Jesus Fucking Christ, he sounds like a madder, more malign version of my father-in-law, who LITERALLY (I do not joke) believes in a Flat Earth,
If you take my father-in-law outside, he will point to the moon, and sombrely say: "See that? - That's FAKE. The Americans have FAKED the moon"
He's gone from believing the moon landings were fake, to believing the moon ITSELF is fake. I think it is a special kind of progressive pathology. And Corbyn is far down this path, which explains his tragic inability to see why his endless Jew-baiting might be seen as anti-Semitic.
Chris [Williamson] also - rightly - argued that not once did Jeremy Corbyn vote against the party as a backbencher. Rather he voted with the party against the direction New Labour imposed on the party.
I...wut?...eh? WTFF?
What a fucking cretin
What about all the times Corbyn voted against Kinnock. Organised against Kinnock as secretary of Benn's 1988 "chicken coup". All the times he voted against John Smith. All before New Laboir was invented. Williamson knows wjat he is saying is bullshit. But he also knows most of the Kali Ma have little knowledge of Labour pre-Corbyn other than the lies posted on social media. So he lies to them knowing they are stupid.
What a fucking cretin Williamson is.
vanilla messaged you.
All being well your piece is going up overnight.
Really look forward to reading it
I spent a happy hour by the pool writing it. There are plenty of Tory leaning contributors who provide me with fascinating and valuable insight from inside that party. There's a few Labour leaning contributors who do the same from our side. Happy to contribute longer pieces if people want to read them...
I read your posts with great interest and understanding. We may not be on the same political page but we may find more unites us than divides us as Joe cox said
Exactly how is Aung San Suu Kyi doing any worse than Henry Kissinger (Cambodia bombing) or Barack Obama (no peace at all, plus drones)?
Neither was stripped. The prize is generally ludicrous. Plus one can hardly blame the Burmese for wanting a Muslim-free country, given their geolocation.
Seriously. Through the method of child murder and rape?
You can fuck right off.
Come now, if there's one sure way to put the stopper on Muslim extremism it's to dismember their kids and chuck them into their burning homes.
Scallops are a disgusting French invention. After Brexit it will be a return to winkles and jellied eels. Those found eating scallops (or scollops) will be driven into the mouth of the channel tunnel at the end of a pike.
That’s a very fishy strategy. One might carp about your approach. I suppose everything has its plaice, but this just has no sole.
Nobel Committee say Aungi San Suu Kyi cannot be stripped of her nobel peace prize
You could not make that up
I don't think its ever been done. And she earned it when she got it however disgracefully she is behaving now. She really needs to be indicted. She is, after all, the democratically elected leader of the country responsible for the genocide.
Proof that you can be both a victim and an oppressor. Curious - and sad - how someone who showed so much moral courage for much of her life has had this blindspot to atrocities performed by her own side. Why did she not speak out?
Because she doesn't care about the Rohingya. She doesn't view them as her people.
Exactly how is Aung San Suu Kyi doing any worse than Henry Kissinger (Cambodia bombing) or Barack Obama (no peace at all, plus drones)?
Neither was stripped. The prize is generally ludicrous. Plus one can hardly blame the Burmese for wanting a Muslim-free country, given their geolocation.
Jesus, Sean. The Rohingya were a peaceful group who have been subject to genocide.
There is no justification at all for what has happened to them. It is a terrible crime and it is very very sad that someone who seemed to stand for democracy and liberty has presided over and not spoken out against such evil behaviour.
Exactly how is Aung San Suu Kyi doing any worse than Henry Kissinger (Cambodia bombing) or Barack Obama (no peace at all, plus drones)?
Neither was stripped. The prize is generally ludicrous. Plus one can hardly blame the Burmese for wanting a Muslim-free country, given their geolocation.
Seriously. Through the method of child murder and rape?
You can fuck right off.
Just someone who voted conservative approving of the slaughter of Muslims, don't forget though Corbyn supporters are a cult because somebody claimed that New Labour values aren't representative of Labour values so Corbyn didn't rebel, let's keep some sense of perspective and concentrate on the bigger threat...
Given you lot think the bigger threat is the MSM, Israel, and the Rothschilds, all I see is a pot and an antisemitic kettle.
Hey!
I was agreeing with you!
We have to ally up with the likes of Bannon to take on the left who are the real threat, if we have to sacrifice the Muslims on the way then so be it I guess. What is a seemingly rise tide of hatred against a minority designed to win votes when we have to stop 'the communists'?
JRM's assertion is also somewhat absurd. What matters is how easily you can find alternative export markets. I suspect, and I could be wrong, that there are other countries who would buy Irish beef.
Just skimming through he videos and reports mentioned on this thread:
- The Leader of the Opposition on video, bonkers about NATO and the Warsaw Pact
- Alex Salmond crowd-funding to sue his own party, whilst being investigated by the police, leaving the SNP divided. (Why divided. exactly? Are allegations of sexual harassment now a test of party loyalities?)
- The poster-boy of the Conservative right being bonkers about Ireland
- Chris Williamson MP... well, to be fair, no-one expects him to say anything sane
Exactly how is Aung San Suu Kyi doing any worse than Henry Kissinger (Cambodia bombing) or Barack Obama (no peace at all, plus drones)?
Neither was stripped. The prize is generally ludicrous. Plus one can hardly blame the Burmese for wanting a Muslim-free country, given their geolocation.
Seriously. Through the method of child murder and rape?
You can fuck right off.
Just someone who voted conservative approving of the slaughter of Muslims, don't forget though Corbyn supporters are a cult because somebody claimed that New Labour values aren't representative of Labour values so Corbyn didn't rebel, let's keep some sense of perspective and concentrate on the bigger threat...
Scallops are a disgusting French invention. After Brexit it will be a return to winkles and jellied eels. Those found eating scallops (or scollops) will be driven into the mouth of the channel tunnel at the end of a pike.
That’s a very fishy strategy. One might carp about your approach. I suppose everything has its plaice, but this just has no sole.
Just skiming through he videos and reports mentioned on this thread:
- The Leader of the Opposition on video, bonkers about NATO and the Warsaw Pact
- Alex Salmond crowd-funding to sue his own party, whilst being investigated by the police, leaving the SNP divided. (Why divided. exactly? Are allegations of sexual harassment now a test of party loyalities?)
- The poster-boy of the Conservative right being bonkers about Ireland
- Chris Williamson MP... well, to be fair, no-one expects him to say anything sane
Have I missed anything even more loony?
Definitly need to turn the country off, then on again.
Just skiming through he videos and reports mentioned on this thread:
- The Leader of the Opposition on video, bonkers about NATO and the Warsaw Pact
- Alex Salmond crowd-funding to sue his own party, whilst being investigated by the police, leaving the SNP divided. (Why divided. exactly? Are allegations of sexual harassment now a test of party loyalities?)
- The poster-boy of the Conservative right being bonkers about Ireland
- Chris Williamson MP... well, to be fair, no-one expects him to say anything sane
Have I missed anything even more loony?
Definitly need to turn the country off, then on again.
Could do a complete reset back to Cameron and Clegg
Just skimming through he videos and reports mentioned on this thread:
- The Leader of the Opposition on video, bonkers about NATO and the Warsaw Pact
- Alex Salmond crowd-funding to sue his own party, whilst being investigated by the police, leaving the SNP divided. (Why divided. exactly? Are allegations of sexual harassment now a test of party loyalities?)
