Corbyn .

[grassroots]

Is Corbyn a Traitor . What is your view.

[said]

Is Corbyn a Traitor . What is your view.

Corbyn represents the far left supporters. The majority of these are people who are not politically aware, who feel that the cause of politics is to serve and provide them with everything they want at absolutely no cost to themselves.

Initially he had some good ideas without considering the realistic outcomes. His attempt to satisfy all his own supporters has led to him completely losing his way. He is trying to appease the Unions who support him financially while trying to satisfy party members such as Anna Soubry, David Lammy, Diane Abbot etc., whose views all conflict with one another and to appeal to the general public whilst denying the reasons and outcome of Brexit.

Corbyn does not have the determination nor the power to gain sufficient respect within his own party in order to govern a country - he appears to be under the illusion that the few empty promises he makes to the less wary electorate will be sufficient to make him a leader.

Is he a traitor? No - just very a naïve, arrogant and stubborn politician.

[justbecause]

Corbyn represents the far left supporters. The majority of these are people who are not politically aware, who feel that the cause of politics is to serve and provide them with everything they want at absolutely no cost to themselves.

Initially he had some good ideas without considering the realistic outcomes. His attempt to satisfy all his own supporters has led to him completely losing his way. He is trying to appease the Unions who support him financially while trying to satisfy party members such as Anna Soubry, David Lammy, Diane Abbot etc., whose views all conflict with one another and to appeal to the general public whilst denying the reasons and outcome of Brexit.

Corbyn does not have the determination nor the power to gain sufficient respect within his own party in order to govern a country - he appears to be under the illusion that the few empty promises he makes to the less wary electorate will be sufficient to make him a leader.

Is he a traitor? No - just very a naïve, arrogant and stubborn politician.

That’s a pretty good summing up of Corbyn, to be fair.

[Little Londoner]

A Traitor? Christ I'd hate to think what you'd call him if he was taking a fortune in donations from Russians like the lily white Tories.

He has backed Mays expulsion of Russian diplomats but has warned about jumping into further sanctions until the PROOF is 100% that the Russian Government sanctioned this outrage. He cites the Invasion of Iraq as jumping the gun without waiting for confirmation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and does not want this to escalate until certainty is confirmed.

If that is being a traitor then I'm a good bet for a Knighthood in the next honours list.

[xroads]

Traitor? No, just the voice of common sense!

The Tories like to shout a lot, but if Russia starts pulling out of trade arrangements and ripping up business contracts, they, the Tories, will suddenly stop shouting.

It's rather like 1980 when the government put pressure on Olympic athletes but they didn't put pressure on UK businesses making money via trade deals with Russia.

BTW, I wonder how many traitors the UK has bumped off over the years.

[Hamble]

Corbyn a traitor?
No he is a far left tool of the far far left tool box.

[silver fox]

Corbyn represents the far left supporters. The majority of these are people who are not politically aware, who feel that the cause of politics is to serve and provide them with everything they want at absolutely no cost to themselves.

Initially he had some good ideas without considering the realistic outcomes. His attempt to satisfy all his own supporters has led to him completely losing his way. He is trying to appease the Unions who support him financially while trying to satisfy party members such as Anna Soubry, David Lammy, Diane Abbot etc., whose views all conflict with one another and to appeal to the general public whilst denying the reasons and outcome of Brexit.

Corbyn does not have the determination nor the power to gain sufficient respect within his own party in order to govern a country - he appears to be under the illusion that the few empty promises he makes to the less wary electorate will be sufficient to make him a leader.

Is he a traitor? No - just very a naïve, arrogant and stubborn politician.

More politically aware than those who swallow Tory mantra unstudied and unchewed, no-one believes that the state will provide from a magic money tree, unlike a certain PM who can find plenty of cash to buy support, what the left require is a fair distribution and equal opportunity for all.

Of course there are factions within the Labour party, just as in virtually every political party, just take a look over your shoulder at Tories fighting like ferrets in a sack over Brexit.

What empty promises????? all he promises is an end to ideological austerity, and to move towards righting the wrongs perpetuated by our present gang.

Your last paragraph, thought you were referring to Boris, that is a perfect assessment of him.

[silver fox]

Corbyn a traitor?
No he is a far left tool of the far far left tool box.

Better a tool box than the snake pit May has to deal with.

[salus.populi]

Is Corbyn a Traitor.

Don't be ridiculous.

[Toodles McGinty]

He is trying to appease the Unions who support him financially while trying to satisfy party members such as Anna Soubry,

Fairly sure he has no interest in satisfying Tory MP Anna Soubry, unless she's jumped ship and joined the Labour party.

My initial reaction to this situation was that it had to be Russia, it is their nerve agent, after all. However, I Googled a bit and found the Novichok was made in several countries in the Soviet Union from the 70s until '93. Now consider the Soviet Union broke up in 1991, this particular nerve agent could be anywhere now, in goodness knows whose hands. So I reckon Corbyn was showing good sense to question the assumption that it had to be Russia behind the attack.

Sure, in all probability it is Putin, but shouldn't a world authority such as the CWC investigate before we're thrown into a full blown second cold war? There are plenty of countries that would like to see Russia being blamed - I'd wager Ukraine had it's own stocks of Novichok, and they aren't too pally with the Bear.

