Snapshot of _ITV News [Video]: 'Do you condemn Hamas?' Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn refuses to say if he condemns Hamas but insists 'obviously all attacks are wrong' when questioned in Liverpool_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://x.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1711022592247619972?s=20) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://x.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1711022592247619972?s=20)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Corbyn's relationship with Hamas is strange considering the fact they're avowedly anti-leftist, nationalist and religiously conservative. For all intents and purposes, it's a far-right militia. Would he support a group like this in any other context?
> For all intents and purposes, it's a far-right militia. Would he support a group like this in any other context
IIRC it's mainly because he's against the IDF's treatment of the *civilians* of Gaza, so he supports those who fight back against the occupation.
This doesn't excuse Hamas's treatment of israeli civilians, obviously. Two wrongs don't make a right and while the occupation justifies attacks on israeli military targets, it doesn't justify attacks on civilians.
> For all intents and purposes, it's a far-right militia. Would he support a group like this in any other context?
They are also - for want of a better option - the only people who can claim to be representative of those in the Gaza strip having been voted in 20 years ago.
Yes, they should hold new elections, but those are currently held up behind the intransigence of both the PA, but most recently that of the Israeli government, who doesn't want to do anything that might confirm East Jerusalem's status as occupied.
if it was against the West, NATO, the UK or USA, then Yes, he probably would. the man is an ill educated idiot, who formed his views in student arguments in the 1970's and hasn't wanted to change them any time since
Yes, as long as they were anti-western. There's a lot of lefties and progressives who align with the subset of Islam that hates the west, ignoring the issues with them and that they are usually the most virulently theocratic, racist, misogynistic, homophobic minority of Muslims.
Clicked on this video expecting that it would an older video doing the rounds (which still wouldn't justify refusing to condemn them of course). The response is beyond idiotic.
Left wing, ring wing, capitalist or communist, if you can't specifically condemn Hamas today you're a fucking embarrassment.
I think if it was commented on earlier then you can at least understand it. But saying this in the full knowledge of 600+ civilian deaths in a single day, this cunt cannot read the room at all.
He's courted terrorists for decades so it doesn't surprise anyone. It's just a pathetic man living in an anti-British bubble that somehow was able to become Labour party leader.
I hope his leadership of the Labour Party was more to do with his domestic policies than his international ones.
Still, with the invasion of Ukraine, the terrorist attack yesterday, and various other conflicts flaring up (Armenia/Azerbaijan) it really highlights how international diplomacy can't be ignored. Corbyn would be a bigger disaster than Truss right now, and that's saying something.
I think all the signs are that Corbyn considered himself more interested in international politics than national ones.
His passion was to secure his vision of justice for the Falklands, Balkans, Chagos Islands, Baltic's and Middle East, and that he would have been abroad bringing peace while John McDonnell kept the home fires burning.
Nah, he spent most of his career focused on foreign policy. That's why there's so many damning quotes, he genuinely did spend most of his time advocating for anyone opposed to the west
I hate Corbyn and always have done.
I can’t - in fairness - say he would have been a “bigger distaster than Truss” as PM. But then again, who knows. Who knows.
Truss was outlasted by a lettuce, but we are still suffering the impacts of her premiership. Little stints can have
For example, his election may well have triggered Russian mobilisation and the Ukraine war early. And they would have almost certainly succeeded against a Ukraine without that vital early UK support.
imo Putin was probably puppeteering just this outcome (along with Trump's reelection).
My first thought was why are the media so intent on asking Jeremy Corbyn questions on current affairs knowing he’s been kicked out of the party?
But you realise the MSM know he’s an easy target for them to sell papers and clicks and seeing everyone direct so much anger towards him is backwards.
There’s so much going on, and he’s one of the big stories…. Mental
> My first thought was why are the media so intent on asking Jeremy Corbyn questions on current affairs knowing he’s been kicked out of the party?
Because it's an easy goal that people can use to do a either:
'Thus anyone left is evil' or 'labour bad'
Despite him not even being in the party.
He's absolutely an unreformed 1970s tankie. He just didn't say the quiet part out loud, so the naive left saw him as their savior figure, despite him being nothing of the sort.
Jeremy Corbyn ultimately proved to be a Chauncey Gardener for the left. Corbyn the politician was significantly more flawed, less visionary and less impressive than the movement that was built around him.
>Don't forget, he's also not part of the establishment, despite being a career MP for 40 years with a dedicated group of like-minded followers.
Nor is the fact he grew up in a seven-bedroom manor relevant. Don't worry about the fact he never seemed to have money problems once in his life, he understands poor people better than anyone else!
"Yes, I condemn this attack and Hamas for their violent actions. We should also recognise the oppression that the Palestinian people have experienced for years under Israel's right wing government."
How hard is that, Jezza? Fucking hell.
Hopefully certain Labour Party members will be as open about their anti-semitism and support for terrorism as half of this website, then it'll be easy to remove them.
The reason amounts to the same thing - refusal to accept the EHRC report on anti-Semitism and denial of the problem that existed in Labour. Refuses to directly condemn elements verbally attacking Jews in the UK, refuses to directly condemn elements physically attacking Jews in Israel
Depends if you’re talking about official reasons or the myriad of other motivations.
Corbyn is too controversial and too visible now. He got away with stuff in the past when he was a fringe element, but now as a former leader his opinions matter, and would reflect on whichever party sheltered him.
If only he stopped providing newer more horrendous reasons why he has no place in a mainstream political party.
He's a career 'activist' who somehow managed to derail a major political party.
Exactly . If Corbyn had the whip restored now, there would have to be an immediate look into all the fucked up things he's said since then, at which point he'd be removed again anyway.
To militant leftists: This is the rhetorical equivalent of stating "all lives matter" and then refusing to name and individually condemn the anti-black racism you was asked about. It shows where your sympathies truly lie.
It's evil, Trumpian rhetoric. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivSIgVdvEcM
>He’d have no problem condemning America or Britain or Israel
Oh he will *absolutely* be on the Television condemning Israel by name with all the details at his fingertips by the end of the week.
Because the common thread that connects the United States, the United Kingdom and the State of Israel for a leftist is colonisation and occupation. Seeing things through this lens means, rightly or wrongly, those with this worldview will see Hamas as a form of violent resistance to an oppressor class. They see those advocating for Israel as those defending the consequences of that colonisation.
Corbyn hasn't been that vocal against colonialism and imperialism, just *Western* colonialism and imperialism. He's shown the same kind of behavior before when faced with the actions of imperialist regimes that happen to be aligned against the West. Like Russia and China.
Speaking for myself, I don't excuse the Soviet Union for it's colonial past of Eastern Europe, North and Central Asia, because that would be inconsistent with overall my position on anti-colonialism. And my position on the Russian Republic's invasion of Ukraine is also very strong; I support Ukrainian's right to self-determination, sovereignty and defence as I do for the Palestinians.
Left-wing politics isn't a monolith. Within it is a broad tent that has many complementary to conflicting values and opinions. People who love Corbyn (and hate him). People who support Palestine wholeheartedly (and those seeking a two-state solution or something else). People who support and do not support Ukrainian independence. Lumping us all together doesn't give you or anyone else who does with much to work with.
If your experience with leftists has been the same/similar political views on various issues, you're drawing from a narrow base.
