Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Jeremy Corbyn's time is up

It's based on an Eoin 'scoop' but looking through what he has found he seems to be right
 
If any element of the shinners are involved in this then MI5s rotten handprints are all over this. No matter what they might say the shinners leadership are Blairite through and through . The people McGinn adulates...Blair , Powell and Campbell are massive fans of Adams and McGuiness and vice versa. The shinners are still sharing public platforms withpowell . Backslapping each other publicly . McGinn worked under Coaker..who's briefs were NI shadow secretary and MOD . It's a tangled web.
The main " nationalist " daily here in the north is the Irish News. They ran with this on the front page, givi g McGinns angle wholly uncritically . Going further to say that the entire McGinn family...via an unnamed family member..are hopping mad with Corbyn. Even though they've never met or spoke to him in their lives and no phone call was ever made . That's a definite sign there's been briefing going on .

Is there a specific Brexit angle here as well? The deep state fear that a Corbyn administration might actually execute the will of the people, and completely fuck Good Friday?
I also think it goes a lot deeper than brexit . Back in the 80s Corbyn denounced the Anglo Irish agreement as ...correctly...strengthening partition and legitimising the unionist veto . He voted against it . Gerry Adams however was quite wishy washy about it despite the party policy back then to utterly rejectit ..understandable considering what he delivered later . Fast forward to the late 90s and John McDonnell was stating very clearly the republican struggle wasn't waged so republicans would sit in a Stormont assembly . But sit there they did . McDonnell would have been turfed out of the shinners as a dissident had he been a member . Now they're leading the labour party with a real chance of being in government. Frankly both of them are more hard line republicans than the entire sinn fein leadership combined . Blair and co are not happy about that one bit, they can easily see the dangers. And if they can so can Adams .


Let's say for example McDonnell and Corbyn assume leadership in a GE and open up the Steakknife affair. That's the entire sinn fein leadership of most of the Adams period outed as Mi5 agents most likely . Done for. There's a shared interest in upholding " Blairs achievement " both sides of the Irish sea . While Pat McGinn hasn't publicly come out and denounced Corbyn ...instead there's an anonymous family source doing the denouncing on behalf of the family...there's a clear message being sent very publicly to the sinn fein...indeed Irish nationalist ... base that Corbyn is a cunt . And to be going totally off message like that against the Labour leadership..especially a long time ally like Corbyn , absolutely reeks of it being blessed from above. Even though none of it is directly attributable to anyone but the son himself . This stinks of a stab in the back .
Is there a specific Brexit angle? The deep state fear of an administration that might actually enact the will of the 52% and consequently fuck-up Good Friday?
 
rexfeatures_513438k_small.jpg

adams and corbyn in happier times
 
How do they know they are fake accounts? Timing of all the messages?

hehe apart from the identical wording.

Does this mean they've got MPs who are bots? :hmm:

Having looked into it I am less sure now, it looks to me like the accounts are spam accounts repeating 'real tweets' in order to avoid being banned by twitter. Looks like another Eoin fuck up.
 
There's a classic essay I'm very fond of by systems theorist Donella Meadows:

Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System

I think it's instructive to ask yourself where in this framework the interventions of the people joining Labour to vote for Corbyn (or possibly more accurately, against nuLabour/neoliberalism) are aimed..

... and then to ask the same question about the PLP & the donors who support the PLP & the punters who align with the PLP and their donors.

Ta for the link, really interesting - there's a Nancy Fraser lecture where she defines a role of critical theorists as 'identifying the most effective/vulnerable areas for action/intervention/change' (i'm paraphrasing from memory), & this describes the same process from a different perspective.
 
Why Jeremy Corbyn’s support for disabled people is not enough | Frances Ryan

Frances Ryan - as a champion of disability rights and a disabled person herself she comes out in support of the man who abstained on the welfare bill rather than the person who voted against it.

