More than two years after he retired from the leadership of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn is still bombarded with unsupported attacks on his character and behaviour.
We all know, now, that claims of rampant anti-Semitism within Labour during his leadership were lies. Accusations were confected for political reasons and were false.
Similarly, claims that he was a supporter of terrorist organisations like the IRA and Hamas were also lies; he is a pacifist and would never approve of the use of violence to achieve political ends.
But still the accusations fly – today, from client journalists like Olivia Utley of the Torygraph and a comedian called Matt Forde, on the BBC’s Politics Live.
Sadly, little attempt was made to balance their nonsense with factual evidence.
Anti-Semitism in the Labour Party was reduced during Mr Corbyn’s time as leader – and that was from a level lower than the national average or any other UK political party.
The investigation of the party by the Equality and Human Rights Commission was requested for political reasons and eventually reported that the party was not institutionally anti-Semitic.
Forde’s attacks on Bell Ribeiro-Addy, referring to the investigation, were misleading. I think he must have known this and question why he behaved in that manner. It surprises me that nobody at the BBC thought to question it in any way.
Perhaps This Writer can redress the balance here, with something the BBC broadcast a while ago:
It seems there’s at least one broadcaster there who still knows what a fact is.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Jake Davison: from the state of him – both mental and physical, the reason he couldnt get a girl seems clear.
What are the facts?
We know that 22-year-old Jake Davison took a gun (of some kind) and murdered his 51-year-old mother Maxine at their home in Biddick Drive, Keyham, Plymouth, last Thursday.
He then moved out into the street where he murdered three-year-old Sophie Martyn and her father Lee, 43.
Finally, he shot dead 59-year-old Stephen Washington and Kate Shepherd, 66, before turning his weapon on himself.
Also shot were a 53 year-old woman and a 33-year-old man who were sent to hospital with injuries that were not thought life-threatening.
Why?
It seems the authorities don’t know Davison’s stated reasons for the rampage – the worst mass killing on UK soil since 2010.
But he has left behind information about his political beliefs that provide us with a workable theory: he reckoned he was an “Incel”.
What on Earth is an Incel?
It’s a term apparently coined in the early part of this century to denote men who believe they are “INvoluntarily CELibate” because women are unfairly withholding sex from them.
Looking at their other beliefs, it becomes apparent that anybody withdrawing from contact with these crazies is likely to have had extremely good reasons for it!
Dr Louise Raw described the Incel philosophy in an article way back in 2018:
They specifically feel entitled to sex with women they perceive as the most attractive — “Stacys” — and resent both them and the “Chads” — romantically successful men — they date. When these are men of colour, the hatred steps up a gear.
This all seemed pitiful until it turned deadly.
Pitiful is right!
The fact is that pretty much every man on the planet might describe himself as “involuntarily celibate” at one time or another.
But – as a rule – we don’t blame women – as a group – for “withholding” sexual contact that we feel we have a right to have. It doesn’t work like that. Sex is the most intimate thing that two people can do, and that’s why most women won’t do it with any Tom, Harry or Dick that turns up. It is perfectly reasonable for them to want a little security in their choice first.
Nobody is “entitled” to it. In fact, if you believe in Darwin’s laws of natural selection, procreation is a privilege that should be awarded only to those who are most fit for the job. There’s evidence for that in the mating displays carried out by the males of other animal species in order to impress the females.
So, as an attitude to relationships, we can safely say that anybody holding this view is a wretched sexual and social inadequate who is just looking for a shortcut to sex that will hide their interpersonal failings.
But there’s another aspect to this: politics.
Incels, it seems, ally themselves with opposition to feminism. The idea is that an improvement in the lives of women must bring with it a worsening of men’s position, and this leads to hatred of women – also known as misogyny.
And misogyny has long been a pathway into support for fascism – in the same way that racism has been.
Incels are therefore most likely to be white men who are misogynistic racists; if they see women they consider attractive with men of colour, then the hatred steps up a notch.
This makes them easy to recruit into far-right organisations, and there is evidence that American alt-right groups have been doing just that.
Davison was certainly prime material for radicalisation of this kind. According to the Daily Beast,
Davison expressed his admiration for Donald Trump on Facebook and posted multiple self-pitying YouTube videos in which he identified himself as part of the incel community.