- The poster-boy of the Conservative right being bonkers about Ireland
- Chris Williamson MP... well, to be fair, no-one expects him to say anything sane
Have I missed anything even more loony?
Well, @SeanT has just compared the Rohingya to German Nazis.......
The RMT have severely buggered up my plans for Saturday!
I had hoped this weekend to do either of the Saturday-only routes from Sheffield to Cleethorpes via Brigg or from Stockport to Stalybridge, but there's a strike by drivers on Northern Rail, not only this Saturday (1st), but the next FOUR Saturdays as well! Judging from the train status websites showing what happened last Saturday (when these strikes started), my chances of doing either train are rather non-existent...
Exactly how is Aung San Suu Kyi doing any worse than Henry Kissinger (Cambodia bombing) or Barack Obama (no peace at all, plus drones)?
Neither was stripped. The prize is generally ludicrous. Plus one can hardly blame the Burmese for wanting a Muslim-free country, given their geolocation.
Seriously. Through the method of child murder and rape?
You can fuck right off.
Just someone who voted conservative approving of the slaughter of Muslims, don't forget though Corbyn supporters are a cult because somebody claimed that New Labour values aren't representative of Labour values so Corbyn didn't rebel, let's keep some sense of perspective and concentrate on the bigger threat...
"The Bravest and Finest Labour Leader ever". Its straight out of the North Korea guide to leader worship
Using the word cult as a dimissive insult, fine.
Genuinely believing Corbyn supporters are a cult, delusional.
Hero worship, fanboy or plenty of other derogatory terms, I'd accept crazy for some of them on the basis we don't actually mean mentally ill but act strangely. Cult is not actually an accurate description though. I imagine most people who are experts on cults would completely disagree with you.
There are lots of Corbyn supporters so you could pick out crazy people, idiots, the delusional as well as normal people, intelligent and the very grounded in reality. As a group though, or even just the majority of them the word cult would not accurately apply than it would to centrists, right wingers or any other political train of thought which also contain lots of all kinds of people (the crazy, the sane etc.)
The RMT have severely buggered up my plans for Saturday!
I had hoped this weekend to do either of the Saturday-only routes from Sheffield to Cleethorpes via Brigg or from Stockport to Stalybridge, but there's a strike by drivers on Northern Rail, not only this Saturday (1st), but the next FOUR Saturdays as well! Judging from the train status websites showing what happened last Saturday (when these strikes started), my chances of doing either train are rather non-existant...
Bloody RMT!
(and relax....)
Sorry to hear that Sunil. Do you know if it is just Northern Rail affected?
Exactly how is Aung San Suu Kyi doing any worse than Henry Kissinger (Cambodia bombing) or Barack Obama (no peace at all, plus drones)?
Neither was stripped. The prize is generally ludicrous. Plus one can hardly blame the Burmese for wanting a Muslim-free country, given their geolocation.
Seriously. Through the method of child murder and rape?
You can fuck right off.
Just someone who voted conservative approving of the slaughter of Muslims, don't forget though Corbyn supporters are a cult because somebody claimed that New Labour values aren't representative of Labour values so Corbyn didn't rebel, let's keep some sense of perspective and concentrate on the bigger threat...
"The Bravest and Finest Labour Leader ever". Its straight out of the North Korea guide to leader worship
Using the word cult as a dimissive insult, fine.
Genuinely believing Corbyn supporters are a cult, delusional.
Hero worship, fanboy or plenty of other derogatory terms, I'd accept crazy for some of them on the basis we don't actually mean mentally ill but act strangely. Cult is not actually an accurate description though. I imagine most people who are experts on cults would completely disagree with you.
There are lots of Corbyn supporters so you could pick out crazy people, idiots, the delusional as well as normal people, intelligent and the very grounded in reality. As a group though, or even just the majority of them the word cult would not accurately apply than it would to centrists, right wingers or any other political train of thought which also contain lots of all kinds of people (the crazy, the sane etc.)
No no no. Most Corbyn supporters are not cultists. People like you are cultists. Because you will defend absolutely anything in your efforts to defend the man. I have several close political friends who joined the party because of Jeremy's leadership- and that's great. I personally campaigned for the man and got supporters to join the party to have a vote. They aren't cultists either. Their eyes are open...
The RMT have severely buggered up my plans for Saturday!
I had hoped this weekend to do either of the Saturday-only routes from Sheffield to Cleethorpes via Brigg or from Stockport to Stalybridge, but there's a strike by drivers on Northern Rail, not only this Saturday (1st), but the next FOUR Saturdays as well! Judging from the train status websites showing what happened last Saturday (when these strikes started), my chances of doing either train are rather non-existant...
Bloody RMT!
(and relax....)
Sorry to hear that Sunil. Do you know if it is just Northern Rail affected?
Nobel Committee say Aungi San Suu Kyi cannot be stripped of her nobel peace prize
You could not make that up
I don't think its ever been done. And she earned it when she got it however disgracefully she is behaving now. She really needs to be indicted. She is, after all, the democratically elected leader of the country responsible for the genocide.
Proof that you can be both a victim and an oppressor. Curious - and sad - how someone who showed so much moral courage for much of her life has had this blindspot to atrocities performed by her own side. Why did she not speak out?
Because she doesn't care about the Rohingya. She doesn't view them as her people.
Exactly how is Aung San Suu Kyi doing any worse than Henry Kissinger (Cambodia bombing) or Barack Obama (no peace at all, plus drones)?
Neither was stripped. The prize is generally ludicrous. Plus one can hardly blame the Burmese for wanting a Muslim-free country, given their geolocation.
Jesus, Sean. The Rohingya were a peaceful group who have been subject to genocide.
There is no justification at all for what has happened to them. It is a terrible crime and it is very very sad that someone who seemed to stand for democracy and liberty has presided over and not spoken out against such evil behaviour.
Believing in a peaceful Islamist sect in 2018 is like believing in a peaceful nationalist German group in late 1930s Germany. One would love to believe they exist. I do not; they do not.
The Rohingya have been brutalised, tortured, raped and slaughtered. It has been awful and hideous, and deeply depressing. Trouble is, I sincerely believe they would do exactly the same to Hindus and Buddhist, were the numbers reversed.
None of what you say justifies what has happened to innocent men, women and children nor Aung San Suu Kyi’s silence in the face of what you describe as “hideous” behaviour, for which she is being rightly criticised.
The RMT have severely buggered up my plans for Saturday!
I had hoped this weekend to do either of the Saturday-only routes from Sheffield to Cleethorpes via Brigg or from Stockport to Stalybridge, but there's a strike by drivers on Northern Rail, not only this Saturday (1st), but the next FOUR Saturdays as well! Judging from the train status websites showing what happened last Saturday (when these strikes started), my chances of doing either train are rather non-existent...
Bloody RMT!
(and relax....)
Sympathies.
I'm not entirely sure why, but the RMT is also striking on SWR.
I am not sure that stupid really does him justice. It's much more fundamental than that.
That's largely true, although Corbyn is eliding 1948 with 1955 when West Germany joined NATO. The Soviet Union wanted to keep Germany whole and weak whereas it was the West that wanted Germany divided and armed. You don't have to love the Soviet Union or think Corbyn is a fit person to be prime minister to acknowledge the West were aggressive cold warriors.
