Time for an update.

 

Various tabloids have attacked Corbyn for his behaviour at Sunday's Remembrance Day service. The Sun said that he didn't bow his head enough when he laid his wreath. The Mail were outraged at the fact that his hand-written message dared to suggest that it might be quite a good idea if we didn't keep having lots of wars.

 

Neither paper bothered to report what happened after the television cameras were off them. Cameron hotfooted it to a nice VIP meal. Corbyn stayed behind to applaud the parade of veterans and to talk to people.

Cameron hotfooted it to a nice VIP meal.

Not actually true.

Not actually true.

Are you saying the independent lied?

Are you saying the independent lied?

You'll notice if you look at the story on the Independent now any mention of 'VIP lunches' has been removed. More poor fact-checking on their part to be honest.

 

http://littleatoms.com/society/jeremy-corb...slap-lunch-meme

 

https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/663664935680024577

 

In the scheme of things, a fairly insignificant small lie, but I'm not sure what ground the Twitter pro-Corbyn spinners think they'll have criticising 'smears' (which mostly tend to be verbatim quotes which they object to fairly clear interpretations of, rather than total fabrications) in future if they're going to resort to outright lies in trying to set the agenda back.

Time for an update.

 

Various tabloids have attacked Corbyn for his behaviour at Sunday's Remembrance Day service. The Sun said that he didn't bow his head enough when he laid his wreath. The Mail were outraged at the fact that his hand-written message dared to suggest that it might be quite a good idea if we didn't keep having lots of wars.

 

Neither paper bothered to report what happened after the television cameras were off them. Cameron hotfooted it to a nice VIP meal. Corbyn stayed behind to applaud the parade of veterans and to talk to people.

 

As Ian Hislop commented on HIGNFY, Corbyn's "anti-war" stance might have more weight to it if he came out and denounced all terrorism and acts of violence by all humans everywhere and acknowledged, perhaps, that bombing innocent victims for political motives loses you the moral high ground. Two wrongs do not ever make a right. He should carefully watch last week's Dr Who episode....

I'm pretty sure that's what he means in his stance....

I'm pretty sure that's what he means in his stance....

 

Hmm not sure his actions over the years, talking with terrorist groups, constitutes anti-war or anti-violence. Whether you agree with the causes or not, it's more useful to act as moderator to get a just and lasting peace rather than take sides in unwinnable conflicts based on hate and history. "Wouldn't it be nice not to have war" is a fairly bland statement everyone would agree with - but is essentially wishful thinking.

Hmm not sure his actions over the years, talking with terrorist groups, constitutes anti-war or anti-violence. Whether you agree with the causes or not, it's more useful to act as moderator to get a just and lasting peace rather than take sides in unwinnable conflicts based on hate and history. "Wouldn't it be nice not to have war" is a fairly bland statement everyone would agree with - but is essentially wishful thinking.

John Major and Tony Blair both initiated talks with Sinn Fein. Does that mean they supported terrorism? There are many ways of persuading terrorists to announce violence. Talking to them is one of those ways. Giving in to all their demands is another. I know which one I prefer.

John Major and Tony Blair both initiated talks with Sinn Fein. Does that mean they supported terrorism? There are many ways of persuading terrorists to announce violence. Talking to them is one of those ways. Giving in to all their demands is another. I know which one I prefer.

They also talked to the DUP. I doubt Corbyn would have been caught dead with an Israeli settler until he got called out on it.

They also talked to the DUP. I doubt Corbyn would have been caught dead with an Israeli settler until he got called out on it.

And Thatcher dismissed Nelson Mandela as a terrorist, yet was perfectly happy to talk to Menachem Begin.

 

Corbyn's views on Israel-Palestine and Ireland are not exactly a secret. Therefore, he was in a better position to influence Sinn Fein / IRA than the DUP.

 

If a politician can make some progress by talking to a terrorist group, then that is a good thing. It is certainly better than Cameron grovelling in front of Saudi rulers.

I'm not sure anyone has evidence Corbyn ever didn't talk to unionists at any rate he was well ahead of his time talking to republicans and realised the only way to resolving the conflict was to talk to ALL the main participants.

They also talked to the DUP. I doubt Corbyn would have been caught dead with an Israeli settler until he got called out on it.

An additional point.

 

Talking to the DUP was not considered particularly controversial at the time. Talking to Sinn Fein was. Major and Blair should both be applauded for having the courage to talk to Sinn Fein, even if Major might be criticised for saying that the very idea made him "sick to the stomach" at a time when he knew full well that the talks were happening.

I'm not sure anyone has evidence Corbyn ever didn't talk to unionists at any rate he was well ahead of his time talking to republicans and realised the only way to resolving the conflict was to talk to ALL the main participants.

Fair point!

In hindsight it's funny how centrist tories now are in awe of Mandela and the like even though they were terrorists before the 90s.

