Jeremy Corbyn

Well that just goes to show how useless these maps I'm finding are then.
Apologies

After what was undoubtedly relentless googling big_n_daft

you are totally unable to explain what the Rotherham abuse scandal has it to do with the Corbyn, so you completely abandon that smear and dig up some dirt involving Islington hoping that will stick to Corbyn !

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/08/31/corbyns-silence-over-child-abuse-in-islington-is-typical-of-how-he-picks-and-chooses-his-causes/

but you clearly think the allegations about what happened in Islington are fabricated and that Corbyn is and forever will be unconnected by act or omission

so as I said, move along, nothing to see here......

I have no idea what size you are but your username is at least part true for certain

I look forward to your summary executions,group show trials and firing squads, I presume I am on your "list"

The link explains why there is a connection between Rotherham and Islington, did you read it?

Yes, that and a whole lot of other links that tell a very different tale.

There is a huge difference between the two but that really isn't the point is it?

Err - yes, that is precisely the point. It's why repeating tittle tattle about pigs heads is no big deal, whereas accusing people of complicity in child abuse is a very big deal.

but please don't try and imply that i don't consider child abuse a serious issue because it was pretty obvious that it was not what I was saying.

That's exactly what you said. If you didn't mean it, maybe you shouldn't have been in such a rush to score a cheap point, "fella".

Yes, that and a whole lot of other links that tell a very different tale.

all the Islington allegations are made up and he ignored a loon

or

they aren't made up and Corbyn did lots to bring people to justice

or

????

don't worry there's nothing to see here, move along.....

Wow you really have missed the point haven't you. Never mind. (Well scored on the addition of "fella" btw)

Wow you really have missed the point haven't you.

You can't have it both ways. Either child abuse is as trivial as pigs heads, and your criticism is consistent, or one is much worse than the other, and your criticism is unfounded. You choose.

big_n_daft - Member

I look forward to your summary executions,group show trials and firing squads, I presume I am on your "list"

Well I have no idea who you are, I doubt you're very important, so no, you're probably not on the "list".

And no of course I didn't read your link. Why on earth would I read a link provided by a right-winger who wants to engage in smearing political opponents? ffs

If a more credible person offered me a link which provided important information about Corbyn I would be happy to read it.

Now you have lost me a bit, just to clarify my point: as far as can see from you posts you have repeatedly made reference to an alleged story about the pm in his past, fair enough not really bothered in fact I wouldn't be suprised. Another poster makes statement repeatedly about alleged child abuse in an attempt to imply an issue with jeremy Corbyn, this is a far more serious issue and should obviously be treated so. BUT my point is that it is hypocritical to take issue with a poster for doing something that you do yourself or are you denying that you have implyed more than once that the pm has sex with dead animals?

BUT my point is that it is hypocritical to take issue with a poster for doing something that you do yourself or are you denying that you have implyed more than once that the pm has sex with dead animals?

It would be hypocritical if fhere was any equivalence between the pigs thing and child abuse. So - in your mind - am I a hypocrite, or not?

At no point have I suggested they are but you seem to want to continue down that track so fair enough you win. Night night.

Well I have no idea who you are, I doubt you're very important, so no, you're probably not on the "list".

phew...

so there is a list then 😉

Child abuse is the most appalling crime, the fact that it wasn't investigated thoroughly in the past is a cause of national disgrace. The fact it could take place in Rotherham and Oxford on such a scale in currently times and be ignored is off the scale.

The "Westminster peopophile / murder ring" is rapidly being confirmed as a fabrication with vulnerable abuse victims being coached into naming famous people (eg comment on Panormama that one victim thought it was a "joke" he was pushed into naming Leon Brittan). Here you have journalist who's living is based on exposing "the establishment" accompanying an abuse victim to the police, a journalist not his solicitor. A journalist who made no effort to check the truth easily checked murder claims. A Labour counsellor who has previously been convicted and jailed for fraud being a key source of "evidence" against Conservative government figures (no grudge there eh ?) you have the police staying publically there is not "shred of evidence" of any of the three alleged murders

Then on top of all this we have Tom Watson sticking his oar in on a matter which has nothing to do with his constituency or his party role. Watson knew there where serious doubts about the allegations, he knew Leon Brittan had been interviewed by the police about the 40 year old rape allegation and that there was no evidence and serious doubts about the report but he chose to write to the police insisting Brittan be arrested and requestioned. He did this as he knew that the press would then name Brittan as "being arrested in connection with a sex offence". Pure press manipulation by Watson.

@DrJ I'm not smearing Corbyn I am posting the fact that a fellow Labour Party member in Islington has heavily criticised Corbyn for not campaigning on behalf of a constituency member in a child abuse allegation. He used the phrase "selective"

@outofbreath the obvious thing for the Tories to do is to move into the middle ground vacated by Labour, they can do this as well as pursue their manifesto. Why go further right and give other parties the room to capture the middle ground ?

Yup.