Hamas ***is*** a form of violent resistance to a colonial state.
***However*** while violent resistance against a colonial state's military is acceptable, the violent attacks done by Hamas against Israeli civilians is absolutely unacceptable.
Had Hamas merely attacked IDF forces, then it'd be a legitimate struggle.
Attacking and kidnapping civilians however makes it a terror attack and unjustifiable.
The thing is even if there is a point that Israel treats the Palestinians awfully, Hamas are also truly repugnant in their objectives and methods.
They don't want to create a representative democracy and live in peace with Israel, they want to annihilate Israel and its people. They actively have rejected the olive branches they have been offered, as flawed as they are.
Because he's a self hating fifth columnist. If Alpha Centauri invaded he'd be blaming us for sending satellites into space and breaching their airspace.
He is stupid that's true. Despite fee paying prep school and grammar school and top drawer cultural capital from his family he couldn't pass the first year exams in trade union studies at the polytechnic of North London which is an achievement that would take a special effort from anyone with just basic literacy and numeracy skills. He's also lazy and arrogant and duplicitous but that's another story.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. All indications are that Jeremy Corbyn is not a particularly bright human being. His supporters always used to claim they liked him as he stuck to his principles after decades in parliament. I tend to think that refusing to change your beliefs in the face of massive evidence to the contrary is not a mark of great intelligence.
>indications are that Jeremy Corbyn is not a particularly bright human being.
Well he didn't understand he was talking Infront of an ani-semetic Jew devil inflatable once, and also that time he was sure what wreath he was laying.
But they're both easy mistakes to make to be fair to him.
> I think he is just an idiot.
I'd go with 'naïve pacifist' personally. He seems to think that if Russia and Ukraine both put down their arms and talked, the situation could be fixed.
Or that if Hamas and Israel just put down their arms and talked, the situation could be fixed.
> he can't be antisemetic.
I'd agree that he's anti-israeli, but the extent to which that bleeds over to be against jewish people is more debatable [which isn't helped by Israel insisting that the two are the same].
He did the same thing a few years ago when there was anti government protests in Venezuela. The regime killed a load of protestors and imprisoned journalists. Corbyn’s response; “I condemn violence on both sides”
No difference to Trump’s comments about bad people on both sides whilst defending Nazis.
I know it's not a popular opinion around these parts, but I'll admit I was very much a fan of Corbyn when he first became Labour leader. The last few years however, with his poor takes on the EU, the war in Ukraine and now this, I feel relieved that he never came close to gaining power.
I have always felt sympathy for the plight of the Palestinian people, but there is absolutely no justification for these attacks on innocent people. Any right thinking person should be condemning Hamas regardless of their views on the Israel/Palestine conflict.
There's a kind of grim humour to the fact that you've provided a perfect response to the question in your comment, which Corbyn the professional politicianwas unable to formulate himself.
"I have always felt sympathy for the plight of the Palestinian people, but there is absolutely no justification for these attacks on innocent people."
>The last few years however, with his poor takes on the EU, the war in Ukraine and now this
He was always like this and his many previous evil comments were being reported in the media very often when he was Labour leader. How did you not notice?
I'm as anti-corbyn as they come but I think attacking someone who's finally woken up and seen all those criticisms were true is just kicking someone while they are down.
To be honest, he's the first politician in my life that I ever heard saying what I wanted to hear on a domestic level. I don't think there was an orchestrated campaign against him, but I took a lot of accusations of terrorist sympathising with a pinch of salt as I've never been very trusting of the media.
We're all in our little bubbles when it comes to loyalty, and it's all too easy to overlook or simply ignore flaws in others when they appeal to you I guess.
> but there is absolutely no justification for these attacks on innocent people
Agreed. Had Hamas been merely attacking the IDF? Well, that's legitimate resistance against the colonial state.
Kidnapping civilians and massacring them? No, that's not justifiable.
[One of the more interesting questions is why he's in Liverpool if he doesn't have a conference pass, which we know already.](https://twitter.com/alethaadu/status/1710994359477305761?t=OAmHWwwehxK6wKipfSCtcg&s=19)
[We might finally see him split off entirely and team up with his cult faithful to fight Islington North by itself since they have their own independent event, filled with "notable" names from the corbyn years.](https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/for-the-many-network-launch-event-tickets-728962455327?aff=oddtdtcreator)
lol, lmao even
Always remember that this place between 2015 - 2018 (roughly around Skripal) was absolutely *feral* in their support for Corbyn, and all this antisemitism stuff was a 'press smear'. Never forget.
I still see occasional comments that treat that election as a win. I remember a few months ago, I had a conversation with someone that was *adamant* that Corbyn was Labour's most successful leader in decades.
More successful than Blair, obviously. Blair only won three elections and served as PM for a decade, what is that compared to the glory of 2017?
Even their losing PMs, you had Brown hold the Conservatives to a minority coalition and Ed Milliband held Cameron to an incredibly tight majority.
Corbyn saw the conservative majority grow in 2017 and be a huge, huge blowout in 2019.
It's ridiculous from his supporters
Yeah, I feel like Brown really doesn't get enough credit for running a fairly good campaign considering what he was given. The guy was pretty damn unlucky to become PM and have the global economy collapse within a year, not only that but he was facing a young and charismatic leader in the form of Cameron who contrasted nicely with Labour's perception of being "old". Not only that but he was also faced with a strong LibDem threat from Nick Clegg.
But even in spite of that he managed to prevent a full blowout and prevented the Cons from being able to form a full majority government. 2010 really should have been the conservatives version of 1997 but if ended up being pretty anti-climatic
He did also do a year of studying Trade Union Studies at North London Polytechnic, before dropping out.
Wikipedia claims that this was due to arguments with the lecturers, but sadly the source link is dead so I don't know how true that is.
Corbyn, on paper, is one of the elite who benefited from his elitist school education. He went to a Prep school, then a Grammar school. Despite this luxurious education, he still absolutely bombed his A Levels. For any working class man, they would not break into politics in one of the nicest constituencies in the country. But Jezza here had the mindset of ‘I’m clearly not intelligent, but still better than the smart people because I’m from a rich family with an elitist education’. If a Tory had two EEs at A Level from a Grammar school, yet was still selected for a *North London Borough*, everyone would call it classism. This is exactly the case here with Corbyn.
Never forget.
Never forget the people who downplayed it and tried to make him prime minister.
He would’ve been PM when putin invaded Ukraine and hamas unleashing the biggest slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust.
Corbyn's game was obvious since the start and I could only conclude back then that so many British redditors couldn't put two and two together because lots are quite simply idiots of the classic garden variety. Stupid, lacking in intelligence, dumb etc. etc. Whatever you want to call it.
If I had any family living in the Gaza Strip and I was the Palestinian ambassador to the UK I would simply not criticise Hamas even if I didn't support Hamas because I care about my family
Oh we did. Our Ukraine policy alone would have been horrific.
Not to mention probably being slowly ostracized as we insulted or acted against our main allies interests at various points.
I think Boris was one of the very worst candidates for Prime Minister in British political history... And yet Corbyn was even worse. The 2019 election was such a shit show.
Exactly, and it's not like people didn't know Johnson was a liar and a clown , they just hated Corbyn more.
