No rational person could blame Jeremy Corbyn for Brexit. So why are the Blairites moving against Corbyn now, with such precipitate haste?
The answer is the Chilcot Report. It is only a fortnight away, and though its form will be concealed by thick layers of establishment whitewash, the basic contours of Blair’s lies will still be visible beneath. Corbyn had deferred to Blairite pressure not to apologise on behalf of the Labour Party for the Iraq War until Chilcot is published.
For the Labour Right, the moment when Corbyn as Labour leader stands up in parliament and condemns Blair over Iraq, is going to be as traumatic as it was for the hardliners of the Soviet Communist Party when Khruschev denounced the crimes of Stalin. It would also destroy Blair’s carefully planned post-Chilcot PR strategy. It is essential to the Blairites that when Chilcot is debated in parliament in two weeks time, Jeremy Corbyn is not in place as Labour leader to speak in the debate. The Blairite plan is therefore for the parliamentary party to depose him as parliamentary leader and get speaker John Bercow to acknowledge someone else in that fictional position in time for the Chilcot debate, with Corbyn remaining leader in the country but with no parliamentary status.
Yes, they are that nuts.
If the fault line for the Tories is Europe, for Labour it is the Middle East. Those opposing Corbyn are defined by their enthusiasm for bombing campaigns that kill Muslim children. And not only by the UK. Both of the first two to go, Hilary Benn and Heidi Alexander, are hardline supporters of Israel.
This was Benn the week before his celebrated advocacy of bombing Syria:
Shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary Benn told a Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) lunch yesterday that relations with Israel must be based on cooperation and rejected attempts to isolate the country.
Addressing senior party figures in Westminster, Benn praised Israel for its “progressive spirit, vibrant democracy, strong welfare state, thriving free press and independent judiciary.” He also called Israel “an economic giant, a high-tech centre, second only to the United States. A land of innovation and entrepreneurship, venture capital and graduates, private and public enterprise.”
Consequently, said Benn, “Our future relations must be built on cooperation and engagement, not isolation of Israel. We must take on those who seek to delegitimise the state of Israel or question its right to exist.”
Heidi Alexander actually signed, as a 2015 parliamentary candidate, the “We Believe in Israel” charter, the provisions of which state there must be no boycotts of Israel, and Israel must not be described as an apartheid state.
This fault line is very well defined. The manufactured row about “anti-Semitism” in the Labour Party shows exactly the same split. In my researches, 100% of those who have promoted accusations of anti-Semitism were supporters of the Iraq War and/or had demonstrable links to professional pro-Israel lobby groups. 100% of those accused of anti-Semitism were active opponents of the Iraq War. Never underestimate the Blairite fury at being shown not just to be liars but to be wrong. Iraq is their Achilles heel and they are extremely touchy about it.
No rational person would believe Brexit was Jeremy Corbyn’s fault. No rational person would believe that now is a good moment for the Labour Party to tear itself apart. Extraordinarily, the timing is determined by Chilcot.
Is this something you know through communicating with sources, or are you deducing this, or a combination?
Why do you want to know?
I tried to tweet this article but it was declined
Would you link to your Twitter account please?
@ Barbara Brown
You recently posted that you had seen Zeppelins over London when you were a child.
That would make you well over 100 years old. If you are, then congratulations and many more years.
But did you perhaps mean barrage balloons (= Second World War)?
This week just gets worse and worse. For what it’s worth I agree with your analysis and dread the return of New Labour.
Me 2
I have no doubt that what you have written has a lot of validity re Chilcot. I suspect this showdown is part of a plot to split and cripple Labour for some time. Namely the bizarre circumstances in which a 66 year old socialist was elected, following a succession of far right leaders.
but ….
Corbyn’s support of the EU damned with very faint praise. Hardly a surprise since he expressed the excoriating opinion below Not something one changes one’s mind about. Another consequence of electing a real socialist party leader.
https://youtu.be/uw9EfSynAqY
Eric, that’s a very selective quote you’ve linked, and from many years ago. Do you have a longer clip, one that starts earlier so we can hear that excerpt in context, preferably including the question he’s answering?
