Forum House of Commons vote on air strikes in Syria – which way will you vote?

@jamba – ninfan does not mention Bataclan. You are the only one here who claims Mr Benn travelled in time and gave his first interview BEFORE Bataclan. 100% jamba.

Paris attacks were on 13th November, beginning at gone nine at night – IOS interview was published on Sunday 14th November, it’s impossible for any of us to know which of those comments were made before or after the attack or its seriousness were known, as its usual for such an interview to be done in advance.

The first captured web version of the interview is at 22.37 on the evening of the fourteenth. I don’t have a paper copy of the newspaper to compare and see if the Paris comments were added as additional comment afterwards, but it would seem literally remarkable if the interview was completed and taken to print in the very few hours between the attack and the publication of the Sunday paper the next morning.

Your detective work is not necessary since in his interview he specifically refers to Bataclan. The sequence of events is clearly
1 Bataclan
2 Benn against bombing
3 Benn for bombing

“In the previous interview, given to the Independent on Sunday, Mr Benn had said the Paris attacks the previous Friday meant it was “even more important that we bring the Syrian civil war to an end” before considering strikes on Isis.”

As I already pointed out, you (and I) don’t know the chronology of interviews, comments or when they were added.

It’s likely that they interviewed earlier in the week, and then asked if he had any further comment in the aftermath of the attacks, it’s also possible that the comments including reference to The Paris attacks were added to the initial interview later. My experience of Sunday newspapers is that the bulk of the work is done during the week,

Benns interview was perfectly clear in mentioning both a proper plan and UN approval in order to give support to any attacks, both of those prerequisites were fulfilled in the intervening two weeks before the vote and speech.

Even you admit this, but have decided to play Angels on pinheads by pretending that Benn did not “emphasise” UN involvement enough in the third hand report of a conversation neither of us were present at, so can’t know how much weight he placed on it.

Of course, it’s interesting how much faith you place in the entire accuracy of a newspaper report regards Benn, whilst at the same time attacking newspapers for their innacurate analysis of anything regarding Corbyn

That’s a lot of words to obscure the essential point that Benn referred to the Paris attacks in his interview.

Of course the Indie could have made the whole thing up, or maybe by “Paris attacks” he actually meant the poorly tummy he got after eating a dodgy steak tartare. Anything is possible if it has to be shoe-horned into your pre-formed conclusions.

Benns interview was perfectly clear in mentioning both a proper plan and UN approval in order to give support to any attacks

The later just given as a sentence with no quote and to be very clear – hell you even quoted it- that was to consider supporting it.

He only got one of those for his remarkably quick – though as jamby wisely notes immensely principled and honourable not to mention laudable and democratic- volte face

From the BBC

Analysis by Laura Kuenssberg

Don’t forget, Jeremy Corbyn built his own career by being a serial rebel, voting against his party leader again and again and again.
For him to call for message discipline from the outset might have seemed ludicrous. And given the lack of support he had among Labour MPs, he was determined to try to build a team from all parts of the party to give him credibility in Westminster.
So now, just four months on, if he embarks on dramatic changes, sacks those who have publicly disagreed with him, like the shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn, there’s a danger it looks like when his own authority is challenged he just can’t take it.

I’d much prefer this thread if it had a “jambalaya only” filter. Congrats on getting through the 1000 posts of echo chamber handwringing barrier, y’all.

Don’t forget, Jeremy Corbyn built his own career by being a serial rebel, voting against his party leader again and again and again.

The obvious difference being, duuuh, that Corbyn was never a shadow cabinet member.

Michael Dugher sacked from the shadow cabinet has received many commendations from other senior members of the shadow cabinet including Andy Bunham. Here is what Dugher had to say about Stop the War

I think it might be quite useful if [Corbyn] went along to [the Stop the War Coalition’s Christmas event] because he can have a word with them as their former chairman and say to them ‘stop the intimidation, stop the abuse and stop the talk of deselections and going after Labour MPs who voted in a way they didn’t approve of’ … What you’ve got to remember about a lot of these people in Stop the War is that they think the wrong people won the cold war. To say I might have a slightly world view is an understatement. Communism in a modern setting doesn’t have a lot of appeal to me

Nope, I still ain’t going to vote Labour as they ain’t no good to me anymore whether they fighting the war or not. I ain’t voting for the advocates of EU ZM superstate regardless of who they are. 🙄

Not even Benn can win my vote …

Euro-skeptic? I am more like ZM-skeptic 😆

Vote out of EU zombie maggots'(ZM) grips before it’s too late.

Jambalaya now writing in defence of a close ally of Gordon Brown…. 😀

kimbers – Member
Jambalaya now writing in defence of a close ally of Gordon Brown….

Or Labour supporters (not referring to Jambalaya) are glad or as they think they are in the headline news again to improve on their profile … now by saying that democracy prevails in Labour in the form of Benn and JC(not Jesus Christ). 😆

thanks jamby i was not certain why he sacked him now i know why
It only needed terrorist sympathiser in that but I suppose communism will do for the tabloid slur.

@chewk – genuinely curious – what’s your political ideology/stance? If that’s too open for a public forum you need not reply…I’m asking cos of the reference you made to positivists a while back….

obviously, best not bomb this place, it being in Syria and all.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/06/inside-isis-terrorism-workshops-video-shows-raqqa-research-centre

jambalaya

our support is there if required and the fact we are not being called upon to deploy our weaponry is a signal that Daesh have gone to ground
If there is an inverse relationship between the number of times the UK’s support is called upon and the strength of ISIL, then here’s some great news: a Freedom of Information request has established that precisely zero Islamic State fighters have been killed by Brimstone missiles – you know, the ones that were absolutely essentially to destroying IS. See p.11 of this week’s Private Eye.