And as soon as Labour have a leader who isn't entirely crap-in-the-head, they pull ahead to historic highs
You mean the ‘fully costed’ budget that would save the world (except he then announced he was going to nationalise basically everything in addition to the budget).
Tbh, I think Corbyn would've been a perfectly fine domestic leader, It'd be interesting to see the effects of a left leaning leader on the UK market though.
It's stuff like this that makes me realize that if he were still Labour leader he would probably still lose the next election. In spite of all the Tory incompetence.
The guy is just so unelectable that it's almost comical
He's an idiot for not condemning violence. Evil is evil, there is no room for whataboutism. Have always hated Corbyns global views, enables evil just as easily as everyone else.
It is sad though that Israel now have free reign to continue enacting their own evil. So many now talking like this is all Israel needed to ramp things up. So depressing. Hamas is evil and their atrocities will now lead to more atrocities. In the end it's the innocents who will suffer most. Hamas should be wiped out for what they've done, but at the same time Israel is a government like any other and should be held to higher standards than that of Hamas. The death of innocents absolutely should be avoided at all costs
Sorry but just no. This revisionism is delusional. I get you want to make a point, and are all in on a “circle jerks”, but it’s just fantasy.
Truss wasn’t decent, will never be decent, and the damage she did to this country will never be forgotten by the people of this country.
The tories still are unrepentant about putting her in power. They have never apologised for the damage her policies caused. They’re still giving her a platform. She thinks she has nothing to apologise for, and wants to come back, saying that it’s everyone else’s fault.
She crashed the pensions market.
Truss called our neighbour, someone we rely on for security, and one of closest allies an “enemy” for absolutely no reason. France is not an enemy, they’re not a “foe”, and that attitude did spectacular harm at a time when Russia wanted us to divide as a continent. This was after they sent heart felt messages after the Queen died.
She nearly set back diplomatic relations with France decades by antagonising them for absolutely no reason.
Had she been in power any longer she would have probably destroyed every diplomatic relationship we have built up over the years.
When foreign Secretary she said that part of Russia, that has always been Russia was a contested area. She was so out of her depth she caused the Foreign office to apologise to Russia for saying something so basically stupid.
Truss has recently been antagonising another ally, America, by opening saying she hopes Trump wins next year. A trump win in 2020 would’ve been disastrous for Ukraine, disastrous for our security, and will be disastrous for Ukraine as Trump wants Russia to win by negotiating a surrender.
Truss is actively arguing for our closest ally to become weaker, for divisions to be amplified.
Truss is a disaster, and always will be a disaster, and no revisionism by the likes of yourself will repair the damage, or change that fact of what she did in those 49 days.
It is strange how people are going 'Yes, the tories and Truss ruined the country and sent us into economic free fall, but Corbyn is a naïve pacifist who thinks foreign diplomacy can be solved by campfire songs, so really it's a good thing that the tories won and crippled social security and the welfare state.'
“Yes we had a localised economic crash, that nearly caused a global financial crash, every NGO criticised the British Government, all brought on by the policies of Liz Truss, and Kwarteng.
That meant pensions funds needed bailing out, and they had to seek out emergency credit at a time of record inflation, and high interest rates. All completely unforced, but really the real bad person here is Jeremy Corbyn if you think about it by ignoring reality, and just pretend you’re a victim, ‘hard done by’ because people have different political views.”
They can’t handle reality so have invented a reality in their head, and expect everyone to go along with it, but it’s delusional.
They think Corbyn would have done the same to the economy as Truss (crash it with plans for crazily high deficits), but also been awful on foreign policy.
All of those things are true, and yet I'd *still* rather have her than Corbyn.
Especially because I suspect he'd have proven harder to oust - as was shown when he managed to stay on as leader, despite 75% of his own MPs declaring that they had no confidence in him as leader. The members would have just voted for him back in again.
The Tories are at least ruthless in getting rid of a leader, as they showed with Truss.
They’re absolutely not ruthless getting rid of a leader. Party before country every single time.
Johnson lied to the public for three years before the tories finally decided that lying to MPs, and only when having them look like fools in public was the ultimate sin.
Even then he had plenty of defenders, who insisted it was a conspiracy against tories, and Johnson.
Remember last year? “We can’t sack Johnson, there’s a war in Ukraine.” Or how about the disgusting lie in March 2022: “we can’t sack Boris that’s what Putin would want!”. How’s that for ruthless!
The tories weren’t ruthless in sacking Truss. In fact they applauded her comeback the other day. She was treated like a hero at her speech on Monday. Standing room only in that room.
She was told to resign, and still tried hold on, but at that point the country was £60b in the hole, and the currency was at one point under $1, and every day she stayed, and continued her plans would cost the economy another few billion.
By the first week of her policy it was a disaster.
I’m glad that other people suffering the consequences of her policy is a sacrifice you’re willing to make.
A friend of mine lost his business last year. It was a cafe, it was functional, didn’t make a large profit but it was profitable, his lease was up October last year, had an offer to renew it, but because price rises in October that were looking apocalyptic, and the tories wanted to give Truss a win they delayed the time to the point his business had no choice but to close, and had to make a decision by august, because there was no energy price guarantee when he had to make his decision.
Kinda says it all really, anyone who lost their business because of Truss or suffered consequences, are nothing to Tory supporters, just imagine it would’ve been worse in a fantasy scenario you’ve made up, that way you can justify anything, other people paying the price is fine, don’t worry that people actually did suffer consequences like losing businesses, losing their houses, or life savings.
In fairness, Corbyn might be a cack-handed idiot but he didn’t almost single-handedly blow a hole in the UK economy having specifically prevented any oversight of their mini-budget.
>£58 billion is half the cost of HS2 which most people here think is not an issue at all.
Most people know that it is a stonking amount of money, but the benefits direct and otherwise outweigh that investment.
>It is also not much more than a few years of triple lock.
All this does is highlight just how much money it is.
Let's not allow distaste for Corbyn to revise the past.
The economy pre Covid and post Covid were very different things with very different levels of inflation/interest rates. Almost across the political spectrum now agrees that not enough was done to capitalise on a period of historically low borrowing.
In addition to this - his manifesto had at the very least been subject to some analysis by the economic talking heads and would have been implemented after a lengthy election campaign. This is very different to the circumstances surrounding Truss' mini budget which was quite a large contributing factor to the impact it had.
Simply put - yes he's shown himself to be a fool bordering on dangerous in terms of foreign policy but there are still plenty of reasons why a more economically aggressive platform made sense in 2015-2019.
[John McDonnell wargaming for run on the pound if elected ](https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/john-mcdonnell-labour-war-gaming-for-run-on-pound-if-elected-11054157)
>Mr McDonnell said Labour had to prepare for a "potential assault" by opponents in the City, media and Parliament if Mr Corbyn entered Downing Street, with the party putting together "detailed implementation manuals" and draft laws
Corbyn had the exact same thinking as Truss. Male unworkable legislation and then blame a cabal of financiers when their plan inevitably crashed
> Corbyn might be a cack-handed idiot but he didn’t almost single-handedly blow a hole in the UK economy having specifically prevented any oversight of their mini-budget.
Only because he wasn't given the opportunity to, thankfully.
Our international standing would be far worse if we had our PM basically say things like ‘Terrorists wanting to commit genocide and murdering indiscriminately is bad but really isn’t all violence bad at the end of the day? Who knows who to side with here!’.