@DrJ @big_n_daft posted the story I had previously read, I'll take it you read that before you posted that I was committing a "unsubstantiated slur" or perhaps you didn't, inconvenient factual source. Just as the involvement of left wing Islington and Rotherham councils in ignoring child abuse is a very inconvenient truth for Corbyn, Watson and the broader Labour Party

Then on top of all this we have Tom Watson sticking his oar in on a matter which has nothing to do with his constituency or his party role. Watson knew there where serious doubts about the allegations, he knew Leon Brittan had been interviewed by the police about the 40 year old rape allegation and that there was no evidence and serious doubts about the report but he chose to write to the police insisting Brittan be arrested and requestioned. He did this as he knew that the press would then name Brittan as "being arrested in connection with a sex offence". Pure press manipulation by Watson.

I thought you were a fan of his.

Just as the involvement of left wing Islington and Rotherham councils in ignoring child abuse is a very inconvenient truth for Corbyn, Watson and the broader Labour Party

Not really. Only the most complete halfwit would associate condoning of child abuse with a political orientation, be it of the left or right.

I am posting the fact that a fellow Labour Party member in Islington has heavily criticised Corbyn for not campaigning on behalf of a constituency member in a child abuse allegation. He used the phrase "selective"

sorry, because I posted the link, it's been totally discreditted and won't be read by Corbynites

And no of course I didn't read your link. Why on earth would I read a link provided by a right-winger who wants to engage in smearing political opponents? ffs

the good news is DrJ is going to link to other sources that totally discredit the LabourUncut article

, that and a whole lot of other links that tell a very different tale.

so there is nothing to see here, move along.......

Yes, even I'm beginning to doubt anything fishy went on...

This all seems perfectly reasonable:

[url= http://www.****/news/article-3265742/Jimmy-Savile-Prince-Charles-close-friendship-sex-abuse-bishop-Peter-Ball.html ]Jimmy Savile and Prince Charles' very close friendship with sex abuse Bishop Peter Ball[/url]

Then on top of all this we have Tom Watson sticking his oar in on a matter which has nothing to do with his constituency or his party role. Watson knew there where serious doubts about the allegations, he knew Leon Brittan had been interviewed by the police about the 40 year old rape allegation and that there was no evidence and serious doubts about the report but he chose to write to the police insisting Brittan be arrested and requestioned. He did this as he knew that the press would then name Brittan as "being arrested in connection with a sex offence". Pure press manipulation by Watson.

@DrJ I'm not smearing Corbyn I am posting the fact that a fellow Labour Party member in Islington has heavily criticised Corbyn for not campaigning on behalf of a constituency member in a child abuse allegation. He used the phrase "selective"

It is interesting how the benefit of the doubt and the attacks is directly linked to your personal politics.
As l always your moral fortitude is matched only by your intellectual rigour.

PS

Child abuse is the most appalling crime, the fact that it wasn't investigated thoroughly in the past is a cause of national disgrace.

Indeed it is not stop trying to make cheap political points using this to discredit the "tired old man " corbyn

Just as the involvement of left wing Islington and Rotherham councils in ignoring child abuse is a very inconvenient truth for Corbyn, Watson and the broader Labour Party

FFS you really are beyond parody as you try to smear left wingers as people who ignore child abuse

no barrel so low Jamby wont scrape it whilst lecturing others on why not to do it

Don't feed the troll JY.

Jamba is getting added to my list of people on here who's posts I'm not even going to bother reading. It's only got him and chewkw on it, so he's doing well.

Straight talking, honest politics

So, this commitment to a balanced budget?

We are not deficit deniers....We accept we are going to have to live within our means and we always will do — full stop....we will vote for Osborne's charter....

....er, sorry, didn't mean that. Can we just talk about the current balance...er, sorry, forget that, we a going to vote against the charter

Old John, is struggling with this straight talking bit, isn't he? Still he is new to the job and its early days. 😉

[s]Mike Bassett[/s]Jeremy Corbyn [s]England Manager[/s] Labour Leader

Changing your mind can be part of straight-talking honest politics. But you'll never pass up the opportunity to make a dig at any left-wing politicians, despite definitely not being a Tory.

Check the topic of the thread grum and today's news?

There's changing your mind and there is flip-flopping. Still early days.....and "full stop" is open to mis-interpretation isn't it?

and FWIW, from page 1 of the nasty party thread

haven't watched any of this - but May's headlines re immigration made me shudder.

It's all right, apparently he (McDonnell) has "changed tactics, not policy".

With this kind of "new politics straight talking" it's a wonder that anyone's confused what Labour do / don't stand for... it's crystal clear isn't it.. although it may well change again when the wind changes direction.

The people who already dislike them will see it as a u-turn.
The people who already like them will see it as perfectly logical.

THat is all this thread is and a circle jerk for the Tories

Personally I dont think he is doing that well so far but no one at all expected them to win over just 5 minutes , THM or Jamby so why they keep posting that they are disappointed is lost on me

Quote from last nights Labour party meeting:

Ian Austin, once an aide to Gordon Brown and now MP for Dudley North, said it was time Corbyn started acting like a leader of the opposition and not like a student union president.

