littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
True or not it would explain a torrent of abuse. Not necessarily linked to Corbyn supporters at all.
Jeremy Corbyn's time is up
- Thread starter hash tag
- Start date
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
This is true. There's a distinct shift of late to lots of people in the public eye being subject to torrents of different kinds of abuse, and although it sometimes looks like it's orchestrated by or at least comes from the same people/group it often becomes a site of 'catch all' abuse, where any and every wanker on the internet starts having a go.
Why?
This is the leaked cable, one of quarter of a million. I don't see how or why wikileaks would be in the business of fabricating
Cable: 09LONDON956_a
cantsin
Well-Known Member
yep, repeatedly this week the Graun / elsewhere has included " Mossad / CIA agent" as one of the main lines of abuse aimed at Smeeth. Orwellian stuff.
On the other hand, anti semitic creeps crawling around on Twitter, enjoying it all a lot, happy to come over as pro Corbyn, but with Alison Chabloz RT's in their t/ls etc .Fucking mess, and if the Lab Right / anti BDS lot want to break down the divide between principled anti Zionist /pro BDS elements, and anti semites, get them all lumped in together, they're getting results on Twitter.
cantsin
Well-Known Member
cantsin
Well-Known Member
I shld probably know more about this ( as with most things ), but can we have a quick / idiots guide to Wikileaks unreliability / reasons to "treat with extreme caution " etc ?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
20 000 in a 12 hour period. And all done in the name of Corbyn. Bullshit.
Libertad
Sparking up a rollie in the Reichstag
Momentum could form a Conga cadre.
not-bono-ever
meh
MP reveals the anti-Semitism that's the norm in her Party's hard left
You dont have to click on the link but Ruth is engaging with the Mail. The story of how a perceived slight turned into anti semitic abuse is again rolled out but again, I am still unclear on how it came to be anti semitic - can someone clear this up for me ?
You dont have to click on the link but Ruth is engaging with the Mail. The story of how a perceived slight turned into anti semitic abuse is again rolled out but again, I am still unclear on how it came to be anti semitic - can someone clear this up for me ?
Last edited:
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
It's from the standard but she would presumably have to have agreed for it to be used by the mail.
Don't think so - I've got friends who've been interviewed in local press who've later found their interview part of a DM story, no permission sought or given.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
But this is actually a simple reproduction of the whole piece - not just parts taken from it. Don't know if that makes a difference. Doesn't really matter anyway - it's clear she's a genuinely nasty lying shit-stirrer, and engaging with the mail (or not) wouldn't make a difference.
The nationals (particularly the mail, but all of them) often reuse entire articles from local press - presumably they have licensing agreements or similar. It's how a lot of stories about benefit cheats and the like come from, and why it seems so baffling that the subject of the article would talk to the mail/sun - they didn't, they spoke to their local rag.
Smeeth is still a dick tho, obv.
Smeeth is still a dick tho, obv.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
There's some background/links on Smeeth here:
Ruth Smeeth and Israeli lobby links come under the spotlight across the web -
Suspect most people know this stuff already (particularly via Notes from the Borderland), but I wanted a quick crash course in terms of the 'strictly protect' bit and how much of an asset she is to them.
Ruth Smeeth and Israeli lobby links come under the spotlight across the web -
Suspect most people know this stuff already (particularly via Notes from the Borderland), but I wanted a quick crash course in terms of the 'strictly protect' bit and how much of an asset she is to them.
not-bono-ever
meh
Fucking hell, She is awful. manipulative,horrible and evasive ..
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
Red Ken has a video on the beeb atm, moderatly amusing. He eats a curry and talks up st J
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
nuffsaid
But this goes up to 11
FYI - here's a debate between a Telegraph columnist and a Morning Star writer on Corbyn and the future of Labour:
Live Q&A: Is Jeremy Corbyn the saviour or destroyer of the Labour Party? Join the debate
Live Q&A: Is Jeremy Corbyn the saviour or destroyer of the Labour Party? Join the debate
Brixton Hatter
Home is south London mate
yes, and they also have licensing agreements with locals (or the national & local paper is often owned by the same company).
Ole
Well-Known Member
Why?
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
It doesn't give context, does it.
What does strictly protect mean? Protect her? Don't give her name? Protect how we got the info? And how and in what context did she tell them that? Was it that someone who didn't identify themselves as being with the US govt was talking to her and she told them that?
