advertisement


Corbyn at it again over Iran blowing up Oil tankers

If you know your history how America got involved in Vietnam by staging an attack on it's own battle ship. Germans with Poland, Iraqi war the list goes on. Of course proof is needed true proof not the propaganda you hear in front of the TV. America and Israel have a list of regime change in the middle east what a mess its turned out to be. Now for the last part Iran.
 
This serves as another indicator as to just how tarnished and lacking in credibility Corbyn is now that he can’t even make a sensible point without drawing flack. His comment (BBC) is perfectly sensible, but he (and by connection his party) is now so indelibly stained with anti-Semitism, support for Hamas, Hezbollah etc etc etc even vacuous opportunists and Trump-toadies like Jeremy Hunt can successfully slap him back into his box. He is basically non-functional as an opposition leader and has made the whole Labour movement untenable as a political force.
 
Tony L said:
This serves as another indicator as to just how tarnished and lacking in credibility Corbyn is now that he can’t even make a sensible point without drawing flack. His comment (BBC) is perfectly sensible, but he (and by connection his party) is now so indelibly stained with anti-Semitism, support for Hamas, Hezbollah etc etc etc even vacuous opportunists and Trump-toadies like Jeremy Hunt can successfully slap him back into his box. He is basically non-functional as an opposition leader and has made the whole Labour movement untenable as a political force.
Click to expand...
If you think any politician in the UK can push back against the drive to war - any war - without drawing heat then you haven't been paying attention. The centre left as well as right wing press are absolutely rock hard for any kind of military intervention whatsoever - their reputation rests on it: after all, if they were to question this (whatever blatantly self-interested and doomed bit of US war-mongering) then maybe they should also have questioned that (every previous self-interested and doomed bit of US war-mongering), which they absolutely did not do. The UK is a war machine and if trying to throw a spanner in it were the only objectionable thing Corbyn were planning it would still be enough to earn the undying enmity of the whole of the British establishment, and all the smear campaigns he's so far endured.
 
Tony L said:
This serves as another indicator as to just how tarnished and lacking in credibility Corbyn is now that he can’t even make a sensible point without drawing flack. His comment (BBC) is perfectly sensible, but he (and by connection his party) is now so indelibly stained with anti-Semitism, support for Hamas, Hezbollah etc etc etc even vacuous opportunists and Trump-toadies like Jeremy Hunt can successfully slap him back into his box. He is basically non-functional as an opposition leader and has made the whole Labour movement untenable as a political force.
Click to expand...
So what he says is perfectly sensible, but it needs to be said by someone trustworthy, someone not indelibly stained, some one upstanding?

47964338446_b7b966f917.jpg
 
Tony L said:
This serves as another indicator as to just how tarnished and lacking in credibility Corbyn is now that he can’t even make a sensible point without drawing flack. His comment (BBC) is perfectly sensible, but he (and by connection his party) is now so indelibly stained with anti-Semitism, support for Hamas, Hezbollah etc etc etc even vacuous opportunists and Trump-toadies like Jeremy Hunt can successfully slap him back into his box. He is basically non-functional as an opposition leader and has made the whole Labour movement untenable as a political force.
Click to expand...

What you assert is only 'true' because you and others react as you have. It's a form of 'go for the man, not the ball' ad hom. It is a routine trick practiced particularly by those who went to schools that taught 'rhetoric', etc. By echoing it, you do what the right wing press, etc, wanted. Suits them - as ever - to 'divide and rule' in ways like this.
 
Trump says he's pulling out of Syria and a week later a gas attack (staged) is blamed on Assad, when him committing such an attack would have been literally insane, given he was winning the war, and knew the only thing that would drag the U.S. back in would be him ordering a gas attack.

Now, as Iran was hosting it's first meeting with a Japanese PM in 47 years, a meeting designed to try to find a way to ease tensions, which Iran wants, we're supposed to believe that on the same day Iran attacked a Japanese owned oil tanker.

Both times the UK government blindly accepted the accompanying U.S. lies.

And some people actually believe these sick lies.... :rolleyes:
 
ks.234 said:
So what he says is perfectly sensible, but it needs to be said by someone trustworthy, someone not indelibly stained, some one upstanding?

47964338446_b7b966f917.jpg
Click to expand...

Despite his errors I bet Clegg could come back right now and have a public approval rating way, way above Corbyn’s current record-breaking minus-53! Surely you see that Corbyn is now a laughingstock and dragging the whole Labour party down? He has made the party utterly unelectable even against the backdrop of Theresa May’s recursive failure. Johnson will just crucify his discredited Labour, as would Farage, and I find that terrifying.
 
Corbyn makes a very good point.

Don't get me wrong, I think his handling of Brexit is awful.

But if you ask me to believe in the pronouncement of the Trump administration, lukewarmly supported by the UK, without some better back up than "it was them that did it" then some healthy scepticism is reasonable.

Gulf II was instigated on a deliberate lie. And our current politicians are willing to lie to our faces when we can go online, download the governments own data and prove that they are lying to us. Because they don't care as long as their tame media prints it enough to get people to believe it. When they can't or don't show you the evidence - then we trust them? Because it is about security? Because it is about oil? Because there is an election soon?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tony L said:
Despite his errors I bet Clegg could come back right now and have a public approval rating way, way above Corbyn’s current record-breaking minus-53!
Click to expand...

Which may example how such "approval ratings" are generated by the way the press, etc, present things over time.

All this whilst issue after issue after issue of PE documents in detail the financial, etc, shady dealings and dealers in the Tory party. Curiously, almost unreported elsewhere...

I'm also wondering why the press have stopped commenting on what BoJo said on air about money being 'wasted' on police investigations into child molestation. His language was, erm, 'unstatesmanlike' to put it politely. In this kind of context such arrogance can have tragic consequences for victims. Yet apparently he is very 'credible' for the Tory party. Which perhaps tells us what we need to know about them...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top