Great to see you back Clark! I hope you will stay with the conversation.
It arrived that size in a tweet. I hardly think a longer version would change anything as strongly argued as that. It was the accepted view of the Labour Party in the 1970s.
Brilliant speech: Peter Shore vs the Treaty of Rome and Ted Heath, 1975 referendum, Oxford Union debate. .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j-Gb8Pk2Pk&feature=youtu.be
Full video. Shore starts around 4 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5ks5tmNwCY&sns=tw
I remember that debate (all of it) – perhaps Lysias does as well (perhaps he even attended).
Heath wiped the floor with Peter Shore.
A passionate speech, delivered without notes.
Eric, the context is important. Corbyn seeded to be saying that specific powers could have been directed to the elected, accountable EU Parliament, but were directed to the EU Commission instead. It is the latter that he described as unaccountable, so to understand the quote we need to know who directed what in that way.
Most propaganda is achieved by omission, for instance selective quotation. It hinders deeper understanding by giving false or exaggerated impressions.
Clark
I think you are confused. Corbyn’s views are well known and at the very least has given his opponents credibility that he wasn’t trying. True or otherwise.
Brilliant, Craig — glad you are around with your Lateral Mind!
I see why you think you will make a good politician. Whatever, you are undoubtedly one of The Top political observer/commentators in the Country. The Times are indeed a Changin’ and your insights are ever more relevant.
Stay well and Keep it Up!
This could well be true. But they clearly all hate Corbyn anyway and any excuse will do. That Corbyn supported a move rejected by the English electorate, that Cameron did likewise and has resigned, that there are clearly going to be vast upheavals in the pipeline – all this provides an excellent opportunity to ditch Corbyn. The impending Chilcot Report is an added incentive.
While I see something in what Craig says, I see it as much more down to the now-impending general election. If Corbyn were to become PM, their argument that we have to get rid of him because he is unelectable would be gone, and so would their careers.
And yet all the talk of Corbyn being ‘unelectable’ has proven to be nonsense in the various by elections, local elections and mayoral election since he became leader.
For all Hilary Benn’s (funny he has the same name as la Clinton, same name, same views) pipsqueak protests, there was a much bigger leave majority in his constituency that the labour party as a whole.
Most of the malcontents had big majorities for leave in their constituencies. You might almost think that it was a protest vote against them and what they stand for… It is certainly a stark demonstration of how little they did to influence their constituents to support their position.
And yes, I entirely agree that the talk of Corbyn being “unelectable” is utter garbage. That is what scares these traitorous scum.
This has raised an interesting point in my mind.
If the electorate has overwhelmingly rejected remain, then if the same “rules” apply to Labour as are being argued for the conservatives then does that mean that a leave supporting person should become the next Labour leader as is being argued for the conservatives?
Well that means John Mann or Kate Hoee… yeah thats going to go down well!
What is bugging the hell out of me is that Labour voted remain (70 odd %) according to Ashcrofts polling as a whole party, which is quite an achievment given the overall anti-EU feeling within the working class and yet the PLP wants to put an even more right wing blairite pro-EU MP in the position of leader.
The best person, in the now, is I believe Corbyn because his view was that the EU had its issues, that he was skeptical, but on the whole felt staying was a better option which actually reflected the feeling of the 70% without burning the bridges to the 30% who were anti-EU no matter what. Putting anyone who was openly “fully” pro-EU and sided with the conservatives and shared a platform with them will mean the 30% (and much higher in some Labour areas) would not vote for them in a month of sundays where as they might well be able to vote for a “pro-EU with reservations” leader, even if they didn’t agree with the stance.
Ack, not “overwhelmingly”, but majority and overwhelmingly in a large number of areas.
“No rational person could blame Jeremy Corbyn for Brexit.”