Unless the Tories are attempting Hari- Kari, its unsurprising Corbyn's numbers fall. He just has to open his mouth for more people to loathe him, irrespective of the Jewish issue.
Scallops are a disgusting French invention. After Brexit it will be a return to winkles and jellied eels. Those found eating scallops (or scollops) will be driven into the mouth of the channel tunnel at the end of a pike.
That’s a very fishy strategy. One might carp about your approach. I suppose everything has its plaice, but this just has no sole.
Scallops are a disgusting French invention. After Brexit it will be a return to winkles and jellied eels. Those found eating scallops (or scollops) will be driven into the mouth of the channel tunnel at the end of a pike.
That’s a very fishy strategy. One might carp about your approach. I suppose everything has its plaice, but this just has no sole.
The RMT have severely buggered up my plans for Saturday!
I had hoped this weekend to do either of the Saturday-only routes from Sheffield to Cleethorpes via Brigg or from Stockport to Stalybridge, but there's a strike by drivers on Northern Rail, not only this Saturday (1st), but the next FOUR Saturdays as well! Judging from the train status websites showing what happened last Saturday (when these strikes started), my chances of doing either train are rather non-existant...
Bloody RMT!
(and relax....)
Sorry to hear that Sunil. Do you know if it is just Northern Rail affected?
As Mortimer just said, SWR (from Waterloo routes) are affected from Friday to Sunday.
The RMT have severely buggered up my plans for Saturday!
I had hoped this weekend to do either of the Saturday-only routes from Sheffield to Cleethorpes via Brigg or from Stockport to Stalybridge, but there's a strike by drivers on Northern Rail, not only this Saturday (1st), but the next FOUR Saturdays as well! Judging from the train status websites showing what happened last Saturday (when these strikes started), my chances of doing either train are rather non-existent...
Bloody RMT!
(and relax....)
Sympathies.
I'm not entirely sure why, but the RMT is also striking on SWR.
Yes from Friday to Sunday - luckily I did the whole of SWR by 2016
The RMT have severely buggered up my plans for Saturday!
I had hoped this weekend to do either of the Saturday-only routes from Sheffield to Cleethorpes via Brigg or from Stockport to Stalybridge, but there's a strike by drivers on Northern Rail, not only this Saturday (1st), but the next FOUR Saturdays as well! Judging from the train status websites showing what happened last Saturday (when these strikes started), my chances of doing either train are rather non-existant...
Bloody RMT!
(and relax....)
Sorry to hear that Sunil. Do you know if it is just Northern Rail affected?
As Mortimer just said, SWR (from Waterloo routes) are affected from Friday to Sunday.
Scallops are a disgusting French invention. After Brexit it will be a return to winkles and jellied eels. Those found eating scallops (or scollops) will be driven into the mouth of the channel tunnel at the end of a pike.
That’s a very fishy strategy. One might carp about your approach. I suppose everything has its plaice, but this just has no sole.
Scallops are a disgusting French invention. After Brexit it will be a return to winkles and jellied eels. Those found eating scallops (or scollops) will be driven into the mouth of the channel tunnel at the end of a pike.
That’s a very fishy strategy. One might carp about your approach. I suppose everything has its plaice, but this just has no sole.
Just skimming through he videos and reports mentioned on this thread:
- The Leader of the Opposition on video, bonkers about NATO and the Warsaw Pact
- Alex Salmond crowd-funding to sue his own party, whilst being investigated by the police, leaving the SNP divided. (Why divided. exactly? Are allegations of sexual harassment now a test of party loyalities?)
- The poster-boy of the Conservative right being bonkers about Ireland
- Chris Williamson MP... well, to be fair, no-one expects him to say anything sane
Have I missed anything even more loony?
Well, @SeanT has just compared the Rohingya to German Nazis.......
No, I compared modern Islam to 1930s Germany. The cowed and complacent majority is led by a vile and genocidal elite, who claim a special national/religious purity.
IS and the Islamists do not lead the whole of Islam which is much more varied than you seem to think. Islamism is very similar to Nazism in some respects. But it is not the whole of Islam.
And if there were Rohingya extremists killing Burmese people, deal with those. But you don’t slaughter a whole group because of the actions of a few. That really is being Nazi-like.
Exactly how is Aung San Suu Kyi doing any worse than Henry Kissinger (Cambodia bombing) or Barack Obama (no peace at all, plus drones)?
Neither was stripped. The prize is generally ludicrous. Plus one can hardly blame the Burmese for wanting a Muslim-free country, given their geolocation.
Seriously. Through the method of child murder and rape?
You can fuck right off.
Just someone who voted conservative approving of the slaughter of Muslims, don't forget though Corbyn supporters are a cult because somebody claimed that New Labour values aren't representative of Labour values so Corbyn didn't rebel, let's keep some sense of perspective and concentrate on the bigger threat...
"The Bravest and Finest Labour Leader ever". Its straight out of the North Korea guide to leader worship
Using the word cult as a dimissive insult, fine.
Genuinely believing Corbyn supporters are a cult, delusional.
Hero worship, fanboy or plenty of other derogatory terms, I'd accept crazy for some of them on the basis we don't actually mean mentally ill but act strangely. Cult is not actually an accurate description though. I imagine most people who are experts on cults would completely disagree with you.
There are lots of Corbyn supporters so you could pick out crazy people, idiots, the delusional as well as normal people, intelligent and the very grounded in reality. As a group though, or even just the majority of them the word cult would not accurately apply than it would to centrists, right wingers or any other political train of thought which also contain lots of all kinds of people (the crazy, the sane etc.)
The labour party under Corbyn is not a cult. It is closer to a religion. It fulfils a fundamental human need for belief in a higher power. Emotion triumphs over any rational assessment of the prospects for successfully implementing the ideas and policies expressed by Corbyn. Believers don't like, and move to eliminate, any form of crticism or challenge.
I am not sure that stupid really does him justice. It's much more fundamental than that.
That's largely true, although Corbyn is eliding 1948 with 1955 when West Germany joined NATO. The Soviet Union wanted to keep Germany whole and weak whereas it was the West that wanted Germany divided and armed. You don't have to love the Soviet Union or think Corbyn is a fit person to be prime minister to acknowledge the West were aggressive cold warriors.
Didn't Stalin first divide Germany by creating a separate state in the Soviet zone and then afterwards proposed reunifying Germany as a neutral buffer?
Just someone who voted conservative approving of the slaughter of Muslims, don't forget though Corbyn supporters are a cult because somebody claimed that New Labour values aren't representative of Labour values so Corbyn didn't rebel, let's keep some sense of perspective and concentrate on the bigger threat...
"The Bravest and Finest Labour Leader ever". Its straight out of the North Korea guide to leader worship
Using the word cult as a dimissive insult, fine.
Genuinely believing Corbyn supporters are a cult, delusional.
Hero worship, fanboy or plenty of other derogatory terms, I'd accept crazy for some of them on the basis we don't actually mean mentally ill but act strangely. Cult is not actually an accurate description though. I imagine most people who are experts on cults would completely disagree with you.