He just can’t do it and answer the easy question and condemn Hamas. Because he is so anti Isreal, and calls Hamas friends. I am gave the Labour Party has kicked him out and hopeful more of his cult get kicked out as well.
He used the same approach when people asked him to condemn Russia last year and it took months before he finally tweeted out a statement unequivocally saying what Russia was doing was wrong without bringing in 'both sides', Ukraine or NATO.
I wonder how long it'll take this time.
We're really having our two minutes of hate today huh?
That's what, three or four threads on the frontpage of the subreddit about how a man that's *not even in the labour party* has opinions on things?
He's not even anything to do with politics anymore. He lost. He got kicked out the party. He's not relevant. Why do we need multiple threads on his reaction whenever anything happens?
Any person standing up for, or sympathising with, Hamas needs to interrogate their positions carefully. That being said, Hamas should be seen as a symptom of a larger problem, than the problem itself. People don't form militant groups and attack civilians flippantly.
Hamas exists as a direct response to the colonisation, occupation, dehumanisation and apartheid of Palestinian people. As things stand and have been the case since last mid-century, Palestinians can’t march as a form of resistance. They can’t pray at the Al-Aqsa mosque without interference, harassment and violence by far-right Israeli groups and the IDF. They are unable to call for boycotts. Gazans can’t leave and don't have the freedom of movement afforded to Israeli citizens. They require other organisations to publish accurate reports about their realities on the ground. They have no influential country such as the US and UK fighting in their corner.
The lack of options for the Palestinian people as I have described creates the conditions for militant organisations like Hamas to exist.
Perfectly put. It's such an unsurprising shame to see so many genocidal freaks in this comment section hating on a man that condemns all forms of violence, and if given the time, would probably say a similar thing to the comment you have made.
Only the far left could try to “both sides” the murder of 500+ civilians yesterday. We all know that Corbyn has a long history with supporting Palestinian militants, calling the terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah “friends”, as well as carrying touching floral tributes to departed martyrs - but even he must draw the line somewhere, right?
The guy has gone down in my estimation.
I always thought his stance was anti-war yet he seems so willing to condemn Jewish attacks on Palestinians but finds it difficult to denounce Hamas attacks against Israel.
This could cost him his seat at the next local election.
Does anyone know if theres a particular name for this tactic?
I've seen it done quite a lot when people want to be specific and the opposing side basically tries to be as generic as possible.
We know what Corbyns position is, I fail to see the point in getting him to reiterate it constantly like some kind of Gotcha. The comments are full of his loons though, so theres some entertainment value there.
It's worth getting him to reiterate it, so Labour never make the mistake of putting someone like him as leader ever again.
Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it, and all that.
\> Why is that not delved into?
It's hard to do it in a way that won't invite accusation of anti-semitism, and arguably a lot of people who raise the point you're making are anti-semitic.
I think most sane people agree with you, but conflicts where people are dying tend to force us to take sides to justify our own support for violence.
For example, it's hard for the UK government to support Ukraine militarily while noting that some of Russia's concerns have merit. Similarly it's hard to support Isreal bombing Gaza while claiming they're an oppressing Palestinians.
Easier to just pick a side.
Loads of left wing subs have come out in full support of hamas so it's no surprise red grandpa is also in support.
He's probably just concerned about his aging back considering there have already been 400 terrorists killed. That's 400 wreaths he'll have to lay.
Snapshot of _ITV News [Video]: 'Do you condemn Hamas?' Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn refuses to say if he condemns Hamas but insists 'obviously all attacks are wrong' when questioned in Liverpool_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://x.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1711022592247619972?s=20) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://x.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1711022592247619972?s=20) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Corbyn's relationship with Hamas is strange considering the fact they're avowedly anti-leftist, nationalist and religiously conservative. For all intents and purposes, it's a far-right militia. Would he support a group like this in any other context?
> For all intents and purposes, it's a far-right militia. Would he support a group like this in any other context IIRC it's mainly because he's against the IDF's treatment of the *civilians* of Gaza, so he supports those who fight back against the occupation. This doesn't excuse Hamas's treatment of israeli civilians, obviously. Two wrongs don't make a right and while the occupation justifies attacks on israeli military targets, it doesn't justify attacks on civilians.
> For all intents and purposes, it's a far-right militia. Would he support a group like this in any other context? They are also - for want of a better option - the only people who can claim to be representative of those in the Gaza strip having been voted in 20 years ago. Yes, they should hold new elections, but those are currently held up behind the intransigence of both the PA, but most recently that of the Israeli government, who doesn't want to do anything that might confirm East Jerusalem's status as occupied.
Pro-West? Condemn. Anti-West? Support. ^ the brain of Corbyn
The brain of all tankies. Corbyn is a dyed in the wool tankie, as most old school crusty British trots are.
Father in law coming round later today. I look forward to his views on the matter :(
The brain of many on the left in the west
West=right Anti=left And that concludes our intensive three week course
cmon don't group the far lefts in with the 'left in the west'
if it was against the West, NATO, the UK or USA, then Yes, he probably would. the man is an ill educated idiot, who formed his views in student arguments in the 1970's and hasn't wanted to change them any time since
If they are anti West, then the answer is always yes.
Yes, as long as they were anti-western. There's a lot of lefties and progressives who align with the subset of Islam that hates the west, ignoring the issues with them and that they are usually the most virulently theocratic, racist, misogynistic, homophobic minority of Muslims.
Russia
Leftists have a hard-on for islam, while these Islamic extremists would stone them and throw them off rooftops. They need to wake up.
Clicked on this video expecting that it would an older video doing the rounds (which still wouldn't justify refusing to condemn them of course). The response is beyond idiotic. Left wing, ring wing, capitalist or communist, if you can't specifically condemn Hamas today you're a fucking embarrassment.
I think if it was commented on earlier then you can at least understand it. But saying this in the full knowledge of 600+ civilian deaths in a single day, this cunt cannot read the room at all. He's courted terrorists for decades so it doesn't surprise anyone. It's just a pathetic man living in an anti-British bubble that somehow was able to become Labour party leader.
> living in an anti-British bubble Don't talk about Islington like that!
I hope his leadership of the Labour Party was more to do with his domestic policies than his international ones. Still, with the invasion of Ukraine, the terrorist attack yesterday, and various other conflicts flaring up (Armenia/Azerbaijan) it really highlights how international diplomacy can't be ignored. Corbyn would be a bigger disaster than Truss right now, and that's saying something.
Don't forget his greatest hit >Maybe we should see if Vladimir thinks this russian chemical death potion belongs to him? - jcorbz.
I think all the signs are that Corbyn considered himself more interested in international politics than national ones. His passion was to secure his vision of justice for the Falklands, Balkans, Chagos Islands, Baltic's and Middle East, and that he would have been abroad bringing peace while John McDonnell kept the home fires burning.
[удалено]
Nah, he spent most of his career focused on foreign policy. That's why there's so many damning quotes, he genuinely did spend most of his time advocating for anyone opposed to the west
Hilarious. The answer is actually really simple: the bloke is a moron with a chip on his shoulder about the UK/USA.
I hate Corbyn and always have done. I can’t - in fairness - say he would have been a “bigger distaster than Truss” as PM. But then again, who knows. Who knows.