So no, Corbyn isn't a traitor, he's doing what he always does, advocating jaw jaw before war war, as Churchill once said.

[Hamble]

[QUOTE=Toodles McGinty;6631161]Fairly sure he has no interest in satisfying Tory MP Anna Soubry, unless she's jumped ship and joined the Labour party.

My initial reaction to this situation was that it had to be Russia, it is their nerve agent, after all. However, I Googled a bit and found the Novichok was made in several countries in the Soviet Union from the 70s until '93. Now consider the Soviet Union broke up in 1991, this particular nerve agent could be anywhere now, in goodness knows whose hands. So I reckon Corbyn was showing good sense to question the assumption that it had to be Russia behind the attack.

Sure, in all probability it is Putin, but shouldn't a world authority such as the CWC investigate before we're thrown into a full blown second cold war? There are plenty of countries that would like to see Russia being blamed - I'd wager Ukraine had it's own stocks of Novichok, and they aren't too pally with the Bear.

So no, Corbyn isn't a traitor, he's doing what he always does, advocating jaw jaw before war war, as Churchill once said.[/QUOTE



Advocating double standards!


Quote
"Jeremy Corbyn said Vladimir Putin’s illegal incursion into Ukraine which saw the annexation of Crimea was “not unprovoked” and that there were “huge questions” over Western intentions in the country. In a 2014 article for the Morning Star at the height of the Ukraine War Corbyn wrote:


“On Ukraine, I would not condone Russian behaviour or expansion. But it is not unprovoked, and the right of people to seek a federal structure or independence should not be denied. And there are huge questions around the West’s intentions in Ukraine.”

At the same time Corbyn was making excuses for Putin’s actions his top spinner Seumas Milne was loudly defending the Kremlin. Milne, who has described Putin as “a centrist”, called the annexation of Crimea “clearly defensive”:


“Putin’s absorption of Crimea and support for the rebellion in eastern Ukraine is clearly defensive, and the red line now drawn: the east of Ukraine, at least, is not going to be swallowed up by Nato or the EU”

Source
Guido Fawkes.

[Toodles McGinty]

Advocating double standards!

Quote
"Jeremy Corbyn said Vladimir Putin’s illegal incursion into Ukraine which saw the annexation of Crimea was “not unprovoked” and that there were “huge questions” over Western intentions in the country. In a 2014 article for the Morning Star at the height of the Ukraine War Corbyn wrote:.....

What has that got to do with Corbyn either being a traitor, or not, for wanting to wait for more evidence in the Salisbury situation?

[Hamble]

What has that got to do with Corbyn either being a traitor, or not, for wanting to wait for more evidence in the Salisbury situation?

Evidence is evidence and should be judged as a whole if this is the blokey 'socialists' wish to elect as a leader of this Country.


Double standards?
Hypocrite?
Liar?
Intellectually challenged?
Agent COB?

[Toodles McGinty]

Evidence is evidence and should be judged as a whole if this is the blokey 'socialists' wish to elect as a leader of this Country.


Double standards?
Hypocrite?
Liar?
Intellectually challenged?
Agent COB?

Evidence is evidence? Isn't that what Corbyn is saying? He's just been on the news and said as Boris Johnson is accusing Putin, he'd like to see the evidence.

Isn't that what any government with an ounce of sense should do, look at the evidence presented, then make an informed judgement?

In a speech this morning "In a speech to the Conservative Party’s Spring Forum in Central London she said that Russia was in ‘flagrant breach of international law and the Chemical Weapons Convention’ and that the UK would ‘consider the next steps with its allies in the coming days.’.

Where is the evidence. Where are the chemical weapons experts stating uncategorically that the trail of evidence leads directly to Russia? Would you be willing to start a possible Cold War on the facts that the Soviet Union had stocks of this chemical 28 years ago, then allegedly stopped making it? Really?

I believe that TRESemme has visions of Maggie Thatcher atop a tank, stirring the nation to vote Tory as the 'only party to defend the nation', well apart form the devastating cuts to the armed services, of course.

Also, I wouldn't mind knowing why Salisbury has fewer CCTV cameras than Outer Mongolia.

[Hamble]

Evidence is evidence? Isn't that what Corbyn is saying? He's just been on the news and said as Boris Johnson is accusing Putin, he'd like to see the evidence.

Isn't that what any government with an ounce of sense should do, look at the evidence presented, then make an informed judgement?

In a speech this morning "In a speech to the Conservative Party’s Spring Forum in Central London she said that Russia was in ‘flagrant breach of international law and the Chemical Weapons Convention’ and that the UK would ‘consider the next steps with its allies in the coming days.’.

Where is the evidence. Where are the chemical weapons experts stating uncategorically that the trail of evidence leads directly to Russia? Would you be willing to start a possible Cold War on the facts that the Soviet Union had stocks of this chemical 28 years ago, then allegedly stopped making it? Really?

I believe that TRESemme has visions of Maggie Thatcher atop a tank, stirring the nation to vote Tory as the 'only party to defend the nation', well apart form the devastating cuts to the armed services, of course.

Also, I wouldn't mind knowing why Salisbury has fewer CCTV cameras than Outer Mongolia.

'Evidence' of past behaviour which I listed and pointed out that Corbyn sides with Putin in defending acts of aggression on foreign soil.

Putin protects Assad in Syria killing his own people with poison.