I think the rational behind people’s thinking is that Jeremy Corbyn has a history of being anti-Europe and that traditional Labour areas voted strongly to leave. There isn’t anything irrational about wondering if maybe he could have done a little more.
the majority of Labour overwhelming supported Remain
Why wasn’t the “man of principles” campaigning for us to leave the EU, something he has wanted his entire political life?
Instead he was only to be seen at the last minute loitering around like an idiot in the Remain camp with an IN badge pinned to his lapel.
Done a little more to persuade Leave or Remain.
Anyone with any understanding of Change Management will find Corbyn’s approach perfectly pragmatic and to that extent rational.
Bugger. Just end-gamed this idiotic Labour heist.
Whilst I, and the majority of Labour members, want Corbyn as PM – he is way better placed to affect a fairer society and debunk austerity than this poorly conceived protest vote against the EU – Brexit gave the right wing Labour rebels the leverage. This gift was given by the very left of the party ironically enough.
There was a strategy from a substantial minority of people on the left to exit the Neoliberal nightmare of European government as the first step towards a snap general election and a socialist government in the UK.
This was poorly thought out: .
Firstly all focus was on Corbyn to deliver Remain for Labour – which he did in the majority (63%-37%), but not enough for those in Labour that plot against him apparently.
He remains a Euro skeptic that took a pragmatic decision to Remain based upon the fall out of exit (economic downturn, the break-up of the UK – EU funding of impoverished places in the UK, arts, science and environment – and of course not least on the effects exit will have on bringing a huge rewrite of Law that would occur under a far right Tory regime). .
Secondly a process for a Leadership challenge requires him to be nominated by MPs BEFORE members can vote for him. Despite his huge mandate with members, MPs who voted on a token whim to include him last time would mostly be reluctant to do so due to the party reaction (they never expected him to win last time, where as now its a forgone conclusion).
So Corbyn will not get on the ballot – so much for democracy.
Thirdly, an election sans Corbyn will result in a less left leader – who may win an election but would inherit a depleted economy and likely have a less progressive outlook.
The protest vote on the left to exit EU thus scuppering the one chance of a decent, honest PM interested in a fair society. He may not be the reality star whizzbang in the age of the cult of personality that our media expects, but he has integrity and ideas, and his position would allow him to deliver those ideas. Hence his popularity. But not now.
This tragic outcome, despite the referendum being tabled before there was ever even a thought he’d be PM – and being entirely about the Tory party shift towards Ukip before last years election. A right wing agenda with left wing consequences despite a huge mandate from party members and delivering an overwhelming majority of Labour supporters to Remain.
The UK continues the glorious pursuit of shooting itself in the foot…
Unless we fight and pressure MPs in Labour with a pre-emptive fight… which is exactly what we failed to do in the referendum.
“Secondly a process for a Leadership challenge requires him to be nominated by MPs BEFORE members can vote for him.”
That does not seem clear-cut. It is arguable that an incumbent leader has an automatic right to stand. Please see a discussion by a barrister on this point here:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/elections/2015/11/could-labours-rule-book-be-used-keep-jeremy-corbyn-leadership-ballot
Of course, presumably the matter would have to be argued in court since there is no way Corbyn’s opponents would accept that, because they know very well that they would be routed if they did. In which case Chilcot would probably be over with the PLP having finagled Corbyn out temporarily. That’s if Craig is right, which the tweet I quoted seems to support.
I have just seen this tweet quoted in the Telegraph, from some ITV person called Allegra Stratton
——-
3/ if he doesn’t resign and let Tom Watson take over, one Labour front bencher just told me “PLP will have to have our own leader”.
10:31 AM – 26 Jun 2016
——-
And so? What’s your point?
I think JSD, I’ll leave you to enjoy your slow Sunday. The Sun is beckoning me as is coffee and a celebratory Brunch thereafter.
Grassroot members should then consider instructing senior counsel such as Hendy QC to consider legality of such an action and whether they have standing to take to court.
As always info we need to hear craig, thanks a million, i would love to talk to you in person about my snippet of information the blzck pridon inmannheim germany, interested [email protected]
Great couple of posts, Craig.
