Verbal

Ignore him. He's just a puerile troll who's too stupid to realise that you might expect comments about Corbyn on a thread entitled Corbyn and the death of the Labour party. Jew-hating, which is systemic among Corbynists, has actually been in full flow this week. Two revelations on Sunday reveal the depths of it. In the Observer, it was reported that Corbyn has declared a £2,000 campaign donation from a certain Ibrahim Hamami, who opposed the Oslo peace accords and in 2015 wrote in defence of a wave of stabbings of Jews in Israel. There is also a mystery of the whereabouts of a £10,000 donation from the 'Friends of Al Aqsa', led by a Leicester optician and rabid Islamist called Ismail Patel (whose other 'friends' include Holocaust deniers). http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/06/jeremy-corbyn-campaign-donation-palestine Yesterday's Sunday Times also carried more evidence of the whitewashing Anitsemitism report. A former Corbynist and Corbyn policy advisor called Josh Simons has complained that Chakrabarti simply ignored his evidence that within Corbyn's office itself there was talk of a "Jewish conspiracy". Simons details how the Stalin enthusiast Seumas Milne, Corbyn's "Director of Strategy", grilled him about his own Jewish family background and his views on Israel. Not a single word of Simons' complaints to Chakrabarti was mentioned in the final report. https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/social-affairs/discrimination/news/77968/former-staffer-claims-corbyn-adviser-spoke-jewish And today, two of Corbyn's closest allies are reported comparing the state of Israel to ISIS, with one Corbynist MP, Grahame Morris, wanting all British Jews who've served in the Israeli defence force to be treated as suspected terrorists, and another, the odious Richard Burgon MP, telling MPs and Labour party members to boycott the Labour Friends of Israel group, on the grounds that "Zionism is the enemy of peace." http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3728588/Storm-Corbyn-s-great-pals-compare-Israel-ISIS-terrorists-Row-Labour-anti-Semitism-grows-comments-two-ministers.html Corbynist Labour's Jew problem is getting out of hand - and the Chakrabarti whitewash will only have made things worse.

I remember going to a Michael Foot rally in Luton during the 1983 general election. The place was stuffed - thousands had turned out and it was a carnival atmosphere. In the election itself the Tories took both Luton seats with huge majorities. So it's hard to think of a more pointless activity than this ****-waving by Corbyn's cultists. It was a pretty bad day for Jezza generally yesterday. The £500 billion cost of the ten "pledges" have been widely laughed at. (Aside of course from the Corbynist cretins who think it's just a matter of turning on the printing presses - not understanding the very basic difference between printing bank notes - see Weimar Germany, Zimbabwe and Venezuala for results - and issuing bonds). And he was finally caught - as many had predicted - acting corruptly in issuing a peerage to Chakrabarti for her whitewashing of the antisemitism inquiry. http://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/chakrabarti-peerage/

Brexit - brought to you by the people who delivered Hinckley Point, Heathrow's third runway, HS2, Universal Credit, Southern Rail, and all PFI and IT contracts. Slip sliding away...

What would you do about it?

Corbyn's 'ten pledges', costed at a cool £500 billion. http://www.jeremyforlabour.com/10_pledges He should have them cast in stone. That's never been done before. Interestingly, where Miliband forgot the deficit, Jezza forgets Brexit. And among the ten is a stunning piece of bad writing, which commits the Labour party to "cutting income". On some of the others - certainly the electorally decent ones - he's already been outflanked by, of all people, Theresa May. The rest are for those desirous of unicorns.

As there's an army of Mogadon Men marching through the main board at the moment, I suspect your bet is quite safe.

For any entrepreneurs out there, this thread would do a roaring trade in incontinence pants.

Because it doesn't say the opposite at all. I made no claim about supplying GPS coordinates to the Russians or Syrians. That would be mad, given their murderous attacks directly on hospitals. The hospitals were nonetheless clearly marked and known about, not least because many have been there for decades. Here's the one I was referring to in Aleppo, that was targeted directly. It was clearly marked as a hospital. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/05/syria-un-security-council-must-step-up-pressure-to-end-attacks-on-hospitals-as-hundreds-killed-in-aleppo/