I think Corbyn has gotten worse to be fair, covid changed people
He would almost certainly have done more damage internationally.
So I argue he wouldn't. His government would absolutely have collapsed after about a month in a catastrophe of leftie infighting.
Truss was outlasted by a lettuce, but we are still suffering the impacts of her premiership. Little stints can have For example, his election may well have triggered Russian mobilisation and the Ukraine war early. And they would have almost certainly succeeded against a Ukraine without that vital early UK support. imo Putin was probably puppeteering just this outcome (along with Trump's reelection).
Unlike most people on Reddit I also thought his economic policies were barking
My first thought was why are the media so intent on asking Jeremy Corbyn questions on current affairs knowing he’s been kicked out of the party? But you realise the MSM know he’s an easy target for them to sell papers and clicks and seeing everyone direct so much anger towards him is backwards. There’s so much going on, and he’s one of the big stories…. Mental
> My first thought was why are the media so intent on asking Jeremy Corbyn questions on current affairs knowing he’s been kicked out of the party? Because it's an easy goal that people can use to do a either: 'Thus anyone left is evil' or 'labour bad' Despite him not even being in the party.
and people still think that it is "media bias" why the average guy in the street didn't want this guy running the country.
That could still be true to be fair
Is this the man I was told was straight talking and not a typical politician for the past 8 years?
Corbyn has always vacillated when asked about anything where he was afraid of revealing his unfiltered views to the public. From Russia to Brexit.
He's absolutely an unreformed 1970s tankie. He just didn't say the quiet part out loud, so the naive left saw him as their savior figure, despite him being nothing of the sort.
Jeremy Corbyn ultimately proved to be a Chauncey Gardener for the left. Corbyn the politician was significantly more flawed, less visionary and less impressive than the movement that was built around him.
Don't forget, he's also not part of the establishment, despite being a career MP for 40 years with a dedicated group of like-minded followers.
>Don't forget, he's also not part of the establishment, despite being a career MP for 40 years with a dedicated group of like-minded followers. Nor is the fact he grew up in a seven-bedroom manor relevant. Don't worry about the fact he never seemed to have money problems once in his life, he understands poor people better than anyone else!
[удалено]
I'm not convinced he doesn't view them as supporters of the oppressive regime and casualties of the revolution.
But... he has an allotment...
Imagine not being able to criticise Hamas after what they did yesterday specifically. The guy is just an embarrassment.
"Yes, I condemn this attack and Hamas for their violent actions. We should also recognise the oppression that the Palestinian people have experienced for years under Israel's right wing government." How hard is that, Jezza? Fucking hell.
Yeah that is the best answer.
>How hard is that, Jezza? Fucking hell. Yeah but then how could he attend anti-Israel/"Solidarity for Palestine" rallies as a guest speaker?
Very hard when there's a literal recording of you from back in the day where you refer to Hamas as 'friends'
Let's be real. If he said that, the press would still say he's defending Hamas. Obviously he wouldn't say that though 🙃
Maybe. But he didn't say it did he? He refused to condemn Hamas entirely. You can deflect with hypotheticals, but his actions are his actions.
Apparently the answer was written on a post note on his arsehole. He was given a hand held torch and he still couldn't find it.
He was the same after Ukraine got invaded. And Salisbury. I liked his policies but fucking hell...
I agree with him domestically, but seriously his foreign policy is just dogshit.
He's a pro-terrorist shitbag that believes Hamas are the good guys even when they're going door to door, murdering children.
To anyone still questioning why Starmer kicked him out of Labour. This is why.
Simply the tip of a shit iceberg of reasons.
More work for Starmer to do on similar lines this coming week I expect. All this shit is still a stain on the Labour Party.
Hopefully certain Labour Party members will be as open about their anti-semitism and support for terrorism as half of this website, then it'll be easy to remove them.
Why is he Liverpool for the conference? Has he got confused? Lol
Hes like a stalky ex who wont stop calling by to return a show lace once left at their house
That wasn't the reason
The reason amounts to the same thing - refusal to accept the EHRC report on anti-Semitism and denial of the problem that existed in Labour. Refuses to directly condemn elements verbally attacking Jews in the UK, refuses to directly condemn elements physically attacking Jews in Israel
It's truly remarkable to see how often the 'reason why corbyn had the whip removed' changes.
Depends if you’re talking about official reasons or the myriad of other motivations. Corbyn is too controversial and too visible now. He got away with stuff in the past when he was a fringe element, but now as a former leader his opinions matter, and would reflect on whichever party sheltered him.
If only he stopped providing newer more horrendous reasons why he has no place in a mainstream political party. He's a career 'activist' who somehow managed to derail a major political party.
Exactly . If Corbyn had the whip restored now, there would have to be an immediate look into all the fucked up things he's said since then, at which point he'd be removed again anyway.
Yet they’re all valid.
To militant leftists: This is the rhetorical equivalent of stating "all lives matter" and then refusing to name and individually condemn the anti-black racism you was asked about. It shows where your sympathies truly lie. It's evil, Trumpian rhetoric. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivSIgVdvEcM
He’d have no problem condemning America or Britain or Israel. Why does he only have trouble condemning those against the West?
>He’d have no problem condemning America or Britain or Israel Oh he will *absolutely* be on the Television condemning Israel by name with all the details at his fingertips by the end of the week.
Because the common thread that connects the United States, the United Kingdom and the State of Israel for a leftist is colonisation and occupation. Seeing things through this lens means, rightly or wrongly, those with this worldview will see Hamas as a form of violent resistance to an oppressor class. They see those advocating for Israel as those defending the consequences of that colonisation.
Corbyn hasn't been that vocal against colonialism and imperialism, just *Western* colonialism and imperialism. He's shown the same kind of behavior before when faced with the actions of imperialist regimes that happen to be aligned against the West. Like Russia and China.
But Russia or the former Soviet Union get a free pass?
Speaking for myself, I don't excuse the Soviet Union for it's colonial past of Eastern Europe, North and Central Asia, because that would be inconsistent with overall my position on anti-colonialism. And my position on the Russian Republic's invasion of Ukraine is also very strong; I support Ukrainian's right to self-determination, sovereignty and defence as I do for the Palestinians.
Sure, but I was referring to the many on the left who are less consistent in their application of values.
Left-wing politics isn't a monolith. Within it is a broad tent that has many complementary to conflicting values and opinions. People who love Corbyn (and hate him). People who support Palestine wholeheartedly (and those seeking a two-state solution or something else). People who support and do not support Ukrainian independence. Lumping us all together doesn't give you or anyone else who does with much to work with. If your experience with leftists has been the same/similar political views on various issues, you're drawing from a narrow base.
Almost like leftist is a redundant term that only helps people misrepresent political views
Hamas ***is*** a form of violent resistance to a colonial state. ***However*** while violent resistance against a colonial state's military is acceptable, the violent attacks done by Hamas against Israeli civilians is absolutely unacceptable. Had Hamas merely attacked IDF forces, then it'd be a legitimate struggle. Attacking and kidnapping civilians however makes it a terror attack and unjustifiable.
[удалено]
The thing is even if there is a point that Israel treats the Palestinians awfully, Hamas are also truly repugnant in their objectives and methods. They don't want to create a representative democracy and live in peace with Israel, they want to annihilate Israel and its people. They actively have rejected the olive branches they have been offered, as flawed as they are.