In one post from 2018, Davison shared a Trump quote and, when his friends ridiculed him in the comments, the suspect hit back: “You may not agree with his political views (I do) but he is different from the scum like Hillary or the people running our country like the neo-con sellout that is [then-British Prime Minister] Theresa May.”
Davison’s Facebook likes suggest he was obsessed with conservative U.S. politics. He followed the pages of Trump, all of his children, and several Trump businesses, as well as pages for the NRA, Fox News, Breitbart, Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, and one called “Ted Nugent for President.” In one comment, he said it was his dream to move to the States.
It has been noted that these associations were suppressed by domestic news organisations like the BBC in their early reports:
BBC bias just confuses me. I watched coverage of the Plymouth terrorist attack on both the BBC and ITV lunch time news shows. Only ITV detailed what’s so far know about his politics: right wing, gun loving, Trump supporting. Why would the BBC not want to mention this? pic.twitter.com/bfFt6uvz1J
Tricky. And these waters were muddied by the BBC (et all) failing to identify his political leanings…
No white man is ever called a terrorist unless he’s a socialist.
— Kerry-Anne Mendoza 🏳️🌈 (@TheMendozaWoman) August 13, 2021
At first, Devon & Cornwall Police denied any link with terrorism:
I wrote 3 years ago about the danger of ‘Incels’. Many people have now died both sides of the Atlantic. But the police immediately said #Plymouth ‘wasn’t a terrorist incident’. Yes it was, & there will be more if these vicious radicalised misogynists aren’t stopped. https://t.co/srfDaIusAZ
UK law defines terrorism as: “Use or threat of action, both in and outside of the UK, designed to influence any international government organisation or to intimidate the public. It must also be for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.”
Personally, then, I don’t think Davison’s actions would constitute terrorism as defined here.
I don’t think he was trying to influence government or intimidate the public because firstly, he didn’t demand anything and secondly, he would need to be alive for any intimidation to work.
The idea of advancing Incel as a cause is self-defeating; even those who identify as members of that group don’t want to be in it!
And his lunatic right-wing ideology will have taken a public relations hammering as a result of his murders.
That being said, there is plenty of evidence to show that people who identify themselves as Incels need to be tracked down and challenged. Perhaps the easiest way to do this would be to accede to the wishes below, and define misogyny (and therefore also its counterpart, misandry) as a hate crime.
After the Plymouth Shooting & the shooters involvement with Incel will the government finally acknowledge misogyny as a hate crime?
We're way overdue a serious interrogation of how online-facilitated cultures which champion misogyny and masculine fantasies, to devastating effect, with loneliness and a loss of security. https://t.co/n93Z3tMcen
It seems to me that the expression of misogynistic opinions in the way carried out by the Incels indicates a desire to harm – and a lack of concern about the consequences – that crosses the line of acceptability.
It also seems reasonable to me that, if alerted to such expressions of opinion, police should challenge those responsible and, following on from that – if necessary – take appropriate steps to prevent acts of violence such as we saw last week in Plymouth.
It would be possible, also, to use such interviews as ways to research whether these people are indeed being radicalised by right-wing organisations for the purpose of committing terrorist crime – and to devise ways of combating such activity.
Connected with this, of course, is the fact that Davison owned a gun. His own social media posts and YouTube videos confessed that he was mentally unstable, and therefore it seems logical that he should not have been in possession of a firearm, yet his licence had been renewed only recently.
And it isn’t as though we haven’t been aware of the risks:
I've been calling for tighter gun controls for over 30 years.
* Ban storing guns at home * Renew gun licences annually * Mental health tests annually for gun owners * Public register of gun owners
Ah, but Chris Williamson is a socialist – and therefore might as well be a terrorist himself – right?
You see how these debates can be twisted by political dogma – especially when news organisations like the BBC distort or omit important facts?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
It seems Shamima Begum is likely to have her wish to live back in the UK after all – as a criminal serving a prison sentence for terror crimes.
The Home Office announced its disappointment that the Court of Appeal had allowed her to come home to beg for the return of her UK citizenship, and said it would appeal against the ruling.
Well, it seems someone has come up with this in the meantime.
Interestingly, a (non-scientific) poll of This Site’s readers has shown (at the time of writing) that roughly three-fifths of those who voted favoured returning her citizenship, against 40 per cent who did not.