Its just laughable - and shes being ripped to shreds in the comments section. I really hope they are overplaying their hand with the "get corbyn" campaign. It wont wash with the labour membership - its being overwhelmingly countered on social media and in day to day conversations - but Im wondering if the wider public will start to see it through it as well - and there is anecdotal evidence of this.
As with Trump, Fargage and Sanders - and the brexit campaign - the more he is vilified the more it cements his anti-establishment credentials.

On a side note - this cant be doing much for the guardian's sales figures either.
 
WRT the diversity issues smears against Corbyn and the membership - rather than detailed erbuttals - maybe one way to counter it is for leading gay, Jewish, disabled, feminist etc activists to attack the PLP for their disgusting exploitation of these issues for their shitty agenda. Some of this has already happened - but it needs to be co-ordinated.
 
There's a classic essay I'm very fond of by systems theorist Donella Meadows:

Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System

I think it's instructive to ask yourself where in this framework the interventions of the people joining Labour to vote for Corbyn (or possibly more accurately, against nuLabour/neoliberalism) are aimed..

... and then to ask the same question about the PLP & the donors who support the PLP & the punters who align with the PLP and their donors.
i had never previously heard of leverage points and am grateful to you for bringing them to my attention.
 
Why Jeremy Corbyn’s support for disabled people is not enough | Frances Ryan

Frances Ryan - as a champion of disability rights and a disabled person herself she comes out in support of the man who abstained on the welfare bill rather than the person who voted against it.

Its just laughable - and shes being ripped to shreds in the comments section. I really hope they are overplaying their hand with the "get corbyn" campaign. It wont wash with the labour membership - its being overwhelmingly countered on social media and in day to day conversations - but Im wondering if the wider public will start to see it through it as well - and there is anecdotal evidence of this.
As with Trump, Fargage and Sanders - and the brexit campaign - the more he is vilified the more it cements his anti-establishment credentials.

On a side note - this cant be doing much for the guardian's sales figures either.

I'm aghast at it really. If there's one thing all this has exposed (and it's not just one thing) it's the snivelling slimyness of liberals. I've learnt more and more over the years why there's such disdain for them on here but never really got the vitriol they received, I never thought they were quite as disgusting as many on here made out, yes even when in coalition, but I really, really get it now. That article is just disgusting really. I mean listen to it:

'The Labour leadership's decision to abstain on the welfare bill showed Labour had abandoned disabled people' - I'm paraphrasing but it subtley attempts to equate the leadership with Corbyn so therefore Corbyn abandon the disabled, even if Corbyn wasn't leader at the time the bill was voted on (I can't remember) it still, in the context of that article, equates Corbyn's leadership with that article. It then goes on to say 'Notably Corbyn voted against the bill' right so which is it? Corbyn, and therefore the leadership, abandons disabled people or it doesn't? It then goes on to say Owen Fucking Smith is the man for the disabled... What? The man who abstained on that bill? The man who said Labour couldn't abandon WCA tests because it would make them appear weak? The man who supports the version of Labour that brought in thoses tests? It's another mind boggler.

It's a pattern I've noticed though recently, both in the wider press and in personal discussion. Again I'll go back to that Facebook argument. I pointed out that Debonaire's account is probably at best exagerated and at worst bullshit. I made the point that when she got the job of shadow secretary she was delighted and went on about how progressive Corbyn was for giving somebody with cancer such a job, a few weeks later she essentially called him an incompetent arse. I asked him which position was true? No answer, he dodged the question. Whether they're conscious they're doing this or not I don't know. I do know when you point it out you're called a bully, a liar and so on. It's not even a question of whether Debonaire's a liar or not it's the fact it shows up how piss poor her, and others like her's judgment is. Again, point this out and it's bully, bad attitude and so on. That fact alone and that people can see through it quite easily is why they're going to lose.
 