There are lots of Corbyn supporters so you could pick out crazy people, idiots, the delusional as well as normal people, intelligent and the very grounded in reality. As a group though, or even just the majority of them the word cult would not accurately apply than it would to centrists, right wingers or any other political train of thought which also contain lots of all kinds of people (the crazy, the sane etc.)
No no no. Most Corbyn supporters are not cultists. People like you are cultists. Because you will defend absolutely anything in your efforts to defend the man. I have several close political friends who joined the party because of Jeremy's leadership- and that's great. I personally campaigned for the man and got supporters to join the party to have a vote. They aren't cultists either. Their eyes are open...
When we have had conversations in the past (which isn't often) you have generally gone off accusing me of whatever some crazy Corbyn supporter that you don't like said. Given your very different definition of cultist to the actual word then surely you are far more a cultist. I have a friend who voted Conservative and for Brexit, I don't go around calling him a member of a cult.
Though I do wonder if I just had a much more advanced understanding of what a cult is. Famous singers for example are not the heads of cults. They may have many adoring fans whose reaction can be incredibly over the top, far further than people would go with Jezza. That also is not a cult.
Just skimming through he videos and reports mentioned on this thread:
- The Leader of the Opposition on video, bonkers about NATO and the Warsaw Pact
- Alex Salmond crowd-funding to sue his own party, whilst being investigated by the police, leaving the SNP divided. (Why divided. exactly? Are allegations of sexual harassment now a test of party loyalities?)
- The poster-boy of the Conservative right being bonkers about Ireland
- Chris Williamson MP... well, to be fair, no-one expects him to say anything sane
Have I missed anything even more loony?
Well, @SeanT has just compared the Rohingya to German Nazis.......
No, I compared modern Islam to 1930s Germany. The cowed and complacent majority is led by a vile and genocidal elite, who claim a special national/religious purity.
IS and the Islamists do not lead the whole of Islam which is much more varied than you seem to think. Islamism is very similar to Nazism in some respects. But it is not the whole of Islam.
And if there were Rohingya extremists killing Burmese people, deal with those. But you don’t slaughter a whole group because of the actions of a few. That really is being Nazi-like.
Anyway off to bed.
And I am going to join you but not literally of course
Every day brings another headline or two or three and it is hard to keep up
I am not sure that stupid really does him justice. It's much more fundamental than that.
That's largely true, although Corbyn is eliding 1948 with 1955 when West Germany joined NATO. The Soviet Union wanted to keep Germany whole and weak whereas it was the West that wanted Germany divided and armed. You don't have to love the Soviet Union or think Corbyn is a fit person to be prime minister to acknowledge the West were aggressive cold warriors.
That is just utter rubbish. I was in Germany in the 1970s. NATO was there to try to stop a Russian invasion, nothing else. The view was they couldn’t but they could hold the Russians up for long enough (about a week) to allow the politicians to sort something out or go nuclear. It was an entirely defensive alliance. Are you saying the Berlin airlift was anything other than defensive? That the invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia was anything other than aggressive? That the brutal killings in East Germany were not a war crime?
The Soviet Union was evil. It murdered more than 30m of its own people. Those that seek to make excuses for it are just sick. Those that try to equiperate NATO with it are delusional. Corbyn wouldn’t know reality if he was battered over the head with it. He is a fantasist.
Exactly how is Aung San Suu Kyi doing any worse than Henry Kissinger (Cambodia bombing) or Barack Obama (no peace at all, plus drones)?
Neither was stripped. The prize is generally ludicrous. Plus one can hardly blame the Burmese for wanting a Muslim-free country, given their geolocation.
Seriously. Through the method of child murder and rape?
You can fuck right off.
Just someone who voted conservative approving of the slaughter of Muslims, don't forget though Corbyn supporters are a cult because somebody claimed that New Labour values aren't representative of Labour values so Corbyn didn't rebel, let's keep some sense of perspective and concentrate on the bigger threat...
"The Bravest and Finest Labour Leader ever". Its straight out of the North Korea guide to leader worship
Using the word cult as a dimissive insult, fine.
Genuinely believing Corbyn supporters are a cult, delusional.
Hero worship, fanboy or plenty of other derogatory terms, I'd accept crazy for some of them on the basis we don't actually mean mentally ill but act strangely. Cult is not actually an accurate description though. I imagine most people who are experts on cults would completely disagree with you.
There are lots of Corbyn supporters so you could pick out crazy people, idiots, the delusional as well as normal people, intelligent and the very grounded in reality. As a group though, or even just the majority of them the word cult would not accurately apply than it would to centrists, right wingers or any other political train of thought which also contain lots of all kinds of people (the crazy, the sane etc.)
The labour party under Corbyn is not a cult. It is closer to a religion. It fulfils a fundamental human need for belief in a higher power. Emotion triumphs over any rational assessment of the prospects for successfully implementing the ideas and policies expressed by Corbyn. Believers don't like, and move to eliminate, any form of crticism or challenge.
I am not sure that stupid really does him justice. It's much more fundamental than that.
That's largely true, although Corbyn is eliding 1948 with 1955 when West Germany joined NATO. The Soviet Union wanted to keep Germany whole and weak whereas it was the West that wanted Germany divided and armed. You don't have to love the Soviet Union or think Corbyn is a fit person to be prime minister to acknowledge the West were aggressive cold warriors.
LOL - you are either a fantasist or have no idea of 20th century history.
I am not sure that stupid really does him justice. It's much more fundamental than that.
That's largely true, although Corbyn is eliding 1948 with 1955 when West Germany joined NATO. The Soviet Union wanted to keep Germany whole and weak whereas it was the West that wanted Germany divided and armed. You don't have to love the Soviet Union or think Corbyn is a fit person to be prime minister to acknowledge the West were aggressive cold warriors.
That is just utter rubbish. I was in Germany in the 1970s. NATO was there to try to stop a Russian invasion, nothing else. The view was they couldn’t but they could hold the Russians up for long enough (about a week) to allow the politicians to sort something out or go nuclear. It was an entirely defensive alliance. Are you saying the Berlin airlift was anything other than defensive? That the invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia was anything other than aggressive? That the brutal killings in East Germany were not a war crime?
The Soviet Union was evil. It murdered more than 30m of its own people. Those that seek to make excuses for it are just sick. Those that try to equiperate NATO with it are delusional. Corbyn wouldn’t know reality if he was battered over the head with it. He is a fantasist.
Aren't you conflating different issues there?
Also having not watched the whole Corbyn video is that what people are doing with Corbyn?
Talking about western aggression isn't the equivalent of justifying everything their opponents do.
A country can be terrible domestically and not the aggressor internationally, for example WW2 when the Nazi's attacked the Soviets.
I have always been under the impression that both the Warsaw pact and Nato were setup to oppose each other. After that you get into a who started it sort of debate but I imagine everyone thinks both sides played at least a part in the aggression towards each other and the build up of tensions.
I am not sure that stupid really does him justice. It's much more fundamental than that.
That's largely true, although Corbyn is eliding 1948 with 1955 when West Germany joined NATO. The Soviet Union wanted to keep Germany whole and weak whereas it was the West that wanted Germany divided and armed. You don't have to love the Soviet Union or think Corbyn is a fit person to be prime minister to acknowledge the West were aggressive cold warriors.