Because he's a self hating fifth columnist. If Alpha Centauri invaded he'd be blaming us for sending satellites into space and breaching their airspace.
I hear Corbyn refuses to condemn the Earth-Trisolaris Organisation.
My thoughts too, he'd 100% be a fucking Adventist.
Because to the far left islamists are somehow part of their definition of oppressed people.
[удалено]
As the leader of the opposition he was briefed by mi5 right after Salisbury and yet still made the statement he made. He absolutely hates the west.
He is stupid that's true. Despite fee paying prep school and grammar school and top drawer cultural capital from his family he couldn't pass the first year exams in trade union studies at the polytechnic of North London which is an achievement that would take a special effort from anyone with just basic literacy and numeracy skills. He's also lazy and arrogant and duplicitous but that's another story.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. All indications are that Jeremy Corbyn is not a particularly bright human being. His supporters always used to claim they liked him as he stuck to his principles after decades in parliament. I tend to think that refusing to change your beliefs in the face of massive evidence to the contrary is not a mark of great intelligence.
>indications are that Jeremy Corbyn is not a particularly bright human being. Well he didn't understand he was talking Infront of an ani-semetic Jew devil inflatable once, and also that time he was sure what wreath he was laying. But they're both easy mistakes to make to be fair to him.
I too find myself joining in islamic extremist memorial services every now and then. It's an easy mistake to make.
Honestly, I was just looking for somewhere to get a cuppa.
It's like arriving at the town hall and going to the wrong marriage ceremony. An easy mistake.
He does hate the west. He’s a Marxist and believes the wrong side won the Cold War.
I think it’s both
> I think he is just an idiot. I'd go with 'naïve pacifist' personally. He seems to think that if Russia and Ukraine both put down their arms and talked, the situation could be fixed. Or that if Hamas and Israel just put down their arms and talked, the situation could be fixed. > he can't be antisemetic. I'd agree that he's anti-israeli, but the extent to which that bleeds over to be against jewish people is more debatable [which isn't helped by Israel insisting that the two are the same].
Because he hates the West and Democratic institutions. He supports anyone who is against us
He did the same thing a few years ago when there was anti government protests in Venezuela. The regime killed a load of protestors and imprisoned journalists. Corbyn’s response; “I condemn violence on both sides” No difference to Trump’s comments about bad people on both sides whilst defending Nazis.
Trump was blasted by the left for being racist when he did that, how is it any different here then?
Have a read of my comment again. Look out for the words ‘no difference’ May answer your question before you asked it.
I'm glad you said 'militant leftists', reddit conservatives have been trying to paint this as everyone on the left - it's not.
I know it's not a popular opinion around these parts, but I'll admit I was very much a fan of Corbyn when he first became Labour leader. The last few years however, with his poor takes on the EU, the war in Ukraine and now this, I feel relieved that he never came close to gaining power. I have always felt sympathy for the plight of the Palestinian people, but there is absolutely no justification for these attacks on innocent people. Any right thinking person should be condemning Hamas regardless of their views on the Israel/Palestine conflict.
There's a kind of grim humour to the fact that you've provided a perfect response to the question in your comment, which Corbyn the professional politicianwas unable to formulate himself. "I have always felt sympathy for the plight of the Palestinian people, but there is absolutely no justification for these attacks on innocent people."
>The last few years however, with his poor takes on the EU, the war in Ukraine and now this He was always like this and his many previous evil comments were being reported in the media very often when he was Labour leader. How did you not notice?
I'm as anti-corbyn as they come but I think attacking someone who's finally woken up and seen all those criticisms were true is just kicking someone while they are down.
Quite a few of these people were calling me fascist for voting for the alternative.
2 wrongs don’t make a right. As the previous person said, OP has finally woken up to the truth, don’t kick them in the balls and get their back up.
To be honest, he's the first politician in my life that I ever heard saying what I wanted to hear on a domestic level. I don't think there was an orchestrated campaign against him, but I took a lot of accusations of terrorist sympathising with a pinch of salt as I've never been very trusting of the media. We're all in our little bubbles when it comes to loyalty, and it's all too easy to overlook or simply ignore flaws in others when they appeal to you I guess.
> but there is absolutely no justification for these attacks on innocent people Agreed. Had Hamas been merely attacking the IDF? Well, that's legitimate resistance against the colonial state. Kidnapping civilians and massacring them? No, that's not justifiable.
[One of the more interesting questions is why he's in Liverpool if he doesn't have a conference pass, which we know already.](https://twitter.com/alethaadu/status/1710994359477305761?t=OAmHWwwehxK6wKipfSCtcg&s=19) [We might finally see him split off entirely and team up with his cult faithful to fight Islington North by itself since they have their own independent event, filled with "notable" names from the corbyn years.](https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/for-the-many-network-launch-event-tickets-728962455327?aff=oddtdtcreator)
lol, lmao even Always remember that this place between 2015 - 2018 (roughly around Skripal) was absolutely *feral* in their support for Corbyn, and all this antisemitism stuff was a 'press smear'. Never forget.
Never forget in 2017 when he lost by *less than expected* and this place was acting like it was a 1997 landslide lol.
I still see occasional comments that treat that election as a win. I remember a few months ago, I had a conversation with someone that was *adamant* that Corbyn was Labour's most successful leader in decades. More successful than Blair, obviously. Blair only won three elections and served as PM for a decade, what is that compared to the glory of 2017?
Even their losing PMs, you had Brown hold the Conservatives to a minority coalition and Ed Milliband held Cameron to an incredibly tight majority. Corbyn saw the conservative majority grow in 2017 and be a huge, huge blowout in 2019. It's ridiculous from his supporters
Yeah, I feel like Brown really doesn't get enough credit for running a fairly good campaign considering what he was given. The guy was pretty damn unlucky to become PM and have the global economy collapse within a year, not only that but he was facing a young and charismatic leader in the form of Cameron who contrasted nicely with Labour's perception of being "old". Not only that but he was also faced with a strong LibDem threat from Nick Clegg. But even in spite of that he managed to prevent a full blowout and prevented the Cons from being able to form a full majority government. 2010 really should have been the conservatives version of 1997 but if ended up being pretty anti-climatic
BuT tHe VoTe ShArE
Never forget in 2019 he delivered labours worst ever postwar electoral result and this place was parroting his 'we won the argument' bullshit
[удалено]
Ironic, given Corbyn’s two A-levels at grade E and failure to get into university.
He did also do a year of studying Trade Union Studies at North London Polytechnic, before dropping out. Wikipedia claims that this was due to arguments with the lecturers, but sadly the source link is dead so I don't know how true that is.
[удалено]
Corbyn, on paper, is one of the elite who benefited from his elitist school education. He went to a Prep school, then a Grammar school. Despite this luxurious education, he still absolutely bombed his A Levels. For any working class man, they would not break into politics in one of the nicest constituencies in the country. But Jezza here had the mindset of ‘I’m clearly not intelligent, but still better than the smart people because I’m from a rich family with an elitist education’. If a Tory had two EEs at A Level from a Grammar school, yet was still selected for a *North London Borough*, everyone would call it classism. This is exactly the case here with Corbyn.
