General Election 2017

[dAVe80]

Just now, mjmooney said:

One thing that really makes me laugh (albeit bitterly) is this idea that Labour policy swinging back to the left has made it unelectable. THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE. The party's move to the centre right under Blair was what led to the party's total collapse in Scotland - and thus giving it a mountain to climb in UK elections. 

The thing is, they really haven't even moved that far to the left. It's just that the Blair / Brown years moved Labour that far to the right, more left leaning policies are seen as radical Socialism, or even Communism!  

[hippo]

31 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

One thing that really makes me laugh (albeit bitterly) is this idea that Labour policy swinging back to the left has made it unelectable. THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE. The party's move to the centre right under Blair was what led to the party's total collapse in Scotland - and thus giving it a mountain to climb in UK elections. 

But that move to the centre right did secure 3 elections on the spin. 

[meregreen]

29 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

The thing is, they really haven't even moved that far to the left. It's just that the Blair / Brown years moved Labour that far to the right, more left leaning policies are seen as radical Socialism, or even Communism!  

A Norwegian politician stated that in Scandanavia. Corbyn would be seen as a middle of the road  politician. The political landscape was moved to the right by both the Tories and Blairs Labour over the last 30 years. Seeing the Political landscape shift a little to the left is long overdue, and very welcome. A real choice again thankfully.

[RimmyJimmer]

2 minutes ago, hippo said:

But that move to the centre right did secure 3 elections on the spin. 

Why else would people have voted for them? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[meregreen]

7 minutes ago, hippo said:

But that move to the centre right did secure 3 elections on the spin. 

Tory ineptitude with the economy had almost guaranteed their fall from grace. Politics tends to be cyclical, it's just a case of when, not if, the people decide they've had enough of you.

Edited May 26, 2017 by meregreen

[hippo]

Just now, meregreen said:

Tory ineptitude with the economy had almost guaranteed their fall from grace. Politics tends to be cyclical, it's just a case of when not if the people decide they've had enough of you.

Yep thats true. I also think Blair in his prime won it for them. He's been tainted since but he seemed credible at the time and people were on board with him. A poorer leader and I thinked Labour may not have won so convincingly.

IMO Corbyn is winning more arguments than May - but hes no where near the groundswell of support that Blair had.

[darrenm]

Interesting. I've asked repeatedly in the Labour thread for any actual non-partisan information about Corbyn's role in Northern Ireland. This seems to be pretty close as it's quoting people who were there at the time.

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

 Veness, Corbyn’s former assistant, talked to the SKWAWKBOX at length about the Labour leader’s involvement in Northern Ireland in those days. She told this blog:

A huge amount of garbage has been written about Jeremy and Northern Ireland. He’s never claimed to start the peace process, but he did play a vital role. He always said you’ve got to talk to all sides if you want to find a solution.

John Major said he would be sick to his stomach to talk to Gerry Adams, but he already had secret back channels.

Jeremy never lied about his contacts or involvement and it’s what made him so respected. The first breakthrough in Northern Ireland was when a Tory minister announced britain has no selfish interest there. That was something the republicans had been waiting for.

There were three things the repubican movement wanted:

• equality of esteem
• a declaration that if a majority of the people voted for united ireland, the UK government would respect that
• release of prisoners – there were thousands, both loyalist and republican

The issue of the prisoners was incredibly complex – a tangled nightmare. Jeremy helped unpick it. The republicans trusted him to do it in a way they wouldn’t have trusted other uk politicians.

Mo Mowlam (late Northern Ireland Secretary under Tony Blair) needed someone she could trust and who was trusted by the republicans. She asked Jeremy.

There is simply no way Adams or McGuinnes would have signed up to the peace agreement without resolution of the prisoner issue, so it’s true to say that Jeremy’s role in the peace process was extremely important.

New Labour lied saying he didn’t help, but without him there would have been no deal.

Jeremy was trusted because he had long shown solidarity.In his very first advice surgery as an MP, Paul Hill’s (see below) aunt and uncle came looking for help.

When Drumcree banned loyalist marches and the town was surrounded by loyalists, Jeremy, I and others went over to show support – we had to walk across field to get there. That earned him the respect of republicans.

The idea he would support bombing campaign absolute nonsense. You need to remind people that one reason he’s slightly careful when he answers questions on Northern Ireland is that he spent years working on miscarriage of justice cases and he doesn’t want to compromise anyone.

Paul Hill from the Guildford Four was in prison and getting married. Jeremy was his best man – the Sun never apologised for smearing him as a ‘mass murderer’s best man’ on their front page, not even after the Guildford Four were exonerated and released.

Jeremy was criticised for bringing a ‘bomber’ into the House of Commons. That was Ronan Bennett – he was subsequently exonerated and is now an internationally recognised playwright. Again, the media never apologised.

He, Tony Benn and Ken Livingstone felt only a political solution could possibly help Northern Ireland – and you can’t have a political solution without the republicans on board, so the fact they had kept lines open was crucial – without that Sinn Fein would never have joined the negotiations.

Remember, at the time Thatcher was saying we don’t speak to terrorists but they were doing it through backchannels, via civil servants. The difference is, JC was honest and up front about it.

There was huge oppression of the republican community in Northern Ireland. You even had English kids being pulled over under Prevention of Terrorism Act when visiting their Irish grandparents.

I worked for Jeremy on the Birmingham Six and Guildford Four cases, as well as on the prisoner issue.