Stand firm, Jeremy. Show us your mettle: get shot of the Red Tories. He should have done it after the Syria vote, but better late than never.
Mike, perhaps now is better timing that looks more natural and probably less controversial amonst the Labour membership. Who, want to stop politics for the sake of politics and start with a clean state once the Chilcot Report is finally out.
Good luck to Corbyn, the democracy needs a principled man, more suited to Peace than War. As well as certain possible initiatives to reinvent and reinvest in British Industry in the New Economy where technology plays a significant role.
“Corbyn had deferred to Blairite pressure not to apologise on behalf of the Labour Party for the Iraq War until Chilcot is published.”
I don’t think it’s for Corbyn to apologise for the Iraq war, it is for Blair et al to apologise on behalf of the party and establishment at the time! If Corbyn apologises it tarnishes him by association, let the real culprits take the full rap for once!
There is another possible aspect to the revolt by Blairites at this time when Tory government is weak… a Neo Liberal consensus coalition government that does not include Corbyn et al to get the Capitalist extremist ship back on track and clamp down hard on dissent by waving the TINA flag in everyone’s faces or aiming the TINA gun at everyone’s bank account.. I keep reading that some believe Oliver Letwin is still behind the scenes rallying and orchestrating the actions of the devotees which of course include Mandelson. Brexit may even be declared ‘a national emergency’ of sorts.
The elite Capitalist structure is in severe crisis and panic, their predatory Ponzi schemes are crumbling as another major crash looms, their ruthlessness and inhumanity (hopefully) about to be exposed via Chilcot and the peasants are revolting against the inequality, greed and oppression. These are important times in my opinion but we know how cruel and ruthless the current systems are when denied their objectives or challenged, so these are also very worrying times.
I’m reading Peter Oborne’s excellent “Not the Chilcot Report” and it’s damning of Blair. A proven liar to parliament and the public, yet still the patron saint of New Labour.
Gordon
Yes an extremely important book. Everybody should read it.
Squabbling politicians who don’t address people’s concerns are one of the main reasons we woke up in the Disunited Kingdom on Friday. Corbyn has obviously been hamstrung by appeasing the Blairites all along or he would have led a more forceful referendum campaign on the basis of whichever way we vote neoliberalism wins and no way will leaving the EU bring jobs, income, healthcare or housing to the neglected post-industrial wastelands where the far Right makes inroads scapegoating immigrants.
However people had the chance to back him in the ref. And they didn’t in Labour strongholds …now is the time to stand up and say what was wrong with the process with CONVICTION Chilcot is important but not of IMMEDIATE concern Craig
There is leadership and then there is “dear leadership” as in North Korea!!!!!!
Corbyn can advise and suggest but the electorate will decide for themselves, and not let him to take the decisions in the private of the ballet booth.
the manufactured crisis of a Billionairess Hodges and her coterie, ie her billionaire Dan who has been quoted in DM calling Corby “the vampire” by no means is diminishing Corbyn, and in fact it is enhancing him. The days of the Satanic Cabal of Tonkins the lying sack of shit are over and gone. Looking forward to seeing the grinning imp in the dock and the Hague.
Seems a bit daft having a debate on Chilcot in a couple of weeks. Very few MPs will have had a chance to read and consider the report and will no doubt argue from pre conceived notions. Neither of the main parties will be focussed as their internal issues will dominate. And there is the little matter of Europe.
It may well be that the debate is timed because of all this but it needs serious debate. We have waited this long so we can wait a bit longer.
Scotland has a bright future on its own.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36632976
ScotRail staff have walked out for the fourth time in a week – leaving train passengers to face further disruption.
No need for border between Scotland & England, says Sturgeon
https://www.rt.com/uk/348432-sturgeon-england-scotland-border/
Nicola Sturgeon says MSPs at Holyrood could veto Brexit
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36633244
what is wrong with that woman?