Labour party is going to tear itself apart, when a strong leader was needed to recover from the Milliband fiasco they have a completely wet one. Hague wrote a good piece in the Telegraph why allowing too much conversation in a party is a bad thing and it seems the Labour party no only failed to read it, but are in open war between the left and right sides of the party.

This might has been posted earlier on the threat but JC's failure to condemn the IRA here [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02z3x45 ]Radio 5 live interview[/url] is somewhat farcical.

Hague wrote a good piece in the Telegraph why allowing too much conversation in a party is a bad thing and it seems the Labour party no only failed to read it, but are in open war between the left and right sides of the party.

Leadership tips from William Hague: I wonder how much attention we should pay?

The people who already dislike them will see it as a u-turn.
The people who already like them will see it as perfectly logical.

But the people who matter are floating voters in marginal seats. We only need to concern ourselves with what they think. (...and they might have forgotten in 4 years time.)

I'd have thought this would play well in the Scottish Elections which are coming up next.

[quote=outofbreath ]I'd have thought this would play well in the Scottish Elections which are coming up next.Aye - and then he can change his mind again after the Scottish elections and before the next Uk General election.

The election is another 5 years away. Does anyone really think people will remember this when that comes round? In the first few weeks of Cameron's govt he lost a cabinet minister to the expenses scandal. Blair had the Ecclestone scandal. I don't remember them ever being brought up in an election campaign. If you're going to screw up, better to do it now than in four years time. As for labour MPs, they need to get a grip and look at how they can help the party instead of damaging it by feeding the press with all manner of tittle tattle.

But the people who matter are floating voters in marginal seats

So the key question is - are those the ones that will snap up the discounted Lloyds shares, or are they the ones shafted by tax credit cuts?

Aye - and then he can change his mind again after the Scottish elections and before the next Uk General election.

That's democracy. Politicians don't make the rules. (Actually, I suppose they do.)

Why waste time on Lloyds - prioritisation on tickets up to £1k. Thanks, but why bother?

(At least he bought a smile to the (over-excited) Dan Hodges in the Torygraph today)

Leadership tips from William Hague: I wonder how much attention we should pay?

Well as Hague is someone who has been there and seems open and honest about his mistakes, then yes you should pay attention. Hague wasn't talking about policies he knows his and JC are never going to meet, in the article he was solely talking about party leadership and internal party debate when setting policy.

So the key question is - are those the ones that will snap up the discounted Lloyds shares, or are they the ones shafted by tax credit cuts?

Not inconceivable that they could be both at the same time.

yes Hague was really trying to hep writting about Corbyn in the torygraph 😆

Half the advice from the labour party is not to help him never mind a Tory grandee

Corbyn’s rise is a symptom of the Left’s slow drift into irrelevance
Like a tribe lost in the desert, without a coherent vision for the 21st century, Labour is now stumbling towards a mirage

that was the title of the previous article from helpful Hague and , being honest, no one can believe he was just trying to be helpful as no one is that stupid or naive.

Any comment on the Tories changing their mind about helping out in Saudi prisons or is this thread just for digs at Labour rather than actual debate

Any chance of saying they did this as Corbyn raised it ?

Any comment on the Tories changing their mind about helping out in Saudi prisons or is this thread just for digs at Labour rather than actual debate

Nobody on the left is going to be crowing about that, because it means they have to accept that the dreaded Gove was not just in the right, but a pants wettingly outstanding leading light in taking on the FCO and making Cameron shift govt policy on the issue.

Any chance of saying they did this as Corbyn raised it ?

Rumours going around that Gove actually briefed Corbyn on it

But the people who matter are floating voters in marginal seats. We only need to concern ourselves with what they think.

Says who......the media/tory press?

Personally I think the people who matter are the "definitely-not-Tory-but-can't-be-arsed-anymore" voters.

The people who were given the rather limited choice of voting for Tories in the Conservative Party or Tories in the Labour Party, and more recently, Tories in the LibDem Party, despite definitely not being Tories themselves.

Personally I think the people who matter are the "definitely-not-Tory-but-can't-be-arsed-anymore" voters.

If they couldn't be arsed to vote last time (when there was only twenty four hours to save the NHS) what makes you think they will be arsed to vote next time?

The thing about people who can't be arsed to vote is that they, well, can't be arsed to vote...

(you might want to bear in mind that voter turnout in marginal seats is already higher than safe seats)

so you will comment but only to make Gove the new Dan the man Hannan
.

Thanks for that valuable contribution ninfan

so you will comment but only to make Gove the new Dan the man Hannan

Hey, its not me writing the Guardian editorial:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/13/gove-emerges-as-human-rights-hero-over-bid-to-scrap-saudi-prisons-deal

Personally I think the people who matter are the "definitely-not-Tory-but-can't-be-arsed-anymore" voters.[qPersonally I think the people who matter are the "definitely-not-Tory-but-can't-be-arsed-anymore" voters.

Yes, I apologise for ommiting them. Have a listen to R4 more or less on this topic.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p032804x