Even then, the papers gave him a hard time – they wanted to preserve the status quo, repress republican communities – you had three generations of kids, all they knew was soldiers on streets. The press attacked Labour’s left to maintain the status quo, which is the same as now

When the Birmingham Six came out of prison, the Mail and Sun said outrageous things against some of them, until they started legal action in ireland and the papers backed down immediately and paid up.

Jeremy’s work laid ground for eventual peace negotiations to take place – but he didn’t get the recognition he deserved because Mo was replaced by Mandelson.

The peace process is still fragile, but the media don’t care about Northern Ireland – they’re only interested in destroying Jeremy.

[Xann]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

...Making out that Jezza and Diane only talked to the IRA and Sinn Fein because they wanted to bring about peace is absolute rubbish. It's rewriting history. His repeated refusal, even now, to condemn the IRA echoes that history.

Don't think he was onboard with blowing up soldiers for a minute.

Can't categorically say, but think it fairly unlikely that a close associate or brother in law landed any juicy contracts through his exploits.

Anyway, this guy agrees with you.

He's really going for it.

Quote

Fifteen years previously, Corbyn was a member of the board of Labour Briefing, a fringe magazine for diehard leftists that unequivocally supported the IRA’s bombing campaign. Corbyn organised the magazine’s mailing-list and was a regular speaker at its events. In December 1984, the magazine“reaffirmed its support for, and solidarity with, the Irish republican movement” noting that its “overwhelming priority as active members of the British labour movement is to fight for and secure an unconditional British withdrawal”. Only “an unconditional British withdrawal, including the disarming of the RUC and UDR, will allow for peace in Ireland. Labour briefing stands for peace, but we are not pacifists”. Moreover, “It certainly appears to be the case that the British only sit up and take notice when they are bombed into it”. That being so, discussions with the SDLP and the Irish government were, at best, a distraction. Only Sinn Fein and the IRA spoke for Ireland. Labour Briefing explicitly opposed the SDLP, preferring instead to endorse the republican terrorist campaign.

Spectator

There's a lot of shots, (plenty more in the link :D), and they get close, but he's being tarred by association here.  "The bombed into it" line would appear to be an accurate observation, the Spectator seem to be posing it as a statement of intent.

There's little objectivity anywhere

To some of his later arguments which were irritating and I can't be arsed to quote.

If there's troops on the streets full time, you've failed, try something else.

* The IRA shifting attention to financial targets changed everything.

 

That's my take on it Pete.

 

* This is a biggie.

[magnkarl]

16 minutes ago, darrenm said:

Interesting. I've asked repeatedly in the Labour thread for any actual non-partisan information about Corbyn's role in Northern Ireland. This seems to be pretty close as it's quoting people who were there at the time.

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

 

 

I don't think the IRA angle is that bothersome to be honest, however Corbyn and the West's insistence on backing Hamas is troubling. Hamas is by all standards a terrorist organisation. If you kill yourself/get killed fighting the Israel state as a Palestinian your family gets a stipend. Our aid money goes into funding this sort of hypocrisy and Corbyn is a big part of the reason why the UK supports Hamas, he's never hidden that fact.

[Davkaus]

Quote

Fifteen years previously, Corbyn was a member of the board of Labour Briefing

Corbyn denied this, didn't he? He was a contributor, but not a member of the editorial board

[Xann]

1 minute ago, Davkaus said:

Corbyn denied this, didn't he? He was a contributor, but not a member of the editorial board

No idea.

Not sold on a lot of the content tbh

[meregreen]

6 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Corbyn denied this, didn't he? He was a contributor, but not a member of the editorial board

Correct. An interviewer threw this at him a couple of days ago, and looked a fool when it turned out to be bullshit.

[peterms]

3 minutes ago, meregreen said:

Correct. An interviewer threw this at him a couple of days ago, and looked a fool when it turned out to be bullshit.

There's a video of the exchange on this page (can't seem to get the video to post on here).

Quote

On Sunday 21 May, Sky News host Sophy Ridge attempted an ‘ambush’ during an interview with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. It did not end well for her...

 

[peterms]

14 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Corbyn denied this, didn't he? He was a contributor, but not a member of the editorial board

Yes, and the significance of that is the Spectator article was trying to smear Corbyn with responsibility for the content of articles he had not written, by falsely claiming he had editorial responsibility.

[PaulC]

19 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Corbyn denied this, didn't he? He was a contributor, but not a member of the editorial board

whether he was or not its a dangerous game politically for Labour to play this card after they were making significant gains in the polls. 

[Risso]

53 minutes ago, darrenm said:

Interesting. I've asked repeatedly in the Labour thread for any actual non-partisan information about Corbyn's role in Northern Ireland. This seems to be pretty close as it's quoting people who were there at the time.

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

 

 

Non-partisan, they you post an article from Skwawkbox?  

[NurembergVillan]

 

[magnkarl]

6 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said:

 

Anti-campaigning at its best. Both parties, including followers, need to start talking about themselves, not the opposition. This sort of thing puts the person that is on the fence  off rather than convince him/her. All it does is make hardcore followers happy, and Labour doesn't need to convince these people any more than they already have.

[dAVe80]

20 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said:

 

Not a patch on UKIP Calypso.

[snowychap]

2 hours ago, peterms said:

How much is a knighthood?

 

He's already got the K, you'd have to some sort of senile old duffer to be paying for it after they've given it to you. Oh...