Only Scots Labour MP Ian Murray quits shadow cabinet
In common with most other politicians Nicola Sturgeon has accidentally found herself out of her depth, and has no way of assessing the risks she is now running.
If Scotland obtains independence on the basis of the Brexit vote and, for whatever reason, Brexit does not happen then she has founded a country on the basis of a lie and a fraud. – Not much of a motto there.
She has no idea whether or not the EU would require Scotland to adopt the Euro
She has no idea whether the Scottish people would vote for a euro using independent Scotland
With independence under these circumstances she is unable to assess likely medium term economic divergence between Scotland and the rest of the UK.
She has no idea as to the medium term quantum of migrants/refugees and hence she has no idea how many of these people Scotland may be forced to accept. Therefore she has no idea as to likely English/Scottish border requirements.
She has no idea how England might diverge from EU policies and hence has no idea of medium term English appetite to import renewable electricity. Presumably Brexit puts Hinckley Point in danger and hence she has no idea of English ability to export peak electricity into Scotland. She does know that if England will not or cannot export power the Scotland will go all dark.
Presumably she understands that a country that cannot guarantee its own power supplies is not an attractive destination for inward investment.
Basically Nicola Sturgeon is akin to someone singing happy birthday at a funeral – and is likely going to suffer the same embarrassment and opprobrium.
I suppose Nicola could nationalize the railways, the coal mines, chemical industries, fisheries, distilleries,
steel industry and the oil % gas industry, she already owns Glasgow-Prestwick because they bought it for a pound.
In this instance, nothing at all.
She is a Scottish,as are the SNP MPs at Westminster and they would be acting in what they see as the best interests of Scotland.
Apologize? Never! The Rome Statute stipulates prosecute or extradite. While Blair got his last licks in before Article 8 bis could be adopted, there are plenty of derivative crimes to be sussed out. SNP members must gear up for sadistic needling, make themselves stick ever so painfully in Britain’s craw on the question of impunity. Britain will puke Scotland out forthwith.
Emily Thornberry, Labour shadow defence secretary, has just stuck her head above the parapet and is so far the only senior Labour MP to say what the remain electorate have been feeling: That, like Corbyn, they are broadly 7.5 out of 10 in favour. It is ludicrous to suggest that Corbyn’s remain views are somehow half hearted in the way the Blairites claim. As Thornberry states, hardly anyone is an obsequious 100% fan of the EU, but they are aware that on balance it is better than not being part of it. So Corbyn is actually being honest and reflecting the views of the remain camp.
The Blairites are continuing to stoop lower and lower to re-launch their failed attempt to remove him before. I suppose you’ve got to give them credit for tenacity. And they have all of the media behind them. People have short memories so it is worth re-stating that the huge grass roots support for Corbyn is still there. It might have had a bashing owing to wall to wall traducing by almost everyone who is not a rank and file Labour member, but that grass roots support is not going to evaporate over night.
Perhaps Corbyn might be well served by another “referendum” on his leadership, so that the rank and file can yet again show the pro war brigade in the parliamentary party that they are held as much in contempt now as they ever were.
You just don’t get it do you? The issue of whether Corbyn is 5/10 or 7.5/10 in favour of the EU was irrelevant. This was an in-out issue, and to fight any battle once you’ve settled in which side you’re going to fight, you’re supposed to fight tooth and nail. Does that really need spelling out to you? And this wasn’t just any little battle, it’s probably the most important decision any of us will have voted on in a generation. Corbyn was pathetic.
Jim,
There is an abundance of evidence from all those who actually attended gatherings with Mr Corbyn that he was honest and persuasive in his support for the UK to remain part of the EU. I on the other hand, despite voting for Corbyn last late August put Principle and solidarity with peers across much of the EU, per who have suffered under a EU imposed austerity far greater than we have in the UK under the lunatics Cameron and Osborne, so vote ‘out’, as did a majority in my own country of Wales. Corbyn is not to blame, the fucking Tories are and all those who talk down too or detest the working class, of which i’m a loyal member. Please cut the crap and propaganda as it really is most annoying.