That is just utter rubbish. I was in Germany in the 1970s. NATO was there to try to stop a Russian invasion, nothing else. The view was they couldn’t but they could hold the Russians up for long enough (about a week) to allow the politicians to sort something out or go nuclear. It was an entirely defensive alliance. Are you saying the Berlin airlift was anything other than defensive? That the invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia was anything other than aggressive? That the brutal killings in East Germany were not a war crime?
The Soviet Union was evil. It murdered more than 30m of its own people. Those that seek to make excuses for it are just sick. Those that try to equiperate NATO with it are delusional. Corbyn wouldn’t know reality if he was battered over the head with it. He is a fantasist.
Aren't you conflating different issues there?
Also having not watched the whole Corbyn video is that what people are doing with Corbyn?
Talking about western aggression isn't the equivalent of justifying everything their opponents do.
A country can be terrible domestically and not the aggressor internationally, for example WW2 when the Nazi's attacked the Soviets.
I have always been under the impression that both the Warsaw pact and Nato were setup to oppose each other. After that you get into a who started it sort of debate but I imagine everyone thinks both sides played at least a part in the aggression towards each other and the build up of tensions.
Watch the video. He condemns himself out of his own mouth better than I can.
So is the Death of Salmond the death of the SNP and indy?
In most political cultures one would say no, of course not. But he is so integral to the rise of the Nats, and so signally emblematic, and, also, such a charismatic thinker and speaker for the cause, as a whole.
He is a huge loss, and I wonder if they and their cause will suffer thereby.
It's like LEAVE losing Farage and Bojo in one go. Not a leader, but a definite, inspiring figurehead.
Without him, I think the Nats might retreat (for a while) into a more mild, civic nationalism.
He is a loss but his time had gone. The SNP handled the handover to Sturgeon very well. The real problem for them is who is next? I can’t see anyone in the next generation even close to those two.
I am not sure that stupid really does him justice. It's much more fundamental than that.
That is just utter rubbish. I was in Germany in the 1970s. NATO was there to try to stop a Russian invasion, nothing else. The view was they couldn’t but they could hold the Russians up for long enough (about a week) to allow the politicians to sort something out or go nuclear. It was an entirely defensive alliance. Are you saying the Berlin airlift was anything other than defensive? That the invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia was anything other than aggressive? That the brutal killings in East Germany were not a war crime?
The Soviet Union was evil. It murdered more than 30m of its own people. Those that seek to make excuses for it are just sick. Those that try to equiperate NATO with it are delusional. Corbyn wouldn’t know reality if he was battered over the head with it. He is a fantasist.
Aren't you conflating different issues there?
Also having not watched the whole Corbyn video is that what people are doing with Corbyn?
Talking about western aggression isn't the equivalent of justifying everything their opponents do.
A country can be terrible domestically and not the aggressor internationally, for example WW2 when the Nazi's attacked the Soviets.
I have always been under the impression that both the Warsaw pact and Nato were setup to oppose each other. After that you get into a who started it sort of debate but I imagine everyone thinks both sides played at least a part in the aggression towards each other and the build up of tensions.
Watch the video. He condemns himself out of his own mouth better than I can.
I have too many bad experiences of sitting through completely non shocking stuff that people had claimed said something it didn't sorry.
If you or anyone else can point to a particular part of the video where he claims the Soviet Union was free open and democratic, didn't kill or mistreat anyone or any of the other things I have heard counter arguments to then fair enough that does seem crazy. Having watched a couple of completely uncontroversial minutes I'm not sure it's really worth it.
Exactly how is Aung San Suu Kyi doing any worse than Henry Kissinger (Cambodia bombing) or Barack Obama (no peace at all, plus drones)?
Neither was stripped. The prize is generally ludicrous. Plus one can hardly blame the Burmese for wanting a Muslim-free country, given their geolocation.
Seriously. Through the method of child murder and rape?
You can fuck right off.
Just someone who voted conservative approving of the slaughter of Muslims, don't forget though Corbyn supporters are a cult because somebody claimed that New Labour values aren't representative of Labour values so Corbyn didn't rebel, let's keep some sense of perspective and concentrate on the bigger threat...
"The Bravest and Finest Labour Leader ever". Its straight out of the North Korea guide to leader worship
Using the word cult as a dimissive insult, fine.
Genuinely believing Corbyn supporters are a cult, delusional.
Hero worship, fanboy or plenty of other derogatory terms, I'd accept crazy for some of them on the basis we don't actually mean mentally ill but act strangely. Cult is not actually an accurate description though. I imagine most people who are experts on cults would completely disagree with you.
There are lots of Corbyn supporters so you could pick out crazy people, idiots, the delusional as well as normal people, intelligent and the very grounded in reality. As a group though, or even just the majority of them the word cult would not accurately apply than it would to centrists, right wingers or any other political train of thought which also contain lots of all kinds of people (the crazy, the sane etc.)
The labour party under Corbyn is not a cult. It is closer to a religion. It fulfils a fundamental human need for belief in a higher power. Emotion triumphs over any rational assessment of the prospects for successfully implementing the ideas and policies expressed by Corbyn. Believers don't like, and move to eliminate, any form of crticism or challenge.
Brexit?
The liberal elite and the EU. It is a very similar thing.
So is the Death of Salmond the death of the SNP and indy?
In most political cultures one would say no, of course not. But he is so integral to the rise of the Nats, and so signally emblematic, and, also, such a charismatic thinker and speaker for the cause, as a whole.
He is a huge loss, and I wonder if they and their cause will suffer thereby.
It's like LEAVE losing Farage and Bojo in one go. Not a leader, but a definite, inspiring figurehead.
Without him, I think the Nats might retreat (for a while) into a more mild, civic nationalism.
I am not sure that stupid really does him justice. It's much more fundamental than that.
That's largely true, although Corbyn is eliding 1948 with 1955 when West Germany joined NATO. The Soviet Union wanted to keep Germany whole and weak whereas it was the West that wanted Germany divided and armed. You don't have to love the Soviet Union or think Corbyn is a fit person to be prime minister to acknowledge the West were aggressive cold warriors.
That is just utter rubbish. I was in Germany in the 1970s. NATO was there to try to stop a Russian invasion, nothing else. The view was they couldn’t but they could hold the Russians up for long enough (about a week) to allow the politicians to sort something out or go nuclear. It was an entirely defensive alliance. Are you saying the Berlin airlift was anything other than defensive? That the invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia was anything other than aggressive? That the brutal killings in East Germany were not a war crime?
The Soviet Union was evil. It murdered more than 30m of its own people. Those that seek to make excuses for it are just sick. Those that try to equiperate NATO with it are delusional. Corbyn wouldn’t know reality if he was battered over the head with it. He is a fantasist.
I don't disagree with you about the evils of the Soviet Union. Nevertheless the very assertive pro West line adopted by Adenauer, effectively abandoning East Germany to its fate, the concept of a West Germany, armed and anti Soviet, were highly controversial at the time and strongly opposed by the SPD. The idea that the Cold War in Europe was all the fault of the Soviet Union is ahistorical. It didn't even want East Germany.
Exactly how is Aung San Suu Kyi doing any worse than Henry Kissinger (Cambodia bombing) or Barack Obama (no peace at all, plus drones)?
Neither was stripped. The prize is generally ludicrous. Plus one can hardly blame the Burmese for wanting a Muslim-free country, given their geolocation.