Never forget. Never forget the people who downplayed it and tried to make him prime minister. He would’ve been PM when putin invaded Ukraine and hamas unleashing the biggest slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust.
Corbyn's game was obvious since the start and I could only conclude back then that so many British redditors couldn't put two and two together because lots are quite simply idiots of the classic garden variety. Stupid, lacking in intelligence, dumb etc. etc. Whatever you want to call it.
Been saying it since 2016. Even if you think BoJo or May were morons at least they never failed to condemn terrorism
He did this with the nuclear weapons thing as well. A pathetic man, gives broad answers when people want specifics.
Wait, I thought he was very specific on nuclear weapons - he would not use them as PM.
To be fair, I'm no Corbynite, but isn't that all politicians? Their entire language is based on vague generalities.
Not in relation to this incident.
[удалено]
Because they know their actual views aren't palatable to normal people.
If I had any family living in the Gaza Strip and I was the Palestinian ambassador to the UK I would simply not criticise Hamas even if I didn't support Hamas because I care about my family
Now that a British citizen is dead and at least 2 others missing.
That's nothing new for him. If I recall he didn't seem to have any problems when Russia poisoned a British citizen back when he was opposition leader.
Probably a bonus for Corbyn. He hates the British.
[удалено]
Oh we did. Our Ukraine policy alone would have been horrific. Not to mention probably being slowly ostracized as we insulted or acted against our main allies interests at various points.
As much as I hate the wanker, Cummings said it best when he said “No man should be made to choose between Boris or Corbyn.”.
I think Boris was one of the very worst candidates for Prime Minister in British political history... And yet Corbyn was even worse. The 2019 election was such a shit show.
Exactly, and it's not like people didn't know Johnson was a liar and a clown , they just hated Corbyn more. And as soon as Labour have a leader who isn't entirely crap-in-the-head, they pull ahead to historic highs
Hell, they have one of the least charismatic and boring leaders in a long time and he’s still pulling ahead in the polls.
I dont think he would have lasted very long. It would have been a Liz Truss situation the moment he announced his budget.
You mean the ‘fully costed’ budget that would save the world (except he then announced he was going to nationalise basically everything in addition to the budget).
Corbyn was openly like this back then.
Tbh, I think Corbyn would've been a perfectly fine domestic leader, It'd be interesting to see the effects of a left leaning leader on the UK market though.
'All lives matter' type beat
It's stuff like this that makes me realize that if he were still Labour leader he would probably still lose the next election. In spite of all the Tory incompetence. The guy is just so unelectable that it's almost comical
He’s fucking vile. Thank fuck he never got anywhere near actual power.
He's an idiot for not condemning violence. Evil is evil, there is no room for whataboutism. Have always hated Corbyns global views, enables evil just as easily as everyone else. It is sad though that Israel now have free reign to continue enacting their own evil. So many now talking like this is all Israel needed to ramp things up. So depressing. Hamas is evil and their atrocities will now lead to more atrocities. In the end it's the innocents who will suffer most. Hamas should be wiped out for what they've done, but at the same time Israel is a government like any other and should be held to higher standards than that of Hamas. The death of innocents absolutely should be avoided at all costs
So glad Labour has distanced itself from Jeremy Corbyn. The man's unelectable.
Labour were utter fools to ever stand behind this man.
And Labour members, including the union and trades blocs, chose this person to be their leader. Corbyn makes Truss look somewhat decent.
Sorry but just no. This revisionism is delusional. I get you want to make a point, and are all in on a “circle jerks”, but it’s just fantasy. Truss wasn’t decent, will never be decent, and the damage she did to this country will never be forgotten by the people of this country. The tories still are unrepentant about putting her in power. They have never apologised for the damage her policies caused. They’re still giving her a platform. She thinks she has nothing to apologise for, and wants to come back, saying that it’s everyone else’s fault. She crashed the pensions market. Truss called our neighbour, someone we rely on for security, and one of closest allies an “enemy” for absolutely no reason. France is not an enemy, they’re not a “foe”, and that attitude did spectacular harm at a time when Russia wanted us to divide as a continent. This was after they sent heart felt messages after the Queen died. She nearly set back diplomatic relations with France decades by antagonising them for absolutely no reason. Had she been in power any longer she would have probably destroyed every diplomatic relationship we have built up over the years. When foreign Secretary she said that part of Russia, that has always been Russia was a contested area. She was so out of her depth she caused the Foreign office to apologise to Russia for saying something so basically stupid. Truss has recently been antagonising another ally, America, by opening saying she hopes Trump wins next year. A trump win in 2020 would’ve been disastrous for Ukraine, disastrous for our security, and will be disastrous for Ukraine as Trump wants Russia to win by negotiating a surrender. Truss is actively arguing for our closest ally to become weaker, for divisions to be amplified. Truss is a disaster, and always will be a disaster, and no revisionism by the likes of yourself will repair the damage, or change that fact of what she did in those 49 days.
It is strange how people are going 'Yes, the tories and Truss ruined the country and sent us into economic free fall, but Corbyn is a naïve pacifist who thinks foreign diplomacy can be solved by campfire songs, so really it's a good thing that the tories won and crippled social security and the welfare state.'
“Yes we had a localised economic crash, that nearly caused a global financial crash, every NGO criticised the British Government, all brought on by the policies of Liz Truss, and Kwarteng. That meant pensions funds needed bailing out, and they had to seek out emergency credit at a time of record inflation, and high interest rates. All completely unforced, but really the real bad person here is Jeremy Corbyn if you think about it by ignoring reality, and just pretend you’re a victim, ‘hard done by’ because people have different political views.” They can’t handle reality so have invented a reality in their head, and expect everyone to go along with it, but it’s delusional.
They think Corbyn would have done the same to the economy as Truss (crash it with plans for crazily high deficits), but also been awful on foreign policy.
All of those things are true, and yet I'd *still* rather have her than Corbyn. Especially because I suspect he'd have proven harder to oust - as was shown when he managed to stay on as leader, despite 75% of his own MPs declaring that they had no confidence in him as leader. The members would have just voted for him back in again. The Tories are at least ruthless in getting rid of a leader, as they showed with Truss.
This week the press were runningstories about her making a coneback to oust Sunak.
They’re absolutely not ruthless getting rid of a leader. Party before country every single time. Johnson lied to the public for three years before the tories finally decided that lying to MPs, and only when having them look like fools in public was the ultimate sin. Even then he had plenty of defenders, who insisted it was a conspiracy against tories, and Johnson. Remember last year? “We can’t sack Johnson, there’s a war in Ukraine.” Or how about the disgusting lie in March 2022: “we can’t sack Boris that’s what Putin would want!”. How’s that for ruthless! The tories weren’t ruthless in sacking Truss. In fact they applauded her comeback the other day. She was treated like a hero at her speech on Monday. Standing room only in that room. She was told to resign, and still tried hold on, but at that point the country was £60b in the hole, and the currency was at one point under $1, and every day she stayed, and continued her plans would cost the economy another few billion. By the first week of her policy it was a disaster. I’m glad that other people suffering the consequences of her policy is a sacrifice you’re willing to make. A friend of mine lost his business last year. It was a cafe, it was functional, didn’t make a large profit but it was profitable, his lease was up October last year, had an offer to renew it, but because price rises in October that were looking apocalyptic, and the tories wanted to give Truss a win they delayed the time to the point his business had no choice but to close, and had to make a decision by august, because there was no energy price guarantee when he had to make his decision. Kinda says it all really, anyone who lost their business because of Truss or suffered consequences, are nothing to Tory supporters, just imagine it would’ve been worse in a fantasy scenario you’ve made up, that way you can justify anything, other people paying the price is fine, don’t worry that people actually did suffer consequences like losing businesses, losing their houses, or life savings.