So it seems she may have her citizenship restored – only to spend the next few years enjoying it in a prison cell.
Here’s LBC:
Richard Walton, who led Scotland Yard’s counter terrorism unit between 2011 and 2016, said that Shamima, now 20, who fled the UK as a schoolgirl to join IS in Syria, is likely to face arrest and a subsequent terror trial if she takes up the opportunity to return to the UK.
Mr Walton said he believes the appeal court had made a mistake in its judgement yesterday and that the ruling “undermines” the ability of elected officials to keep the public safe.
Mr Walton said: “I think the court of appeal has made a profound mistake. It will set a dangerous precedent.
“Frankly it is alarming to see the court of appeal taking over the Home Secretary’s responsibility of who should be allowed in the UK.
“It has opened the door for her return to Britain and has undermined a statutory power of parliament.
“She is highly likely to be arrested… but it is almost impossible to gather sufficient evidence from war zones.”
It seems to This Writer that, if Ms Begum is indeed arrested on her arrival in the UK, then it presents an opportunity for our security forces.
As a commenter on This Site’s previous story wrote: “If she was a child that was groomed, as some are saying, then we need to know who has been doing the grooming.”
Exactly. Let’s find out who has been encouraging teenagers to betray their country, track them down and bring them to justice.
I think that should be something we can all support.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Boris Johnson – what a miserable, fake excuse for a politician!
First he ducked out of the interview he had promised the BBC, after he saw Andrew Neil pressing Jeremy Corbyn hard (but not too hard for the Labour leader, who remained calm and clear throughout).
Then he used the atrocity of the terror attack on London Bridge to press the Corporation into allowing him to be interviewed, not by Andrew Neil but by Andrew Marr – and for 15 minutes, not 30.
That interview was broadcast on Sunday (December 1) – and Johnson lied through his teeth from start to finish.
How do I know? Simple.
The BBC fact-checked it.
Here are some highlights:
1. Mr Johnson said his government is putting £160 million of extra money into counter-terrorist policing – but in fact it had promised only to increase funding in line with inflation. The £160 million was the difference between spending plans announced in 2015 and the figure eventually spent in 2019-20. Lie.
2. Mr Johnson claimed Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn had said he would disband MI5 – but there is no evidence to support it. Lie.
3. Mr Johnson said the Queen’s Speech – the programme for the new Parliamentary session he had demanded – had been blocked by Parliament. In fact it had been passed, on October 24 – by 16 votes. Lie.
4. Mr Johnson said his government was already considering ending the policy of automatic early release for serious and violent offenders – but the ‘Sentencing Bill’ in the Queen’s Speech would have only changed the automatic release point from halfway to two-thirds of the way through a sentence. Offenders considered “dangerous” are already not considered for release until they have served two-thirds of their sentences. Lie.
5. Mr Johnson said his government would make the largest investment in the NHS in modern memory – but the £34 billion he quoted, in real terms, came to 3.2 per cent per year, only slightly more than half the six per cent average achieved by Labour governments between 1997 and 2010. Lie.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
A heckler who asked Jeremy Corbyn if the UK’s prime minister should be a “terrorist sympathiser” was himself linked to racist and homophobic comments on Twitter.
People like Church of Scotland minister Reverend Richard Cameron do excellent work in clearing the air of these poisonous, false suggestions by being highly questionable themselves.
Here’s the incident, caught on video:
"Do you think the man that's going to be prime minister of this country should be a terrorist sympathiser, Mr Corbyn?"
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is heckled on a visit to Glasgow
The reference to an “Islamic jihadi” scarf was insensitive, as Mr Corbyn was wearing a scarf gifted to him by care charity Who Cares? Scotland, and had been explaining what it meant to him when Mr Cameron interrupted:
Whilst out on the campaign trail, @jeremycorbyn has been wearing a scarf that we gave to him.
Whilst he was explaining what it meant to him today, someone interrupted and took the focus away from Care Experienced people.
He went on to ask, “Are you invited to the funeral?” – believed to be a reference to the death of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who was recently killed by US forces. The radio station LBC has also tried to kick up a stink about this, but has been accused of misleading the public (more about this in another post).