"The Bravest and Finest Labour Leader ever". Its straight out of the North Korea guide to leader worship
Using the word cult as a dimissive insult, fine.
Genuinely believing Corbyn supporters are a cult, delusional.
Hero worship, fanboy or plenty of other derogatory terms, I'd accept crazy for some of them on the basis we don't actually mean mentally ill but act strangely. Cult is not actually an accurate description though. I imagine most people who are experts on cults would completely disagree with you.
There are lots of Corbyn supporters so you could pick out crazy people, idiots, the delusional as well as normal people, intelligent and the very grounded in reality. As a group though, or even just the majority of them the word cult would not accurately apply than it would to centrists, right wingers or any other political train of thought which also contain lots of all kinds of people (the crazy, the sane etc.)
The labour party under Corbyn is not a cult. It is closer to a religion. It fulfils a fundamental human need for belief in a higher power. Emotion triumphs over any rational assessment of the prospects for successfully implementing the ideas and policies expressed by Corbyn. Believers don't like, and move to eliminate, any form of crticism or challenge.
Brexit?
The liberal elite and the EU. It is a very similar thing.
No I mean Brexit supporters. They have those same accusations you made about Corbyn supporters made about them. So whilst neither are a cult, you would (maybe?) describe both as like a religion.
I think religion is a step too far IMO. Although it is more realistic description than cult.
I am not sure that stupid really does him justice. It's much more fundamental than that.
That's largely true, although Corbyn is eliding 1948 with 1955 when West Germany joined NATO. The Soviet Union wanted to keep Germany whole and weak whereas it was the West that wanted Germany divided and armed. You don't have to love the Soviet Union or think Corbyn is a fit person to be prime minister to acknowledge the West were aggressive cold warriors.
That is just utter rubbish. I was in Germany in the 1970s. NATO was there to try to stop a Russian invasion, nothing else. The view was they couldn’t but they could hold the Russians up for long enough (about a week) to allow the politicians to sort something out or go nuclear. It was an entirely defensive alliance. Are you saying the Berlin airlift was anything other than defensive? That the invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia was anything other than aggressive? That the brutal killings in East Germany were not a war crime?
The Soviet Union was evil. It murdered more than 30m of its own people. Those that seek to make excuses for it are just sick. Those that try to equiperate NATO with it are delusional. Corbyn wouldn’t know reality if he was battered over the head with it. He is a fantasist.
I don't disagree with you about the evils of the Soviet Union. Nevertheless the very assertive pro West line adopted by Adenauer, effectively abandoning East Germany to its fate, the concept of a West Germany, armed and anti Soviet, were highly controversial at the time and strongly opposed by the SPD. The idea that the Cold War in Europe was all the fault of the Soviet Union is ahistorical. It didn't even want East Germany.
Yes it did - it stripped East Germany bare of industry and raw materials, one reason why the East was so behind the West upon reunification. Stalin insisted on getting to Berlin first to get his hands on the nuclear research centres just west of the city.
I am not sure that stupid really does him justice. It's much more fundamental than that.
That's largely true, although Corbyn is eliding 1948 with 1955 when West Germany joined NATO. The Soviet Union wanted to keep Germany whole and weak whereas it was the West that wanted Germany divided and armed. You don't have to love the Soviet Union or think Corbyn is a fit person to be prime minister to acknowledge the West were aggressive cold warriors.
That is just utter rubbish. I was in Germany in the 1970s. NATO was there to try to stop a Russian invasion, nothing else. The view was they couldn’t but they could hold the Russians up for long enough (about a week) to allow the politicians to sort something out or go nuclear. It was an entirely defensive alliance. Are you saying the Berlin airlift was anything other than defensive? That the invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia was anything other than aggressive? That the brutal killings in East Germany were not a war crime?
The Soviet Union was evil. It murdered more than 30m of its own people. Those that seek to make excuses for it are just sick. Those that try to equiperate NATO with it are delusional. Corbyn wouldn’t know reality if he was battered over the head with it. He is a fantasist.
I don't disagree with you about the evils of the Soviet Union. Nevertheless the very assertive pro West line adopted by Adenauer, effectively abandoning East Germany to its fate, the concept of a West Germany, armed and anti Soviet, were highly controversial at the time and strongly opposed by the SPD. The idea that the Cold War in Europe was all the fault of the Soviet Union is ahistorical. It didn't even want East Germany.
Yes it did - it stripped East Germany bare of industry and raw materials, one reason why the East was so behind the West upon reunification. Stalin insisted on getting to Berlin first to get his hands on the nuclear research centres just west of the city.
The Soviet Union wanted.a weak but intact Germany that it could control through the four powers system. Adenauers assertive pro West policy wasn't universally popular, but he was a wily old man (about 80 I think) and got his way. Adenauer in my view is the greatest of all post War leaders. He was the prime mover behind what became the European Union.
No I mean Brexit supporters. They have those same accusations you made about Corbyn supporters made about them. So whilst neither are a cult, you would (maybe?) describe both as like a religion.
I think religion is a step too far IMO. Although it is more realistic description than cult.
' Brexit supporters' - too diverse. They aren't a coherant group. You can't make generalisations in the way that you can about remainers (liberals who worship the EU - my point above) and Corbyn supporters.
There is a line of thought that goes something like 'if we can get out of the EU we can be a great country again and anyone who thinks otherwise is a traitor', but this is not really driven by a belief in a higher power, it is more to do with an exaggerated sense of being imprisoned and wanting to break free from that. It isn't the same. (PS I voted remain).
No I mean Brexit supporters. They have those same accusations you made about Corbyn supporters made about them. So whilst neither are a cult, you would (maybe?) describe both as like a religion.
I think religion is a step too far IMO. Although it is more realistic description than cult.
' Brexit supporters' - too diverse. They aren't a coherant group. You can't make generalisations in the way that you can about remainers (liberals who worship the EU - my point above) and Corbyn supporters.
There is a line of thought that goes something like 'if we can get out of the EU we can be a great country again and anyone who thinks otherwise is a traitor', but this is not really driven by a belief in a higher power, it is more to do with an exaggerated sense of being imprisoned and wanting to break free from that. It isn't the same. (PS I voted remain).
edited for blockquote mixup
This belief in a higher power thing is a bit vague and meaningless for me so I am struggling to argue with it but all the other things you mentioned have been accusations made about Brexit supporters and for my liking could be made about almost any political group/thought/idea supports.
You may be a remain voter, but you aren't a member of either of the groups you are labelling as religions. At least from reading your posts I assume you aren't a liberal who worships the EU.
It doesn't have to be all Brexit supporters in much the same way you use religion or others on here use cult but will happily say this individual or that individual is okay or not cult/religion despite being a Corbyn supporter.
Edit: For clarity I am a remain voter but not really a passionate anti Brexiteer, I just use Brexit supporters as a useful example in this case, I think you could make similar cases for Corbyn and Brexit supporters as for most other political ideologies supporters.
So is the Death of Salmond the death of the SNP and indy?
In most political cultures one would say no, of course not. But he is so integral to the rise of the Nats, and so signally emblematic, and, also, such a charismatic thinker and speaker for the cause, as a whole.
He is a huge loss, and I wonder if they and their cause will suffer thereby.