This devastating piece tells the truth about Corbyn’s outright refusal, despite begging, to put his shoulder into the task. Petty party political resentment trumped the hugely bigger picture issue of the importance of winning this election. Unbelievable stuff really, I can scarcely credit anyone would be this stupid.
http://www.politico.eu/article/how-david-cameron-lost-brexit-eu-referendum-prime-minister-campaign-remain-boris-craig-oliver-jim-messina-obama/
The only point that article makes about Corbyn is that he refused to share a platform with Cameron, though making an exception for the memorial for Jo Cox. It says “The Labour leader defiantly campaigned [for Remain] on his own “, but reports an accusation from “senior figures in the Remain campaign” which the article neglects to name (and thus may be Corbyn’s detractors), of being “half-hearted” and “ineffectual”. However, Labour voters supported Remain by about two to one, which considering the Remain/Leave demographic looks pretty effective to me.
Of course if prominent Labour figures hadn’t been enthusiastically trashing Corbyn since his election as leader, more Labour voters might have listened to him.
Jim: I do get it. The problem with black and white thinking that you describe (fight tooth and nail) is that it precisely gives rise to hyperbolic statements like recovering our supposed £350 million and shoving it into the NHS, and other equally ridiculous statements that were always lies but were enough to persuade millions to vote for them. Is this the kind of tooth and nail that you wish for? I say again that a typical Remain voter is not an obedient, unquestioning idiot who believes the EU is the path to paradise. Corbyn’s views exactly reflect that skepticism.
Your position fails to acknowledge that all political arguments have nuance. You think that any nuanced view equals either no view at all, or by default is “pathetic”. Corbyn won a landslide rank and file vote precisely because many are sick and tired of grand-standing politicians who will say and do anything to be “electable”. Is this what you mean by “tooth and nail”? The huge support for Corbyn from REAL people, not has-been Blairites, is a force that has weight, and far more lasting weight than the ambitions of those who will stop at nothing to get power for the sake of it.
No, still don’t get it. The fight itself was the issue, stop obfuscating about nuance in arguments about the merits or demerits of the EU, that’s a wholly separate conversation. Corbyn, once he’d made the decision to support remain, had a duty to put his whole being into that fight. The link I’ve posted above gives devastating testimony from the ‘insiders’ about his stubborn refusal to join his party political enemies in this fight. There’s nothing ‘nuanced’ about a battle like this, it’s veritable life and death stuff regarding our place in Europe and the future of the EU itself. Corbyn is unable to see this, and look at the result.
And you’re failing to address the issue of the 30% decline in Labour support since the 2015 election under the leadership of JC. He’s not the Messiah, he’s a very naughty boy.
One sacking and three resignations so far. Hilary Benn, Heidi Alexander, Gloria de Piero and Ian Murray (any relation?)
Emily Thornberry and Diane Abbott are strongly defending Corbyn.
I have a notion that some of these jokers might be reconsidering their position, and thinking that this was maybe not such a good idea after all.
Which ones are the jokers? The MPs who are hanging on the coat-tails of a discredited,self-serving war monger or the MPs who reflect the views of the huge numbers of grass roots Labour members who voted for Corbyn and still support him.
The ‘huge numbers of grassroots members’ have been nicely in-step with a 30% decline in support for Labour since the 2015 election. Any conclusions to be drawn from these numbers?
Jim,
Perhaps the spineless toads you seem to adore should put themselves up for re-selection with their respective CLP’s, let the members decide their fate first, which will end in tears, as most are opposed to their CLP memberships views, testament of which was Thursdays vote, or are fact easily disposable with you, as it would seem is democracy and the acceptance of a democratically extracted verdict.
Which spineless toads would those be then Chris? I’ve nothing against democracy, just that in this case and thanks in part to your vote and the votes of millions of former Labour supporters, we’ve ended up in Farageland. Nice. And look how hard Jeremy fought the remain case :
http://www.politico.eu/article/how-david-cameron-lost-brexit-eu-referendum-prime-minister-campaign-remain-boris-craig-oliver-jim-messina-obama/
I paid my three quid to vote for Corbyn. I’ll be upgrading that to full membership soon.