It may well be exactly as wikileaks et al are suggesting. It might not be. I'd say it's more likely that a member of the CIA is undercover than a British MP, no matter what I think of their politics.
We start veering off into the territory of loonspuddery when we jump on whatever conclusion suits us when in fact there are multiple things that could in fact be true.
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
Also lol, potteye.
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
And why do they consider it confidential? Because she's paid by them to feed them information? Because they don't particularly want to say how they got that information? It's very easy to jump to the biggest and most damning conclusion because it fits the narrative you like the most. Conspiracies everywhere.
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
Were the two on the right purchased in some sort of kit form? Just look at them.
ItWillNeverWork
Messy Crimbobs, fellow humans.
And he keeps looking directly at the camera. Agggrrr!
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
Can't remember where I read it but I do recall reading someone say the Zinoviev letter, and the neccesarily clandestine nature of some of the currents that formed the labour party (guilds, unions) engendered a paranioa they've never truly shaken off. On the other hand it WAS a forgery and if spooks haven't been through st J's bins by now then standards are slipping.
I have no opinion on the wikileaks stuff yet, I just thought it was an interesting idea that a party formed from currents that had a very closed organisational structures could be prone to seeing the hand of er maj's finest everywhere. They did go through Militants bins as well so its not helping matters when itts re inforced by true infiltration. Eh. Who knows.
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
I have no doubt that people are still 'monitored' despite all the various scandals and outrages over it as its been uncovered over the years (there have been some recent outrages over it, with current MPs having been monitored for decades etc). We know they monitor regular activists who are attached to this and that group, so it's not a huge leap for them to monitor MPs and union leaders and whoever else if they're all threatening the same interests.
It's one thing to acknowledge that and quite another to jump into massive shady conspiracy theories with undercover agents and CIA infiltration and whatever else. It's comforting to imagine a sinister and mysterious puppet master making the system dance to his tune, but the reality is far more fractured and ad hoc and messy and unsophisticated than that. If only we can bring that puppet master to account. We can't. There isn't one. That's scarier.
This Smeeth stuff just feeds into that bigger conspiracy stuff. And frankly, it's not in the least bit helpful if you (not you personally dotty - none of this is at you directly) want any of your arguments against the current PLP to be taken remotely seriously.
What's more likely? That she is on the pay roll of the CIA to feed them such crucial and clandestine information as Gordon Brown is going to call an election; or she was having an 'insiders' conversation - the likes of which go on in every Westminster cafe and every CLP meeting and in every constituency office and in every random council corridor - where she mentioned something she'd heard (because frankly people with a modicum of power like to puff themselves up by looking like they know important things) and probably said something like "but don't tell anyone I told you" because it wasn't meant to be public knowledge? It does them no favours to say "hey guys, we heard this thing and it was Ruth Smeeth wot told us" because it just puts everyone in the shit, and shows up how this kind of information gets passed around - which is very easily because all these people move in the same circles, being the ruling/political class that they are.
But by all means, continue insinuating she's some deep cover agent on the CIA payroll, just watch out for the black helicopters coming for you in the night.
It's one thing to acknowledge that and quite another to jump into massive shady conspiracy theories with undercover agents and CIA infiltration and whatever else. It's comforting to imagine a sinister and mysterious puppet master making the system dance to his tune, but the reality is far more fractured and ad hoc and messy and unsophisticated than that. If only we can bring that puppet master to account. We can't. There isn't one. That's scarier.
This Smeeth stuff just feeds into that bigger conspiracy stuff. And frankly, it's not in the least bit helpful if you (not you personally dotty - none of this is at you directly) want any of your arguments against the current PLP to be taken remotely seriously.
What's more likely? That she is on the pay roll of the CIA to feed them such crucial and clandestine information as Gordon Brown is going to call an election; or she was having an 'insiders' conversation - the likes of which go on in every Westminster cafe and every CLP meeting and in every constituency office and in every random council corridor - where she mentioned something she'd heard (because frankly people with a modicum of power like to puff themselves up by looking like they know important things) and probably said something like "but don't tell anyone I told you" because it wasn't meant to be public knowledge? It does them no favours to say "hey guys, we heard this thing and it was Ruth Smeeth wot told us" because it just puts everyone in the shit, and shows up how this kind of information gets passed around - which is very easily because all these people move in the same circles, being the ruling/political class that they are.
But by all means, continue insinuating she's some deep cover agent on the CIA payroll, just watch out for the black helicopters coming for you in the night.
Similar threads