It's like LEAVE losing Farage and Bojo in one go. Not a leader, but a definite, inspiring figurehead.
Without him, I think the Nats might retreat (for a while) into a more mild, civic nationalism.
Sturgeon is doing to Scottish nationalism what May is doing to Brexit, diluting it to almost tasteless
Alex Salmond has resigned from the SNP this evening.
What are the next 19 days going to bring?
The Swedish election should be interesting.
Yes indeed. One of my bigger betting events of the year so far.
Today's polls half a dozen of one and six of another, with SKOP moving a point to the Socialists and SIFO moving a point to Swedish Democrats. Overall I would have to say, time running out for the SDs - what they are reliant on is the polls being wrong (save for YouGov which has them ahead).
Even if they come first the SDs are not going to form the government. Far from time running out what they want is to do well enough to force a Moderates and Social Democrats Grand Coalition to which they can form the principal opposition, then the clock really starts ticking in their favour just as the AfD have done in Germany in opposition to the CDU and SPD Grand Coalition
The Cave Rescuer Elon Musk Called A "Pedo" Has Lawyered Up And Is Preparing A Libel Claim “You published through three different tweets to your twenty-two million followers that Mr. Unsworth engages in the sexual exploitation of Thai children, and you did so at a time when he was working to save the lives of twelve Thai children.
"Something deeply unsettling about an independently wealthy man asking ordinary people for money so he can take the government of Scotland to court..."
Alex Salmond has resigned from the SNP this evening.
What are the next 19 days going to bring?
The Swedish election should be interesting.
Yes indeed. One of my bigger betting events of the year so far.
Today's polls half a dozen of one and six of another, with SKOP moving a point to the Socialists and SIFO moving a point to Swedish Democrats. Overall I would have to say, time running out for the SDs - what they are reliant on is the polls being wrong (save for YouGov which has them ahead).
Even if they come first the SDs are not going to form the government. Far from time running out what they want is to do well enough to force a Moderates and Social Democrats Grand Coalition to which they can form the principal opposition, then the clock really starts ticking in their favour just as the AfD have done in Germany in opposition to the CDU and SPD Grand Coalition
But the betting is on who comes first. Read the post.
(this is from memory) but in the 1910s it was among the richest countries in the world on a per capita basis. It's been a consistent disaster since then
Britain said in 2016 that it would gradually lower its 20% corporate tax rate to retain multinational corporations after its departure from the unified European market. But excessive tax cuts could earn the country tax-haven designation, creating the possibility that companies operating there could be slapped with back taxes by their home countries.
Moving the regional headquarters to continental Europe will also help Panasonic avoid any barriers to the flow of people and goods, Abadie said...
Didn't want to dip into his multiple pensions or RT salary?
Why are people so critical of him for this?
If you could get a bunch of muppets to give you £50K rather than spend it out of your own resources, wouldn't you?
Yes, but you’d need to be prepared to accept the stick that goes with it, especially if you have a £250k salary paid for by the Russians and seven pensions funded by the British taxpayer.
Britain said in 2016 that it would gradually lower its 20% corporate tax rate to retain multinational corporations after its departure from the unified European market. But excessive tax cuts could earn the country tax-haven designation, creating the possibility that companies operating there could be slapped with back taxes by their home countries.
Moving the regional headquarters to continental Europe will also help Panasonic avoid any barriers to the flow of people and goods, Abadie said...
That looks like the tax was a side comment and it's more about flow of goods post Brexit. I'd be very surprised if Japan was to designate the UK a tax haven.
Britain said in 2016 that it would gradually lower its 20% corporate tax rate to retain multinational corporations after its departure from the unified European market. But excessive tax cuts could earn the country tax-haven designation, creating the possibility that companies operating there could be slapped with back taxes by their home countries.
Moving the regional headquarters to continental Europe will also help Panasonic avoid any barriers to the flow of people and goods, Abadie said...
That looks like the tax was a side comment and it's more about flow of goods post Brexit. I'd be very surprised if Japan was to designate the UK a tax haven.
Well it is the headline and lead two paragraphs of the article, but apart from that, you’re probably right.
The point remains that it limits are ability to mitigate the flow of goods problem with tax cuts.
Didn't want to dip into his multiple pensions or RT salary?
Why are people so critical of him for this?
If you could get a bunch of muppets to give you £50K rather than spend it out of your own resources, wouldn't you?
The points is presumably that as their former letter representative, he claims to have represented those muppets. You position of holding them in contempt is therefore less defensible from him ?
I do question their judgment in giving heir money to someone who is (presumably) wealthier than they are in order to pursue (optional) legal action about an entirely personal matter.
I suppose it shows commendable generosity, but (in my view) they are being taken advantage of
A public figure (of considerable personal wealth) uses crowdfunding to fund case relating to sexual harassment is disrespectful towards all victims of such assaults.
If everyone wanted the case to be about individual justice then it should have been kept out of the public sphere. Such an important political figure was always going to result in this getting mixed up in politics. Those rubbing their hands at the chance to get at Salmond have their own part to play just as much as those backing him to the hilt, it should be about whether he commited a crime or not and justice for those involved if he did. Not a chance to take a crack at the SNP or the independence movement.
If everyone wanted the case to be about individual justice then it should have been kept out of the public sphere. Such an important political figure was always going to result in this getting mixed up in politics. Those rubbing their hands at the chance to get at Salmond have their own part to play just as much as those backing him to the hilt, it should be about whether he commited a crime or not and justice for those involved if he did. Not a chance to take a crack at the SNP or the independence movement.
Salmond is the one who decided to sue the Scottish government - he is the one who brought it into the public sphere. He could have let the process play out in the normal way - but he chose not to. And then decided to ask the public to pay for it.
It really isn't a good look - and I would say the same of any politician of any party. This isn't about party politics at all.
Not entirely sure here so just asking, did he bring it into the public sphere or did decide to sue which was then revealed to the public sphere. There is a slight difference between him intentionally doing it and him doing something (which maybe if he is innocent could be argued to be fair to do) which then triggers it.
The problem is it is very party political. The people who have responded with glee to this are his political opponents, those backing him to the hilt his political supporters. A great many people are hoping for a particular verdict based on their political outlook rather than hoping for justice to be done in this case.
Not entirely sure here so just asking, did he bring it into the public sphere or did decide to sue which was then revealed to the public sphere. There is a slight difference between him intentionally doing it and him doing something (which maybe if he is innocent could be argued to be fair to do) which then triggers it.
The problem is it is very party political. The people who have responded with glee to this are his political opponents, those backing him to the hilt his political supporters. A great many people are hoping for a particular verdict based on their political outlook rather than hoping for justice to be done in this case.
You can't as the former leader of your country expect to start legal action against your government without it attracting the interest of the press. Indeed we were aware of his decision to take action before we knew why.
It isn't a matter of national security and so there would be no reason for it to be kept out of the press.
I cannot conceive that he decided on a legal route without full knowledge that it would enter the public arena. He took the decision and has to live with it.
That could be fair enough then, unless you know for sure that his case where he is suing the Scottish government is false then he may well have a case which means he is within his rights to sue. The fact this means it would come to public attention as a result of his status is neither here nor there. If he is right in his case then he can't be blamed for the result of it.