30% decline in support since the 2015 election?
Nope. Don’t know how you make that out. This was not a party political vote.
May’s local election was. And that showed Corbyn gaining very significantly from what Miliband managed in 2015.
Internal Labour poll shows 30% decline in Labour vote since 2015 election.
http://gu.com/p/4myge?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Thornberry, Abbott. Lol.
well said Leonard, its the careerist warmongers who love to shack up with industry, rather than reflect the wishes of the membership, who are trying to oust JC.
I am referring to the jokers planning mass resignations.
Not only Chilcot, also a desperate attet to hange the leader before the debate on Trident.
Well, it’s on. The Cold War is over, not such a bad thing. One of the criticisms is that Corbyn isn’t ‘leadership’ material. This is a corporate, Dale Carnegie word, which probably itself flowed over from militaristic thinking. It’s a word that routinely irritates me, given it’s vague Ayn Rand style inferences, and it’s no mistake that Blair used it all the time – narcissists are often found in ‘leadership’ positions, because status enables their self-love. However, Corbyn is now to have his mettle tested, and will have to show some of what is misnamed ‘leadership’. He’s started well – Benn is a treacherous toad, who wants the top job, but will never win any leadership election, unless they change the rules. #Chat shit, get sacked.
It is no coincidence that Blair is over the airways today – because it’s always about Blair. I suspect he knows he faces disgrace, and quite possibly jail, and so here we are. I’d never even have imagined that the PLP would stoop to the tactics Craig describes. Corbyn with no parliamentary status? That’s nuts – and also desperate. It’s the desperation that intrigues me the most. What is it they fear? Also Interesting that Watson is involved. I’ve never trusted him, though accept he has done good work on the child abuse scandal. He sees himself as future leader for sure, but is being used by the conniving Blairites, and will be screwed over first thing, if Corbyn is out.
Alas, I see this going to the legal system, which is bent. Imagine. The leader of the party suing to ensure he stays on the ballot, that he knows he’ll win? Truly, interesting times.
They fear that there might be a general election this year, and that Corbyn might become PM before Christmas.
If he does, that is their careers over. They will have zero hope of any political advancement ever again.
That is why they must either oust him, or damage the party so badly that the Tories win an overall majority.
That is what is going on.
Sadly, it looks as though my £3 investment is about to run out. I am now backing Diane Abbott for Labour leader.
The Blairites in the party want to save their own hides. They wanted to move against Corbyn after the local elections, but he proved them wrong by being a success. So now they’ve leapt upon Brexit. They argue Corbyn didn’t speak to the heartlands, but guess what? Neither did Milliband, Brown and Blair! Why? Because New Labour refused to take the heartlands with them. They never once considered their concerns, they refused to open up lines of communication re immigration to allay their fears, in short they refused to represent them. That those very same New Labourites are blaming Corbyn for their mistake speaks volumes. It’s all about them, keeping their positions of power and the blame squarely away from their door.
Mark,
Strong, honest words, which I strongly agree with. The New Labour lot are a bloody disgrace and deserve being hung, drawn and quartered.
You were banging on about democracy a few minutes ago! Now it’s back to the guillotine and scaffold fantasies. You lot never disappoint.
Now don’t be silly. He did not mean that literally – at least I hope not!
You haven’t heard some of Chris’s previous robustly expressed opinions then! There are Pol Pot apologists on this forum believe it or not. I didn’t think these people really existed until I stumbled in here a good few months ago. Insane stuff, the far far left in bed with fascists! And that’s the sane ones. ?
Jim,
I have zero, and that means zero tolerance for traitors and those who deny democratic mandates.
Unlike you, my Principles are worth dying for if they are to be upheld, and if that means laying down one’s life, so be it.
