 gave George Bush and his friends and colleagues in The Project for the New American Century (all involved in the oil industry btw) the excuse to start wars they had been waiting to start.

So 9/11 gave them the excuse to attack and invade Afghanistan, next they went for something worthwhile - a country with oil, unfortunately the Iraq War unlike Afghanistan didn't go as planned and the policy stalled.

Had Iraq been as easy as Afghanistan the next target would probably have been Iran, the real prize. Certainly during the early stages of the Iraq War when it seemed to be going fairly well there was some sabre-rattling towards Iran by the Bush administration.

After Iran my guess is that it would have been Syria, although there was some sabre-rattling towards Syria too so that could have been first. Anyway whatever way it went the plan was that the whole of the Middle East would be dominated by the US and serve US interests.

However the Iraq War changed all that when it was realised that walking into foreign countries isn't quite the pushover that arrogant and greedy Republican right-wingers might have hoped.

The Project for the New American Century now appears to have become defunct despite its significant funding from the oil and arms industries, the "project" has been abandoned, ironically not very far into the 21st century. I can't even find their website anymore.

Out of the main party leaders Corbyn is the most likely to give an honest appraisal of the reasons for going to war. Certainly more honest than the Tories. Thanks for bringing it up just5minutes.

Carefully ignored the fact that the uk oil would be in Scottish water and everybody except you and perhaps Zulu, agrees it would almost definitely certainly probably be Scottish. But what is international law to you,eh? I did talk in more detail about Israel compared to Argentina, you must have missed that.

jambalaya - Member
...How North Sea oil is to be distributed in the event of Indy would be based upon negotiation as its pragmatically impossible for Scotland todo a Zimbabwe and declare UDI...

We'll see.

There's growing support for it from those who think the SNP is not pushing hard enough. The critical period will be after the Scottish elections. If the SNP clean up like they did this year (unlikely IMO), then the voices will become more strident. The attitude being that the voters will then have spoken, no need for another referendum.

This is because there is considerable distrust of any process in which the UK govt has a hand because so many people believe the postal votes were manipulated in the referendum.

I'd put my money on the Scottish Parliament passing a motion to dissolve the Treaty of Union rather than a UDI, but it comes to much the same.

The SNP are following rather than pushing the movement.

I am interested to see what effect Corbyn will ultimately have on Scotland. At the moment it seems minimal, but surely he is going to be able to attract some of the faithful back. The SNP's moment in the sum may be briefer than they expected, hence a need to move quickly on independence.

Back to Corbyn. In today's news :

[i][b]David Cameron must intervene to press his Saudi counterparts to halt the planned beheading and crucifixion of a protester, Jeremy Corbyn has said.

The Labour leader has also called for the prime minister to terminate the bid of a Ministry of Justice commercial body to sell expertise to Saudi Arabia’s prison service.

Corbyn asked Cameron: “Will you step in to terminate the Ministry of Justice’s bid to provide services to the Saudi prisons system – the very body, I should stress, which will be responsible for carrying out Ali’s execution?”[/b][/i]

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/26/cameron-urged-to-intervene-over-planned-execution-of-saudi-protester ]Cameron urged to intervene over planned execution of Saudi protester[/url]

I note that despite having a close personal relationship with the Saudi despots Tony Blair hasn't yet found the time to express an opinion on the matter.

He found plenty of time to intervene 3 times in the Labour Party leadership debate though.

Perhaps that was one of the reasons why Tony Blair was so determined that Corbyn shouldn't win the election - he knew that Corbyn might upset his murdering despot friends who pay him vast amounts of money for his "advice".

If the SNP clean up like they did this year (unlikely IMO), then the voices will become more strident. The attitude being that the voters will then have spoken, no need for another referendum.

is the price of oil going up?????

Damn Ernie,I am sure Jambalaya was coming along in a second to post that up...or not. I am starting to like jezza more and more.

So, Jeremy now thinks we [u]should[/u] intervene in the internal politics of Arab countries ❓

That's an interesting volte-face.

It's completely consistent. He has long campaigned against injustices in the Middle East and indeed throughout the world.

Which bit of achieving change through peaceful means instead of war don't you understand, my little daft Tory troll ?

Which bit of achieving change through peaceful means instead of war don't you understand

The bit that involves supporting the IRA, Hamas and Hezbollah?

Well make your mind up!! You just said :

That's an interesting volte-face.

And you're now claiming it's nothing of the sort and he's always intervened in the internal politics of Arab countries.

Which one is it, my little point-scoring Tory troll ?

Israel and Lebanon aren't Arab countries...

Israel and Lebanon aren't Arab countries...

Lebanon is what, then ?

Palestine is definitely Arab, as are Palestinians of course, my little petty Tory troll.

Palestine is definitely Arab

Palestine isn't a country 😆

Oh yes it is, as far me and Jeremy Corbyn are concerned. A country under Zionist occupation.