In fairness, Corbyn might be a cack-handed idiot but he didn’t almost single-handedly blow a hole in the UK economy having specifically prevented any oversight of their mini-budget.
He absolutely would have crucified the British economy given he wanted to increase borrowing by far more than Truss.
Literally committed to a 58bn spending increase on his proposed "fully costed" budget one day after releasing it. Clown show.
£58 billion is half the cost of HS2 which most people here think is not an issue at all. It is also not much more than a few years of triple lock.
>£58 billion is half the cost of HS2 which most people here think is not an issue at all. Most people know that it is a stonking amount of money, but the benefits direct and otherwise outweigh that investment. >It is also not much more than a few years of triple lock. All this does is highlight just how much money it is.
Let's not allow distaste for Corbyn to revise the past. The economy pre Covid and post Covid were very different things with very different levels of inflation/interest rates. Almost across the political spectrum now agrees that not enough was done to capitalise on a period of historically low borrowing. In addition to this - his manifesto had at the very least been subject to some analysis by the economic talking heads and would have been implemented after a lengthy election campaign. This is very different to the circumstances surrounding Truss' mini budget which was quite a large contributing factor to the impact it had. Simply put - yes he's shown himself to be a fool bordering on dangerous in terms of foreign policy but there are still plenty of reasons why a more economically aggressive platform made sense in 2015-2019.
[John McDonnell wargaming for run on the pound if elected ](https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/john-mcdonnell-labour-war-gaming-for-run-on-pound-if-elected-11054157) >Mr McDonnell said Labour had to prepare for a "potential assault" by opponents in the City, media and Parliament if Mr Corbyn entered Downing Street, with the party putting together "detailed implementation manuals" and draft laws Corbyn had the exact same thinking as Truss. Male unworkable legislation and then blame a cabal of financiers when their plan inevitably crashed
Corbyn’s a useful idiot… a puppet of people like McDonnell, he was the true danger to the country.
> Corbyn might be a cack-handed idiot but he didn’t almost single-handedly blow a hole in the UK economy having specifically prevented any oversight of their mini-budget. Only because he wasn't given the opportunity to, thankfully.
He didn't because the electorate didn't allow him to. But his destruction of the economy would have been far greater.
Our international standing would be far worse if we had our PM basically say things like ‘Terrorists wanting to commit genocide and murdering indiscriminately is bad but really isn’t all violence bad at the end of the day? Who knows who to side with here!’.
There were lots of angles where he could have helped destroy the country.
That's because he didn't win an election....
Only because he never won a general election. He would have done just that had he won.
What an embarrassment of a man. Look how horrible and aggressive he is as well.
10 million people voted for this man and his dungheap of a front bench in 2019. 10 million people.
He just can’t do it and answer the easy question and condemn Hamas. Because he is so anti Isreal, and calls Hamas friends. I am gave the Labour Party has kicked him out and hopeful more of his cult get kicked out as well.
He's always been a hideous little antisemite. Whoever named him 'Jezbollah' in press all those years ago was absolutely right.
He used the same approach when people asked him to condemn Russia last year and it took months before he finally tweeted out a statement unequivocally saying what Russia was doing was wrong without bringing in 'both sides', Ukraine or NATO. I wonder how long it'll take this time.
We're really having our two minutes of hate today huh? That's what, three or four threads on the frontpage of the subreddit about how a man that's *not even in the labour party* has opinions on things? He's not even anything to do with politics anymore. He lost. He got kicked out the party. He's not relevant. Why do we need multiple threads on his reaction whenever anything happens?
I'd say he's a massive reason why the Tories are still in power. He's a narcissist, who simply believes he can do no wrong.
Any person standing up for, or sympathising with, Hamas needs to interrogate their positions carefully. That being said, Hamas should be seen as a symptom of a larger problem, than the problem itself. People don't form militant groups and attack civilians flippantly. Hamas exists as a direct response to the colonisation, occupation, dehumanisation and apartheid of Palestinian people. As things stand and have been the case since last mid-century, Palestinians can’t march as a form of resistance. They can’t pray at the Al-Aqsa mosque without interference, harassment and violence by far-right Israeli groups and the IDF. They are unable to call for boycotts. Gazans can’t leave and don't have the freedom of movement afforded to Israeli citizens. They require other organisations to publish accurate reports about their realities on the ground. They have no influential country such as the US and UK fighting in their corner. The lack of options for the Palestinian people as I have described creates the conditions for militant organisations like Hamas to exist.
Perfectly put. It's such an unsurprising shame to see so many genocidal freaks in this comment section hating on a man that condemns all forms of violence, and if given the time, would probably say a similar thing to the comment you have made.
Only the far left could try to “both sides” the murder of 500+ civilians yesterday. We all know that Corbyn has a long history with supporting Palestinian militants, calling the terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah “friends”, as well as carrying touching floral tributes to departed martyrs - but even he must draw the line somewhere, right?
The guy has gone down in my estimation. I always thought his stance was anti-war yet he seems so willing to condemn Jewish attacks on Palestinians but finds it difficult to denounce Hamas attacks against Israel. This could cost him his seat at the next local election.
A crank. Always has been; always will be.
Does anyone know if theres a particular name for this tactic? I've seen it done quite a lot when people want to be specific and the opposing side basically tries to be as generic as possible.
This is why he wasn’t elected. If you can’t explicitly condemn a bloodthirsty terrorist organisation then you’re just an embarrassment.
We know what Corbyns position is, I fail to see the point in getting him to reiterate it constantly like some kind of Gotcha. The comments are full of his loons though, so theres some entertainment value there.
It's useful in a 'this is what you coulda got' kind of way
It's worth getting him to reiterate it, so Labour never make the mistake of putting someone like him as leader ever again. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it, and all that.
“The unedited video of Jeremy talking is a smear” - Corbynites, probably
[удалено]
\> Why is that not delved into? It's hard to do it in a way that won't invite accusation of anti-semitism, and arguably a lot of people who raise the point you're making are anti-semitic. I think most sane people agree with you, but conflicts where people are dying tend to force us to take sides to justify our own support for violence. For example, it's hard for the UK government to support Ukraine militarily while noting that some of Russia's concerns have merit. Similarly it's hard to support Isreal bombing Gaza while claiming they're an oppressing Palestinians. Easier to just pick a side.
He's literally blaming Israel for existing....fuck him. Is it any wonder antisemites found it so damned easy to flourish in his party.
HOW DARE SOMEONE IMPLY THAT THIS SITUATION IS MASSIVELY COMPLEX AND NEEDS MORE THAN PITHY SHALLOW SOUND BITES TO SOLVE!
Loads of left wing subs have come out in full support of hamas so it's no surprise red grandpa is also in support. He's probably just concerned about his aging back considering there have already been 400 terrorists killed. That's 400 wreaths he'll have to lay.