Take the hospitals out of it though. They are run and only run outside of regime or IS control by two sets of people: Syrian doctors and/or Medicins san Frontieres. If it's high-tech - as this hospital was - it's more likely the latter (although Syrian medics are very highly trained and well regarded). An MSF hospital was also bombed two months ago, killing medical staff and patients. There has never been a shred of evidence that hospitals in these war zones are part of rebel or militant combat operations, and they are all very clearly marked and notified as hospitals. Any targeting of them therefore is almost certainly intentional - and the intention is to inflict maximum pain on civilian populations, thereby inflating the refugee crisis. On the more general point about the happiness of people under Assad and Saddam, it's important to know that there's a key distinction between the behaviour of the dictators and that of IS. IS learned all its savagery from Assad and Saddam's enforcers (the latter are one and the same), but IS took it one (insignificant) step further by making torture videos out of it all and broadcasting them to the world. Saddam and Assad and their goons had a habit of making the same videos - they just circulated them much less widely. They were meant as entertainment for themselves and their mates, and they are, if anything, worse than the worst of IS's death-porn. In both cases - IS and Assaddam - you became a victim not by rebelling against them necessarily but merely by being in the wrong place at the wrong time. All of this is lost in the 'post-fact' noise - the Russians, with RT and social media bots, and the Syrians with the SEA, have run effective campaigns in trying to undermine any of the overwhelming evidence of war crimes and savagery. Some in the West fall for it - I see a few links to RT on here from time to time, which is depressing because it shows depths of conspiracist-cretin gullibility I didn't think were possible. I'm not suggesting you're one of these, but I'd say the people to listen to for reliable information are MSF, some of the citizen-journalist groups like Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently, and journalists, like Jeremy Scahill, with a long track record of independent reporting in the region.

As Assad hasn't actually made this argument - not least because the perpetrators were probably the Russians - I have no idea why you feel the need to come up with a vicious dictator's excuses for him. You seem unaware, too, that it's a war crime to bomb hospitals, period.

What would you do about it?

What would you do about it?

And so it begins... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/29/labour-rebels-plan-to-elect-own-leader-and-create-alternative-gr/

Damn this Muslim to hell. How dare he... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/father-of-a-muslim-soldier-killed-in-action-tells-donald-trump-you-have-sacrificed-nothing-and-no-a7161466.html

Some perspective is in order. The causes of death in the US in 2015, which was a bad year for Islamic terrorism, were: Suicide 43,000 Motor accidents 32,000 Gun homicide 13,286 Domestic violence 1,600 Islamic Terrorism 19 Oh, and Sharks 1.

Aside from the referendum, nothing's actually happened yet to cause the collapse. Cameron didn't press the nuclear Article 50 button on 24 June, as he promised he would (a broken promise, certainly, but a devilishly clever political move too). It's only when we're on the A50 road to hell that things will get seriously bad. As it stands, the once distinctly minority view that A50 won't happen any time soon has grown more widespread, and we seem to have settled into a period of uncertain certainty. There are, though, plenty of longer-term anxieties about the economy because of the vote, which will feed in to lower growth or even a recession. But the real collapse won't start until A50 is actually triggered. In the meantime, interesting to note that the EU has appointed just about the most hostile and politically skilled negotiator available to handle the UK/EU split. The Three Buffoons are absolutely no match for Michel Barnier (BoJo can't handle detail, Davis hasn't a clue about what the rules of trade negotiation even are, and who the **** knows what Fox is doing, given that he can't even talk to anyone about bilateral in any substantive way until at least 2019). So just wait - you'll get your economic crash and your emergency budget. It'll happen as soon as A50 gets triggered, and Barnier instantly knocks out the Three Buffoons' inevitable demand for access to the internal market without free movement. No wonder the Tories are hoping to drag this out until after the 2020 election.

Given Scotland is now wiped out for Labour, that kind of poll lead for the Tories would give the execrable Corbyn the historic defeat he's looking for - far bigger than the Thatcher landslide against Foot in 1983. Polling 29% against a profoundly unpopular Tory party is astounding.

Don't forget the striking similarities in political rhetoric and actual policy pronouncements. It's both alarming and fascinating to see a real live fascist competing for political power and being so close to it. It's like the 1930s never happened.

That already seems out-of-date. Even Juncker, who was issuing 'hurry up and **** off' threats in the hours after the referendum, is now fully signed up to the 'take as long as you want' approach to the UK's triggering of Article 50. Something has changed on both sides of what's still not even a negotiation. Whatever has changed has happened because the new May government have been talking to various parts of the EU. I wonder what would happen if a version of what's being leaked from the EU's higher echelons were to be true: that the UK would be offered 'brakes' on immigration provided it remains in the EU, but not if it leaves and wants access to the single market (which, headbangers here notwithstanding, it most certainly does). It's certainly the case that the long grass is growing longer. The Tory party chairman Patrick McLoughlin suggested at the weekend Article 50 would be triggered 'by 2020'. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/article-50-2020-mcloughlin_uk_5794e41de4b02508de4697bb Which will all the more puzzling for Brexit enthusiasts, because the basic terms that the UK wants to set for its future are simply not dependent on recruiting armies of trade negotiators. The terms themselves - in or out of the EEA/EFTA, 'red lines' on immigration, etc - will necessarily be the result of broad political decisions, not the technical minutae of trade negotiation. And there are enough Brexiteers in the relevant ministries to have agreed those terms by now. Slip sliding away...