Comments
There is no justification at all for what has happened to them. It is a terrible crime and it is very very sad that someone who seemed to stand for democracy and liberty has presided over and not spoken out against such evil behaviour.
I was agreeing with you!
We have to ally up with the likes of Bannon to take on the left who are the real threat, if we have to sacrifice the Muslims on the way then so be it I guess. What is a seemingly rise tide of hatred against a minority designed to win votes when we have to stop 'the communists'?
Don’t be cowed by his bull.
- The Leader of the Opposition on video, bonkers about NATO and the Warsaw Pact
- Alex Salmond crowd-funding to sue his own party, whilst being investigated by the police, leaving the SNP divided. (Why divided. exactly? Are allegations of sexual harassment now a test of party loyalities?)
- The poster-boy of the Conservative right being bonkers about Ireland
- Chris Williamson MP... well, to be fair, no-one expects him to say anything sane
Have I missed anything even more loony?
"The Bravest and Finest Labour Leader ever". Its straight out of the North Korea guide to leader worship
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1034914897526775810
I had hoped this weekend to do either of the Saturday-only routes from Sheffield to Cleethorpes via Brigg or from Stockport to Stalybridge, but there's a strike by drivers on Northern Rail, not only this Saturday (1st), but the next FOUR Saturdays as well! Judging from the train status websites showing what happened last Saturday (when these strikes started), my chances of doing either train are rather non-existent...
Bloody RMT!
(and relax....)
Genuinely believing Corbyn supporters are a cult, delusional.
Hero worship, fanboy or plenty of other derogatory terms, I'd accept crazy for some of them on the basis we don't actually mean mentally ill but act strangely. Cult is not actually an accurate description though. I imagine most people who are experts on cults would completely disagree with you.
There are lots of Corbyn supporters so you could pick out crazy people, idiots, the delusional as well as normal people, intelligent and the very grounded in reality. As a group though, or even just the majority of them the word cult would not accurately apply than it would to centrists, right wingers or any other political train of thought which also contain lots of all kinds of people (the crazy, the sane etc.)
I'm not entirely sure why, but the RMT is also striking on SWR.
Unless the Tories are attempting Hari- Kari, its unsurprising Corbyn's numbers fall. He just has to open his mouth for more people to loathe him, irrespective of the Jewish issue.
And if there were Rohingya extremists killing Burmese people, deal with those. But you don’t slaughter a whole group because of the actions of a few. That really is being Nazi-like.
Anyway off to bed.
Then leave and start afresh.
Though I do wonder if I just had a much more advanced understanding of what a cult is. Famous singers for example are not the heads of cults. They may have many adoring fans whose reaction can be incredibly over the top, far further than people would go with Jezza. That also is not a cult.
Every day brings another headline or two or three and it is hard to keep up
I hope everyone has a restful night
Good night folks
The Soviet Union was evil. It murdered more than 30m of its own people. Those that seek to make excuses for it are just sick. Those that try to equiperate NATO with it are delusional. Corbyn wouldn’t know reality if he was battered over the head with it. He is a fantasist.
Also having not watched the whole Corbyn video is that what people are doing with Corbyn?
Talking about western aggression isn't the equivalent of justifying everything their opponents do.
A country can be terrible domestically and not the aggressor internationally, for example WW2 when the Nazi's attacked the Soviets.
I have always been under the impression that both the Warsaw pact and Nato were setup to oppose each other. After that you get into a who started it sort of debate but I imagine everyone thinks both sides played at least a part in the aggression towards each other and the build up of tensions.
If you or anyone else can point to a particular part of the video where he claims the Soviet Union was free open and democratic, didn't kill or mistreat anyone or any of the other things I have heard counter arguments to then fair enough that does seem crazy. Having watched a couple of completely uncontroversial minutes I'm not sure it's really worth it.
I think religion is a step too far IMO. Although it is more realistic description than cult.
Not necessarily a safe assumption.
Bonne nuit!
Night all!
There is a line of thought that goes something like 'if we can get out of the EU we can be a great country again and anyone who thinks otherwise is a traitor', but this is not really driven by a belief in a higher power, it is more to do with an exaggerated sense of being imprisoned and wanting to break free from that. It isn't the same. (PS I voted remain).
edited for blockquote mixup
You may be a remain voter, but you aren't a member of either of the groups you are labelling as religions. At least from reading your posts I assume you aren't a liberal who worships the EU.
It doesn't have to be all Brexit supporters in much the same way you use religion or others on here use cult but will happily say this individual or that individual is okay or not cult/religion despite being a Corbyn supporter.
Edit: For clarity I am a remain voter but not really a passionate anti Brexiteer, I just use Brexit supporters as a useful example in this case, I think you could make similar cases for Corbyn and Brexit supporters as for most other political ideologies supporters.
As far as Macron is concerned I expect a different answer applies to Salmond
"Argentina asks IMF to release $50bn loan as crisis worsens"
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45350218
Even with Chequers?
“You published through three different tweets to your twenty-two million followers that Mr. Unsworth engages in the sexual exploitation of Thai children, and you did so at a time when he was working to save the lives of twelve Thai children.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/the-british-diver-elon-musk-called-a-pedo-threatened-to-sue#.vcdnl0qd4
https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/AlexSalmond
Didn't want to dip into his multiple pensions or RT salary?
https://twitter.com/ScotTories/status/1034913912905494528
"Something deeply unsettling about an independently wealthy man asking ordinary people for money so he can take the government of Scotland to court..."
* Scotland = Salmond or SNP, Sturgeon (under review)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1034979892524457985
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1034981992692166658
https://twitter.com/ftwestminster/status/1034999767678509061
Unless his wife married him for one of the three reasons stated above...
(this is from memory) but in the 1910s it was among the richest countries in the world on a per capita basis. It's been a consistent disaster since then
If you could get a bunch of muppets to give you £50K rather than spend it out of your own resources, wouldn't you?
https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Companies/Panasonic-to-move-European-headquarters-out-of-UK
Britain said in 2016 that it would gradually lower its 20% corporate tax rate to retain multinational corporations after its departure from the unified European market. But excessive tax cuts could earn the country tax-haven designation, creating the possibility that companies operating there could be slapped with back taxes by their home countries.
Moving the regional headquarters to continental Europe will also help Panasonic avoid any barriers to the flow of people and goods, Abadie said...
The point remains that it limits are ability to mitigate the flow of goods problem with tax cuts.
I do question their judgment in giving heir money to someone who is (presumably) wealthier than they are in order to pursue (optional) legal action about an entirely personal matter.
I suppose it shows commendable generosity, but (in my view) they are being taken advantage of
A public figure (of considerable personal wealth) uses crowdfunding to fund case relating to sexual harassment is disrespectful towards all victims of such assaults.
https://twitter.com/lass_ayrshire/status/1034934554639912962
Brian Meek used to offer a reward for verifiable information he could publish
It really isn't a good look - and I would say the same of any politician of any party. This isn't about party politics at all.
The problem is it is very party political. The people who have responded with glee to this are his political opponents, those backing him to the hilt his political supporters. A great many people are hoping for a particular verdict based on their political outlook rather than hoping for justice to be done in this case.
It isn't a matter of national security and so there would be no reason for it to be kept out of the press.
I cannot conceive that he decided on a legal route without full knowledge that it would enter the public arena. He took the decision and has to live with it.