Then he asked whether Mr Corbyn thought the UK’s prime minister should be a terrorist sympathiser, and “Who’s going to be the first terrorist invited to the House of Commons when you’re prime minister?”
Of course we know that Mr Corbyn doesn’t sympathise with terrorists; any such accusations have been proved unfounded.
But Mr Cameron’s own Twitter account makes very clear indications of his own sympathies.
Some of his tweets seem to have disappeared from his timeline but Indy100 has kindly supplied examples to the world. This one shows support for Boris Johnson’s brand of Islamophobia:
And here’s one that suggests he is homophobic as well:
Finally, it seems Mr Cameron is also anti-Semitic, which tends to scuttle claims that Jeremy Corbyn is of the same persuasion:
I note Richard Cameron has been frothing in my mentions for years. Always nice to put a face to these obsessive trolls, isn't it? pic.twitter.com/mLDLAeglWe
When people with such obvious prejudices attack a politician like Mr Corbyn, they make it clear that it is their opinions that are at fault – not his.
Mr Corbyn walked away, showing he wants nothing to do with people like this.
I’m with him – wouldn’t you be?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Fireball: The explosion on Bishop Street, Londonderry was caught on camera.
Terrorism has reared its ugly head again in Northern Ireland, it seems – although interestingly the mass media are steering away from the word.
A car bomb – in a hijacked pizza van, we’re told – exploded outside a courthouse in Londonderry at around 8.10pm on Saturday (January 19).
Police were informed at around 8pm, leaving less than 10 minutes to evacuate people from neighbouring buildings which included a hotel, Freemasons’ hall, and a youth club. There were no casualties.
The lack of notice has led police to describe the attack as “unbelievably reckless”, and it is these words that the mainstream media have adopted, rather than referring to terrorism.
In fact, there seems a strong attempt to play down the incident:
Car bomb in Derry around 8.30 last night. A bleak reminder of troubles, but also a reminder of how little Northern Ireland counts in London – as far as I can see not on any front pages.
But investigations have centred on the New IRA, one of a handful of republican groups that have rejected power-sharing and the Good Friday Agreement, and which makes a point of targeting police and courts.
Police Service of Northern Ireland says officers' main line of inquiry is that the dissident 'new IRA' group is responsible for the car bomb attack in Londonderry and two people have been arrested
Two men have been arrested. But the incident raises an important question:
Why now?
The timing seems significant as not only has the power sharing system brought about after the Good Friday Agreement stalled, but it seems Theresa May is determined to sideline the needs of Northern Ireland in her Brexit deal with the European Union.
There has been no government in Stormont since early 2017, after a row between Sinn Fein and the DUP over a botched renewable energy scheme.
And of course Brexit has revived concerns over the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic, and over NI’s constitutional status.
The Conservative government in Westminster seems conspicuously relaxed about both situations.
Doesn’t the attitude of Theresa May and her government seem deliberately provocative to people in Northern Ireland who were unhappy with the peace process in the first place? I’m not suggesting she is responsible for the actions of other people, but she certainly has a responsibility to prevent any return to the so-called “Troubles”.
Aren’t the delay over restoring the government in Stormont, and the failure to overcome the border controversy, an opportunity for such republicans to claim the peace process has failed and go back to violence?
Isn’t that what happened in Derry on Saturday night?
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Police presence: A police car outside the Islamic centre.Isn’t it incredibly hypocritical that an incident in which a Muslim crashes a car into pedestrians outside Parliament is an act of Islamic terrorism, but the same organisation can’t bring itself to label one in which a driver crashes a car into pedestrians outside a Muslim centre – shouting Islamophobic slogans – as an act of anti-Islamic terrorism.
What gives, BBC?
You reported that the police were treating it as a hate crime. Explain why you didn’t report it as a terrorist attack. I really want to know, and I don’t think I’m the only one.
Remember, terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims” – and I think the fact the perpetrator(s) shouted Islamophobic slogans shows a political aim.
How do you expect average British citizens to have a zero tolerance attitude towards islamophobia when our government tolerate it and consistently brush it under the carpet with islamophobic MPs 🗣🗣🗣🗣🗣
The Conservative government is a racist, Islamophobic organisation, therefore it does not acknowledge attacks on Muslims as racist or Islamophobic, let alone terrorist.