The Lebanese government seems to disagree with you.

http://www.ministryinfo.gov.lb/en/sub/Lebanon/LebaneseConstitution.aspx

Two. Lebanon is Arab in its identity and in its association. It is a founding and active member of the League of Arab States and abides by its pacts and covenants. Lebanon is also a founding and active member of the United Nations Organization and abides by its covenants and by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Government shall embody these principals in all fields and areas without exception.

Some interesting claims about Scotland/SNP from JC on Marr Show today. Particular highlight was claiming that SNP privatised Scotrail...

Maybe he made the mistake of asking Kezia? I was at the same school as her,by time she went it had been a state school for less than 20 years,my parents acted like they had won the lottery when I got in because it was that good. Kezia stayed in the nice area that sent its kids there automatically, yet she described it as an inner city concrete jungle. Pretty mean after they made her head girl dontchathink?

Better than expected on Marr IMO. Ok, the odd bit of BS (inheritance tax nonsense), but controlled, articulate and kept himself in check rather well for a non-spin MP

Judging by the internet chatter, I suspect the false claims made on the Marr show about the SNP have harmed Labour's prospects in Scotland. Hopefully this is misinformation fed to him, and not simply a continuation of the Scottish Labour Party's lies and false claims. If so, he can recover.

I'll keep my fingers crossed that he manages to reintroduce humanity back into the Labour party though. He's probably playing a softly softly agenda. It may be his lack of serious responsibilities in the past may make this a steep learning curve.

His day didn't finish as well as it started

Still good to see the [s]Conviction[/s] compromise.

Odd comments from Corbyn on inheritance tax, calling Osbourne's policy as "a tax break for the richest". What Osbourne has done is cut inheritance tax for those with an estate between £650k and £1m. Does anyone seriously think those people are the "richest" in the UK.

As per @tmh's note above another massive climb down / dose of pragmatism over Tridnet. We won't even discuss it. At least the Labour conference gets the joke that even the discussion is a vote loser,

Ach, I kinda expected it but still sad to see - Corbyn's decided that electoral prospects in England demand the same actions as his predecessor, attacking the SNP instead of working with them and doing a u-turn on independence.

I think Scottish Labour have worked out that he's going to abandon them too - allowing ScotLab members to support independence, making noises about ScotLab being "affiliated" to the Labour Party instead of taking orders form them, etc.

Back to Labour's basic problem - what Labour needs to do to win votes in England is the opposite to what they need to do to win votes in Scotland.

At least the Labour conference gets the joke that even the discussion is a vote loser

Is that why the SNP which opposes Trident replacement won 56 seats in the the general election in Scotland, while Labour, the Tories, and the LibDems, all of which support Trident replacement, got 1 seat each......because opposition to Trident replacement is "a vote loser" ?

There is no doubt that there is greater opposition to Trident replacement in Scotland than in the rest of the UK, the question is why ?

Well you don't to have look far for the answer.

Unlike in the rest of the UK there have been political debates and discussions concerning Trident in Scotland. The largest party opposes its replacement, people have had the opportunity to listen to the arguments in favour and against. Having done so they have come out against by a large margin.

In the rest of the UK there has been no debate. All 3 main parties (and UKIP) are in favour. People in the rest of the UK have not had the opportunity to hear the arguments in favour and against. Unsurprisingly opposition is therefore smaller.

Stifling debate and denying people the possibility of making informed decisions is not good for democracy, a point not lost on right-wingers like yourself, the Tories, blairites, etc.

But the example of Scotland shows that debating Trident is not a vote loser, on the contrary it is clearly a voter winner.

Your premise is complete false. As you well know of course.

Corbyn's decided that electoral prospects in England demand the same actions as his predecessor, attacking the SNP instead of working with them

He is the leader of the Labour Party. His job doesn't involve helping a rival political party, I would expect him to be expelled from the party if he did.

He needs to offer a credible alternative to the SNP to win votes from them.

You do realise that he needs to win votes from the SNP don't you?

ernie_lynch - Member
...He needs to offer a credible alternative to the SNP to win votes from them.

You do realise that he needs to win votes from the SNP don't you?

Well seeing as the SNP has pinched many of Labour's old policies, maybe reclaiming them instead of moving further right might help. Retaining the ability to obliterate millions of ordinary working class people in faraway countries seems at odds with his declarations of the unity of the working classes.

His apparent support for NI to separate from the UK and become part of the the rest of Ireland while opposing Scottish independence is puzzling many.

This popped up on my morning feed:
[img] [/img]

Like this.

I hope the Labour party manages to stop talking in a way that plays into tory hands and feeds speculation that they are against the middle-classes (anti-austerity, robin hood tax, 'against inheritance tax cuts') and starts to use language which more effectively communicates their position.

As a marketeer, I'm getting really sick of it.

As a marketeer, I'm getting really sick of it.

Ironically, I think a lot of people are heartily sick of having politics delivered by marketeers.