What a weird kipper fantasy. You're saying that the Tories, with 330 seats in the Commons, face instant and certain defeat from the leaderless UKIP, with their one (rather liberal for UKIP) MP. And you're saying this because May would somehow have failed to deliver on a question that was never actually in the referendum, despite your (putting it politely) nativist magical thinking leading you to think it was. You also seem to have completely ignored that some of the leading Brexiteers, including the great hero BoJo, explicitly offered the Norway model as a way to go - that is, full membership of the EEA, with full access to the single market. Whether you like it or not, and should it ever happen, that counts as a withdrawal from the EU. It just so happens that to have that access we will be required to sign up to the 'four freedoms' (one of which is essential if the British economy is not to be trashed - freedom of movement of services, including passporting rights). Another one is freedom of movement of people, which may have certain 'brakes' applied, but which will remain a key red line for the EU. I don't doubt that what Matthew Parris I think aptly calls 'headbangers' - including you and a perennial awkward squad on the right fringes of the Tory party - will scweam and scweam that this is not what you wanted, and you have been at least consistent in making your silly ultimatums. But the reality is that May has far more pressing electoral problems than the headbangers and those further out on the nativist fringes. She has to steer away from a constitutional crisis to keep the Scots and others on board (and it won't be easy to resist a second Scots independence referendum on such a slim majority), and she has to steer a way around huge pressure from British business, who frankly will be screaming much more loudly and effectively than you if we have to spend the next x number of years digging our way back into the largest single market in the world. So either give up the fantasy or go and find something to bang your head against. You aren't going to get your way.

Then there are only two possibilities. Either what you've written here is a straight-out lie designed to cover up your Jew-hating sentiment expressed when defending another Jew hating comment. Or you were too stupid to realise that the original remarks were Jew-hating. Either way, I'm surprised you've not found yourself in a spot of trouble with the mods on this - or double-trouble. One, because Jacob Rothschild is still alive, and therefore to make or defend the anti-semitic remark about his (your words "A Jew") manipulating the conspiracist's wet dream of a "New World Order" is a slam-dunk libel. (Of course, "NWO" conspiracy theories, like yours, all resolve with the blame being laid at the door of those damn filthy Jews, singular or plural.) And two, because anti-semitism - including the defence of anti-semitic ideas - is commonly classified as racism, and that's against the rules of this forum. I'd rather focus on the post-Brexit debate, but so long as you post here I'll keep hoping you do the decent thing and retract.

Got any evidence for this kipper T? How does a news programme "salivate"? Or is this just evidence for your paranoid delusions about meejah beaming directly into people's brains? Only a conpiracist schmuck would say that the Beeb was propagandising for remain, rather than reporting both sides of the story. You just want your want your paranoia confirmed, and search for it in the tiniest example of expert reports being covered that might hint at a downside to Brexit. As with your steadfast defence of a Jew-hating libel - and your hilarious suggestion that these ideas were no more antisemitic than those of virulently Jew-hating Corbynistas now fronting the Labour party - you really seem to have departed from sane political debate.

Please provide a single piece of evidence that the government "have a plan" - you'll struggle as the government themselves have admitted there isn't one. Other than after 2016, please provide a single piece of evidence that they have an idea about when to trigger Article 50. On a positive note, here's something you can get behind. No doubt along with the 66% of the UK who want access to the single market to be the priority of any negotiation - as against 31% who think it should be about restricting the movement of people - you and all the other Brexiteers on here will support this: http://savethesingle.market I mean, if you don't, there'll be a bloody revolt on the streets, etc., etc.

(...And posted on the correct thread!) Time for kipperderry et al to write RAGING BTL comments under this article in The Independent, mysteriously entitled 'Why it's time the accept the fact that Brexit may never happen.' Kipper plus mates had practice here (and failed) but might want to tackle a familiar problem: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/why-its-time-to-accept-the-fact-that-brexit-may-never-actually-happen-a7148816.html

Time for kipperderry et al to write RAGING BTL comments under this article in The Independent, mysteriously entitled 'Why it's time the accept the fact that Brexit may never happen.' They've had practice here (and failed) but might want to tackle a familiar problem: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/why-its-time-to-accept-the-fact-that-brexit-may-never-actually-happen-a7148816.html