Does anybody, in all seriousness, need me to provide examples of Tory racism when Boris Johnson and Theresa May are still in public life?
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
All smiles for the camera: The participants in the BBC documentary We Are British Jews.
It seems it was too much to ask that We Are British Jews could be a balanced documentary, but at least it has helped kill the vicious lie that Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is a friend of terrorists.
The BBC promised us that the programme broadcast on BBC2 at 9pm (BST) yesterday (September 4) would document the genuine life experiences, attitudes and reactions of eight Jewish citizens of the UK at this time.
To This Writer’s jaundiced eye and ear, it seemed dangerously one-sided – against Mr Corbyn and the Labour Party, at a time when it is fighting off a manufactured “anti-Semitism” crisis.
You see, during the documentary, someone raised the claim that the Labour leader was a friend of people in the terrorist organisations Hamas and Hezbollah.
I was live-tweeting on Twitter at the time, so I broadcast the fact that the claim wasn’t true – and bedlam ensued.
Here's the anti-Corbyn trope (why not use the word?) of .@jeremycorbyn calling terrorists his friends. It's a myth, based on cordiality towards people he needed to negotiate with in order to get peace. #wearebritishjews
I had to clarify this, as I had intended to say that it was a myth that these people were his friends. He was using diplomatic – some say Parliamentary – language, and rightly so – you don’t get what you want from somebody by insulting them, after all.
You can draw your own conclusions about the people who responded from their words:
Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organisations, he praised the members of both as 'friends'. Q.E.D.
Pure sophistry. He wasn't in talks with them about anything. He was just an insignificant backbench MP with an obsession about Israel. And you don't have to call someone a 'friend' to treat them cordially in a public forum.
What sort of 'talks' were they? Your position is totally dishonest. Corbyn has never expressed the slightest interest in engaging with Israelis and you know it.
Sorry, but I think it's YOUR position that is dishonest. You haven't researched your claim that .@jeremycorbyn never talked with Jews/Israelis, you are pushing an untenable view.
Important point, there: The claim was that Mr Corbyn only spoke with terrorists from Hamas and Hezbollah but the fact was that he had spoken with the Israelis as well.
Did this revelation lead to more rational discussion? No.
Show us him in dialogue with the Israeli govt or the unionists in Ireland. How many funerals of terror attacks in the UK did he attend compared with members of the IRA or Islamic extremists? He is filth, and so are you for supporting him.
This one shows the attitude of these people – even when a claim has been disproved, they keep pushing it. Because if you repeat a lie often enough, people start believing it again?
What a lot of bollocks – if Corbyn was “negotiating” for peace then when did he eve meet the other side? When did he eve meet with loyalist in Northern Ireland for that matter.
Isn’t this a false equivalence? Mr Corbyn applauded the Good Friday Agreement which he supported to the hilt. But it is will known that he disagreed with Tony Blair on a huge number of issues over the nine years of Blair government that followed, so it is no wonder he did not share a platform with that gentleman in 2016. These issues are different.
And by the way (apologies for the profanity in this one):
Bullshit, Has he ever made a comment about Israel that is not hate inspired. He has nothing to do with bringing peace to the region, Even the PA distances itself from him.
That is a pathetic excuse. He wasn't responsible for, and didn't achieve, peace. It is not a myth, it is documented fact and it's a bit early to start rewriting history.
The idea that Corbyn was ever in a position to have meaningfull peace negotiations is laughable. You need two sides to be involved in negotiations not one.
If it's one side at a time, you do. And you don't know that such was not the plan. You meet representatives of one side, get their point of view, then go to the other side. You act as a go-between and see what result you can get.
If you want to stop violence and killing, perhaps you need to talk to the people who are carrying it out. See also my tweet about visiting one side at a time. And what makes you say he hasn't been impartial?
So it turns out that one peace negotiated by Mr Corbyn, “like the Good Friday Agreement”, was the Good Friday Agreement.
Mr Corbyn acted as a go-between – exactly as I had suggested – on behalf of the Labour government of the time, and sorted out details that made the Northern Irish peace process possible.
He did it by visiting just one side of the conflict – and you can be sure he used diplomatic language.
And I would not have been able to bring this to you without the help of all the haters whose words appear above – and many more who didn’t make the edit.