Listening to Corbyn interviewed on Five Live this morning, it was really refreshing to listen to a politician actually answer questions, and express his actual views, instead of endlessly repeating the same central office approved soundbites, that they've focus grouped to death over the previous couple of weeks.

We're heartily sick of this...

[img] [/img]

As a marketeer, I'm getting really sick of it.
Ironically, I think a lot of people are heartily sick of having politics delivered by marketeers.

This +100.

Yvette Cooper is a perfect example of this. Never really answering a question or expressing a strong opinion. I couldn't watch her on TV, with her trained hand gestures and facial expressions. As she has been told this would express sincerity and openness.

Absolute bullshit.

Totally agree binners - but currently they are supporting tory marketing, buy repeating their phrases.
There's no need to make it sound rehearsed, spun and bulleted, but there is a need to communicate effectively without falling into traps.

In the video he released last night, he says "an alternative to Austerity", then went on to say "no need for tax credit cuts taking over £1200 a year from the poorest families". The latter is the crux (along with a whole lot of other things) making the former redundant.

When he then says "cutting inheritance tax which broadly helps the wealthy" he's missing the fact that everyone hates inheritance tax - especially hard workers who have saved all their lives who would be exactly his target audience. It's a stealth tax that makes everyone feel cheated.

So you have to reword it so that people realise the aims of what you're trying to do and also so that the press can't simply lead with "Corbyn against inheritance tax cuts".

Looks right now like Trident is Labours equivalent of the Tories EU. If Corbyn is going to get pushed around that much by his own party he's in trouble, as the electorate will see him as weak.

Whether you like marketing or not, it is essential for Labour to provide a unified front, mixed messages and jocking for position in the public eye aren't smart.

From the bbc live feed

whilst he has spent a lifetime opposing the UK's nuclear weapons, he knows plenty of his colleagues are fully committed to them. But the very fact it is even being debated tells you how very, very different this conference, and Labour, now is.

That sounds interesting.

If Corbyn is going to get pushed around that much by his own party he's in trouble

Well this comes down to governing by consensus instead of autocracy, doens't it? It's a bit ridiculous to try and operate in a democratic institution by being autocratic. The party should represent the views of the majority of its members, and the views of its MPs who're representing their constituents. The alternative is the Blair approach - you really advocating that?

His apparent support for NI to separate from the UK and become part of the the rest of Ireland while opposing Scottish independence is puzzling many.

Well, both situations are different, so taking each as a complex issue rather than simply sticking to a simplisitc notion would seem to be sensible, no?

The membership of both main parties have been treated with utter contempt for decades now, in favour of rule by a cabal of the 'Political Caste' who consider themselves to be on some kind of higher level than everyone else, take decisions without consultation, totally ignoring facts that are inconvenient, and advice that contradicts their own views, or motives.

The absolute epitome of this was Blair taking us into Iraq.

Heres an interesting article about party democracy, and the lack of respect for it, that some Blairites could do with reading

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/27/jeremy-corbyn-labour-conference ]Corbyn won. Handle it better.[/url]

epicyclo - Member

Retaining the ability to obliterate millions of ordinary working class people in faraway countries seems at odds with his declarations of the unity of the working classes.

That silly and deliberately disingenuous comment could have come straight out of one of ninfan's posts, I doubt that even jambalaya would make such as crass comment.

I would have expected better from you epicyclo, I obviously overestimated you. Still, I've learnt something already today - as they say, everyday is a school day.

Time to take your posts less seriously I reckon 🙂

When he then says "cutting inheritance tax which broadly helps the wealthy" he's missing the fact that everyone hates inheritance tax - especially hard workers who have saved all their lives who would be exactly his target audience. It's a stealth tax that makes everyone feel cheated

1. Some folk hate all tax not everyone does though
2. How does one save hard to have over 325k in assets at death? It suggests a very healthy income in the first place- quite possibly a southern thing due to massive house price gains but that was hardly hard work as they did nothing to get it from the housing bubble.
3.Stealth would suggest it goes unnoticed
4. I dont feel cheated by it so stop everyone as you dont speak for us all anymore than I do.

I feel cheated that poor people are getting hammered whilst the bette roff are getting the tax break

I don't understand why the unions think that Trident is about jobs.
£100 billion vs max 10,000 jobs
That's 10 million per worker!

Just listened to John McDonnell's speech.

Have to say - that was spot-on.

I don't understand why the unions think that Trident is about jobs.

From a composite resolution on economic policy passed two years ago at the Trades Union Congress :

[i]Public finances can also be improved by addressing tax avoidance and scrapping the replacement of Trident. Money saved by ending our nuclear weapons system could be used to sustain the process of defence diversification, vital to our manufacturing future.[/i]

[quote=AlexSimon said]I don't understand why the unions think that Trident is about jobs.
£100 billion vs max 10,000 jobs
That's 10 million per worker!

£100 billion over 35 years.