 

I'm surprised the Brits still don't look at George Washington as a terrorist for his role in the fight for US independence. :P

In hindsight it's funny how centrist tories now are in awe of Mandela and the like even though they were terrorists before the 90s.

I think they'd prefer not to be reminded of past comments. Just like Cameron would like to avoid any mention of his expenses-paid trip to South Africa in the apartheid years. That is, the trip that happened at around the same time that Jeremy Corbyn was arrested for protesting outside South Africa House.

An additional point.

 

Talking to the DUP was not considered particularly controversial at the time. Talking to Sinn Fein was. Major and Blair should both be applauded for having the courage to talk to Sinn Fein, even if Major might be criticised for saying that the very idea made him "sick to the stomach" at a time when he knew full well that the talks were happening.

 

Indeed Thatchers policies of making criminals out of acts of political violence shows a lack of understanding of the Irish conflict and made things much worse. Although this was partly as a reaction to the murder of her friend Aire Nieve!

all very fair comments, and hypocrites should be outed in politics at every opportunity, but I still think ALL politicians need to be practical and even-handed when it comes to conflict, and condemn all atrocities by all sides. Saying the Ends justify the Means, just a big "No it doesn't" is all it takes. People die. A true pacifist does not condone random violence in any circumstances, and true believers in democracy believe that is the only reasonable method for change but it can't be suddenly imposed it needs persuasion. I'm not a pacifist because I believe one has the right to defend oneself from violence, but that doesn't include the right to defend yourself by striking at someone else first or tit for tat an eye for an eye and all that goes with that.

 

I'd just like Jezza to make his views perfectly clear when it comes to violence, and condemning those that do it. I would also like a world free from war and conflict and injustice.

Corbyn snubs national treasure Incy Wincy Spider!

 

https://twitter.com/BBCLouise/status/664429...6462080/video/1

 

The shame!

all very fair comments, and hypocrites should be outed in politics at every opportunity, but I still think ALL politicians need to be practical and even-handed when it comes to conflict, and condemn all atrocities by all sides. Saying the Ends justify the Means, just a big "No it doesn't" is all it takes. People die. A true pacifist does not condone random violence in any circumstances, and true believers in democracy believe that is the only reasonable method for change but it can't be suddenly imposed it needs persuasion. I'm not a pacifist because I believe one has the right to defend oneself from violence, but that doesn't include the right to defend yourself by striking at someone else first or tit for tat an eye for an eye and all that goes with that.

 

I'd just like Jezza to make his views perfectly clear when it comes to violence, and condemning those that do it. I would also like a world free from war and conflict and injustice.

 

 

I would argue JC does exactly that as i said do we have any proof he doesnt talk to all the participants, its just in Britain its easy to show pictures of him with Gerry Adams in the 1980s repeatedly to convince people he is at ease with people who resort to these methods.

 

In relation to believing you have the right to defend yourself but not to 'strike at someone else first' I totally agree and i am not sure you are making a comment in relation to republicans in N.Ireland? At any rate republicans would say they joined the IRA due to events like Bloody Sunday. The IRA only came into the new conflict in 1970 4 years after the first death by the UVF in 1966.

 

At any rate the Irish conflict is one that goes back hundreds of years and its very hard to say who started what without going through a 1000 year history lesson although we dont know who started it British government policy throughout the years definately lengthened and exacerbated the conflict.

I would argue JC does exactly that as i said do we have any proof he doesnt talk to all the participants, its just in Britain its easy to show pictures of him with Gerry Adams in the 1980s repeatedly to convince people he is at ease with people who resort to these methods.

 

In relation to believing you have the right to defend yourself but not to 'strike at someone else first' I totally agree and i am not sure you are making a comment in relation to republicans in N.Ireland? At any rate republicans would say they joined the IRA due to events like Bloody Sunday. The IRA only came into the new conflict in 1970 4 years after the first death by the UVF in 1966.

 

At any rate the Irish conflict is one that goes back hundreds of years and its very hard to say who started what without going through a 1000 year history lesson although we dont know who started it British government policy throughout the years definately lengthened and exacerbated the conflict.

 

Just general conflict comments I wasn't being specific, fairly obviously everyone thinks they are fighting for a just cause or they wouldn't do it. The British government has a lot of historical decisions to criticise (though most governments aren't exactly free from criticism to a lesser or greater degree), but it doesn't help the here and now and those alive now to refer back to events that happened before most of us were born, as if someone alive today is in some way to blame for something that happened centuries (or however long) ago. The ones to blame are those who took/take decisions, but in any case that still doesn't solve the current problems and issues, which are the most important thing to concentrate on.

 

Peace takes generations to become lasting, and human rights are really quite a recent development. It's within my living memory that sections of the UK population were granted equality, and within living memory generally that women got the vote. With regard to the IRA, none of the methods of violence worked politically, it just entrenched opinion and lost the cause sympathy. Things only changed when one terrorist attack was so awful it altered public opinion and people sat down to talk and negotiate. Which should have been the attitude of all parties concerned decades earlier to avoid escalation.