Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Corbyn's suggestion that Ukraine surrender and give Putin what he wants would have wider implications for the region. Having gained the Ukraine, where next? How about the Baltic states? Or Finland? Within the last year Putin threatened Sweden. If they were all to lay down their arms and offer no resistance as Corbyn insists, why not?

Indeed.

Putin is pursuing the same foreign policy imperatives as the Tsars - access to warm-water harbours and buffer states on the eastern edge of the European Plain. So the old Soviet empire is, for him, something to regain. Ukraine is the first step, not the goal.

If Putin's the new Czar, does that make Jezz the neo-Rasputin?

It is a shame how he carries on.

Rah-rah Jez Corbyn
Russia's greatest love machine...?

Nah.

Yug wrote: ↑Sun Feb 26, 2023 12:52 pm Rah-rah Jez Corbyn
Russia's greatest love machine...?

Nah.

Just ask Diane. . .

Yug wrote: ↑Sun Feb 26, 2023 12:52 pm Rah-rah Jez Corbyn
Russia's greatest love machine...?

Nah.

It's a close race between Jez and the former MP for Baghdad North.

This is good for a chuckle. Letter in the Grauniad from somebody allegedly named "Zoe Zero".

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/wh ... 283c&ei=16

Sodha writes about ejecting Corbyn as if it were a sign of democracy, yet what could be less democratic than denying the voters of Islington North their choice of Labour MP – the much respected and hard-working Corbyn, who has served that constituency very well for decades?

The voters of Islington North do not get "their" choice of Labour MP (and never have done). They get the opportunity to choose to vote for a Labour candidate, which they will continue to enjoy. It just won't be Jeremy Feckin' Corbyn. The voters of Islington North could still vote for Corbyn, if he grows a pair of bollocks and stands on his own account instead of seeking to continue to use the Labour Party as a host for him and his parasitically eccentric political hobby horses. Granted, that is looking increasingly unlikely.

Keir Starmer clearly feels threatened by the mere presence of Corbyn on the backbenches. Why?

No he doesn't. If there is a threat from Corbyn, it is, as ever, that of his toxicity turning off voters from electing Labour to government because of his association with the party. Corbyn on the backbenches has done fuck all for his entire parliamentary career other than ignore his party whip, and would only continue in the same vein.

Corbyn is correct to point to the one thing that, according to Starmer, we aren’t supposed to talk about: Palestine. But it’s more than that. Starmer represents preservation of the status quo, whereas Corbyn represents change. Some of us are more than ready for change and Sodha cannot ignore the fact that 12 million of us voted for that.

What bollocks. A steady 28 point lead in the opinion polls represents people wanting a "preservation of the status quo?
You can fuck that sky-high.

I am so heartily sick of this sort of delusional Trot whining.

You see the same thing from the Sun claiming Scousers are denying their city its democratic right to tits, bigotry and bingo, Tories who insist that Johnson is the rightful PM because of his 2019 mandate, of Irish Republicans who claim loyalty to the 1919 IFS government, and neo-nazi groups who say that every German government since Doenitz has been illegitimate. They are stupid cranks.

Not so much continuity now...



The article is worth a read.

https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/corbyns-ch ... sm-report/

Jeremy Corbyn’s chief of staff attempted to “delete all information” related to the leaking of a controversial report into Labour’s antisemitism crisis, the High Court has heard.

Karie Murphy later insisted she had forgotten information, including the controversial 800 page report itself, had been stored on her iCloud account which was linked to her work laptop when it was removed.

Lawyers acting for the Labour Party asked the High Court on Wednesday to grant permission for use of an email Murphy had sent on April 8 2020 – one day before the antisemitism report was leaked – which they say contains “prima facie evidence of wrongdoing.”


Labour is facing numerous claims for a breach of data protection laws and privacy, relating to the leaking of the report, which contained private details of whistleblowers and complainants about antisemitism in the party.

The report was leaked in April 9th 2020, just as Keir Starmer replaced Corbyn as leader.

It was an attempt to suggest efforts to combat antisemitism in the party had been hindered not by those close to the ex-leader but, in part, because of the “factionalism” of party officials who were opposed to his leadership.

Labour is attempting to prove that Murphy, along with four other former party staffers, including former communications director Seamus Milne were responsible for the leak.

The five ex-employees — Murphy, Milne, Georgina Robertson, Harry Hayball, and Laura Murray — deny leaking the report and say that two investigations did not find the source of the leak.

From what I’ve read it seems blindingly obvious who leaked it.

It will be one of those 5 and it’s probably Murphy or someone with access to her drive, it was done to hurt the party on their way out.

Youngian wrote: ↑Sun Feb 26, 2023 12:06 am David Sainsbury is hardly a sinister oligarch.

She thinks "the people"" are a very low percentage of them who join political parties.

I have some concern that business donors could water down sectoral bargaining, but otherwise I'll take them over a bunch of people who eg call for nationalisations without any idea of what they cost.

mattomac wrote: ↑Sun Feb 26, 2023 8:56 pm From what I’ve read it seems blindingly obvious who leaked it.

It will be on of those 5 and it’s probably Murphy or someone with access to her drive, it was done to hurt the party on their way out.

A few people have suggested this case will be extremely expensive. I don't know if it would if this email is the smoking gun it sounds.

mattomac wrote: ↑Sun Feb 26, 2023 8:56 pm From what I’ve read it seems blindingly obvious who leaked it.

It will be on of those 5 and it’s probably Murphy or someone with access to her drive, it was done to hurt the party on their way out.

More than that; it placed the party in breach of data protection laws, a case which is proceeding and may cost so much in fines and compensation as to bankrupt it. Intentionally, I suspect.

Business as usual. Like the rest of the world doesn't exist apart from Britain and America.

The NHS problem is that it's been underfunded, not that it's been privatized. See here, myth number 5.

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publicatio ... land-myths

Check out the utterly juvenile response BTL to this from Jez fans.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Mon Feb 27, 2023 2:29 pm

mattomac wrote: ↑Sun Feb 26, 2023 8:56 pm From what I’ve read it seems blindingly obvious who leaked it.

It will be on of those 5 and it’s probably Murphy or someone with access to her drive, it was done to hurt the party on their way out.

A few people have suggested this case will be extremely expensive. I don't know if it would if this email is the smoking gun it sounds.

Yup that’s if they can’t prove it as those investigations did, if Labour can say it was one of them which that email suggests then the party will remove some of the costs, Sainsbury’s donation helps settle the costs currently accrued through a number of these law suits.

I assume if they had held on any longer the party may well have been finished.

People seem to be confused: Corbyn isn’t a pacifist, as a pacifist would be critical of both sides and certainly much more critical of someone who is openly a warmonger. Corbyn is an apologist masquerading as a pacifist. All forms of peace are not equal - just wanting it without appraising the cost or the context is almost as stupid as just wanting war for the sake of it.

I was told I’d been brainwashed by the Murdoch press for suggesting Corbyn had no involvement in the NI peace process and just parroted the Republican line with an ‘I condemn all violence’ caveat. It might have been because I heard him say this stuff at Troops Out * meetings in the 80 and 90s.

* A Republican organisation for Brit fellow travellers. Many attendees were good people sick of the conflict and police brutality against the Irish in London during the Troubles. And others like Jez in it for the whole stretch as part of a wider global struggle against imperialism.