Why Jeremy Corbyn’s support for disabled people is not enough | Frances Ryan

Frances Ryan - as a champion of disability rights and a disabled person herself she comes out in support of the man who abstained on the welfare bill rather than the person who voted against it.

Its just laughable - and shes being ripped to shreds in the comments section. I really hope they are overplaying their hand with the "get corbyn" campaign. It wont wash with the labour membership - its being overwhelmingly countered on social media and in day to day conversations - but Im wondering if the wider public will start to see it through it as well - and there is anecdotal evidence of this.
As with Trump, Fargage and Sanders - and the brexit campaign - the more he is vilified the more it cements his anti-establishment credentials.

On a side note - this cant be doing much for the guardian's sales figures either.


Been in dialogue with Frances, bit shocked by this. I have major issues with JC, he has admitted turning around public opinion on benefits will be hard, and at first chose to not prioritise it, but i still think he is the one who would do more to challenge the sanctions, etc.
 
WRT the diversity issues smears against Corbyn and the membership - rather than detailed erbuttals - maybe one way to counter it is for leading gay, Jewish, disabled, feminist etc activists to attack the PLP for their disgusting exploitation of these issues for their shitty agenda. Some of this has already happened - but it needs to be co-ordinated.


I think you are right, it can't be left to the media and the PLP/Rebels to set the agenda, i note Tani Grey-Thompson has been quiet upto now.
 
I'm aghast at it really. If there's one thing all this has exposed (and it's not just one thing) it's the snivelling slimyness of liberals. I've learnt more and more over the years why there's such disdain for them on here but never really got the vitriol they received, I never thought they were quite as disgusting as many on here made out, yes even when in coalition, but I really, really get it now. That article is just disgusting really. I mean listen to it:

'The Labour leadership's decision to abstain on the welfare bill showed Labour had abandoned disabled people' - I'm paraphrasing but it subtley attempts to equate the leadership with Corbyn so therefore Corbyn abandon the disabled, even if Corbyn wasn't leader at the time the bill was voted on (I can't remember) it still, in the context of that article, equates Corbyn's leadership with that article. It then goes on to say 'Notably Corbyn voted against the bill' right so which is it? Corbyn, and therefore the leadership, abandons disabled people or it doesn't? It then goes on to say Owen Fucking Smith is the man for the disabled... What? The man who abstained on that bill? The man who said Labour couldn't abandon WCA tests because it would make them appear weak? The man who supports the version of Labour that brought in thoses tests? It's another mind boggler.

It's a pattern I've noticed though recently, both in the wider press and in personal discussion. Again I'll go back to that Facebook argument. I pointed out that Debonaire's account is probably at best exagerated and at worst bullshit. I made the point that when she got the job of shadow secretary she was delighted and went on about how progressive Corbyn was for giving somebody with cancer such a job, a few weeks later she essentially called him an incompetent arse. I asked him which position was true? No answer, he dodged the question. Whether they're conscious they're doing this or not I don't know. I do know when you point it out you're called a bully, a liar and so on. It's not even a question of whether Debonaire's a liar or not it's the fact it shows up how piss poor her, and others like her's judgment is. Again, point this out and it's bully, bad attitude and so on. That fact alone and that people can see through it quite easily is why they're going to lose.

No, of course he wasn't, it was Harriet Harman who was acting leader, I actually think she did it on tactical/strategic grounds and probably would have voted against in other circumstances.
 
Been in dialogue with Frances, bit shocked by this. I have major issues with JC, he has admitted turning around public opinion on benefits will be hard, and at first chose to not prioritise it, but i still think he is the one who would do more to challenge the sanctions, etc.
Thought I'd read Corbyn has said he'll end sanctions but I'm not certain that is policy.
 
I'm sure John McDonnell has said he will end WCA, but yes, not sure about sanctions, Momentum will have to make sure it is a priority.
 
Tbh, a lot of people had/have bought into the 'scroungers line', not surprising with the years of state sponsored propaganda.
 
Back
Top Bottom