The conclusion is clear:
Jeremy Corbyn is not a friend of terrorism. He is a friend of peace. Ask yourself why anybody would want to deny that and you’ll be able to think of your own name for his critics.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
On the other, they have merrily provided weapons to those inflicting terror on others in the Middle East – in Israel, and to Saudi Arabia for its war on the Yemen, for example.
Theresa May is currently in South Africa, and visited the Robben Island prison cell in which Mr Mandela was incarcerated for decades.
Interviewed before the visit, she refused point-blank to deny that she had supported Margaret Thatcher’s claim that Mr Mandela was a terrorist and deserved to be in prison:
"Mrs Thatcher believed that Nelson Mandela was a terrorist…Did you think the same thing?"@Theresa_May is questioned by @MichaelLCrick about her stance on apartheid ahead of her visit to Robben Island, where Mandela was imprisoned. pic.twitter.com/8NdT41d1ah
Notice that Mr Crick asked if she had been arrested outside the South African embassy for protesting against apartheid. We know somebody who was, don’t we?
Contrast this with the Conservative government’s support for suffering in the Middle East.
In the same month the Israel Defence Force killed dozens of people and injured thousands more, it turns out the UK has increased its sales of arms to that country by more than £140 million.
Our exports of deadly weapons to the country that has terrorised, mutilated and killed weaponless people… nearly tripled.
Consider Saudi Arabia and its war on Yemen.
Arms sales to Saudi Arabia from the UK totalled around £1.1 billion in 2017, and Theresa May laid on a lavish welcome for Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman when he visited this country in March.
But Labour pointed out that these arms were being used to kill civilians in Yemen – and the government was even providing military personnel who were offering advice on targeting:
Corbyn urged the prime minister to stop arms sales to Saudi Arabia over its intervention in Yemen, which has killed thousands of civilians and worsened a humanitarian catastrope, and take the crown prince to task on human rights.
Speaking after PMQs, Corbyn’s spokesman expanded on Labour’s position, saying arms sales and the involvement of British military personnel provided a level of complicity over the situation in Yemen.
“Britain has not only increased arms supplies to Saudi Arabia dramatically since the start of the war, not only supports the war, as Theresa May said in the chamber just now, but British military personnel advise the Saudi air force and military on targeting – and so there is a direct involvement in the conduct of the war,” he said.
“Which as we know has led to very large numbers of civilian casualties and very clear evidence of the targeting of schools and hospitals. Very large numbers of children have been killed.”
We know Theresa May is a racist – we have her “hostile environment” policy and the resulting Windrush scandal as evidence of that. And her government has not condemned the “Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people” law which confirms that country as an apartheid state. So her refusal to deny believing that a black man who opposed apartheid was a terrorist is understandable.
And before anyone tries to suggest that she can’t be a racist because of her relationship with the Arabs of Saudi Arabia, I offer just one word in explanation:
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Forensic officers at the scene of the attack [Image: Victoria Jones/PA].
“Black = criminal
“Muslim = terrorist
“White = mental health issues
“Darren Osborne is a terrorist radicalised by the media and right wing groups.”
I can’t help but agree.
White far-right terrorists seem to be very often described as “loners” Don’t recall Muslim terrorists ever being described as loners It matters, of course, not only to understand causes but also as to the likely public response https://t.co/rOW22KUj3G
An unemployed “loner” intent on spilling as much blood as possible ploughed a hire van into a group of Muslims after becoming radicalised by far-right material within just a few weeks.
Darren Osborne, 48, deliberately mowed down worshippers outside two mosques in north London, shortly after 12.15am on June 19 last year, killing Makram Ali, 51, and injuring 12 others.
A jury of eight women and four men took one hour to convict the father-of-four, who was seen smiling and blowing a kiss to angry bystanders in the moments after the terror attack, of murder and attempted murder.
Osborne, who had denied both charges, nodded and looked around the courtroom as the verdicts were delivered at Woolwich Crown Court on Thursday.
The attacker admitted he had initially hoped to “plough through” as many people as possible at the pro-Palestinian Al Quds march in central London, previously attended by Mr Corbyn.
But after driving a hire van from Cardiff to London on June 18, road closures thwarted Osborne’s plan.
Instead he travelled across London in hunt of a mosque, eventually ending up in Finsbury Park.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