Treachery is treachery is treachery. Now you either support democracy or you do not, and these Labour fuckers do not support democracy, for if they did, they’d shut the fuck up.
Further, suggest you look me up on Twitter, where you’ll find I don’t mess around and don’t hold back. I do not promote violence, but when my class is attacked, I will fight for that class period.
The ongoing ‘existential battle’ for the future of the Labour Party is not being waged in an undemocratic way, what on earth are you going on about Chris? It may be ‘vicious’ in the sense of midnight telephone conversations through gritted teeth. Nobody’s reaching for their carbines or sending round the boys with knuckledusters. Get a grip.
Jim
Just as the Communists were in bed with the Nazis in their determination to destroy the Weimar Republic.
As someone who has little common ground with Jeremy Corbyn I agreed with him about Iraq and indeed went public at the time that it was a dangerous stupid business. In all the present fuss you are right to remind us about Chilcot. As for the EU Corbyn was always on a hiding to nothing whichever way he went.
Under section 29 of the Scotland Act 1998, the Scottish Parliament must act in a manner compatible with EU law. The central British breach of obligations to Scotland was war on Iraq. Britain’s illegal war on Iraq breached the Paris Charter, which mandates adherence to international law. The British government’s interference with that law justifies as a countermeasure a state resolution of independence to permit Scottish compliance with the acquis communautaire. No referendum needed.
Can Blair and the others be tried under Scottish law?
Lysias
Why do you keep asking questions to which you know the answer?
yer but
wot if the United Kingdom gets thrown out by the hated European Empire?
We, the United Kingdom
will just tell them, we’re out, so shut the fuck up about your laws, we’re no longer interested.
Just as Hilary Benn’s out dated Syria speech turned my stomach, so does his assault on Jeremy Corbyn.
Some years ago, a Labour party friend took me to a local pre election ‘rally the troops’ meeting in York. I belonged to no party, consider myself a moderate and leaned towards Liberals. Passionately anti Iraq War. Hilary was speaking. Charming man. A little charismatic in the flesh. We chatted informally pre his rallying speech which focused on the achievements of Labour and reminded me of how quickly the pupil/teacher ratio improved with Blair — a godsend for our twin daughters in primary ed. So it was without any malice that I asked Hilary publicly if he thought that these achievements were overshadowed by the Iraq War and Afghanistan. (His father agreed to support my Plant for Peace protest to bring troops home from Afghanistan.) Shock and awe. No one expected the elephant to be mentioned. I can’t properly recall his answer but it was inadequate. He was not pleased. My friend disappeared at the end and I was convinced the local command were giving him a hard time. He never told me. He just kept saying ‘It was a good question.’ I felt bad for putting my friend, a very decent long standing Labour man, in such an awkward position.
I joined Corbyn’s Labour party last year. When I heard the news this morning, it shook me. I can not tell you how glad I am that I confronted Hilary Benn that night and I cannot wait to do it again.
Yes, this is about Chilcot Craig..and about the naked lust for power without principle.
I believe that Corbyn’s shadow cabinet was the first in UK politics to contain more women than men, so it’s perhaps ironic that most of those resigning today are women.
You-couldn’t-make-it-up
As they don’t agree with their leader, for reasons yet unknown, they should resign their seats and get re elected as red Conservatives.
Some interesting past articles from The Economist in the 1990’s:
Looking back from 2992: a world history, chapter 13: the disastrous 21st century. (book excerpt) The Economist (US) December 26, 1992
https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-13282236.html
Now China had to decide what its relations should be with the other new great power of the 21st century. This was the force that burst upon the world, almost as explosively as a similar phenomenon had done 1,400 years earlier, out of the long-sluggish Muslim world: the New Caliphate, as amused outsiders called it until they learnt not to joke.
The failure of Muslims to match the political and economic advance of the democracies had puzzled the 19th and 20th centuries. These people had, after all, an earlier history of dazzling achievement; more recently many of them had shown great skill in science and the arts; and, since the early 20th century, their lands had contained most of the industrial world’s chief source of energy. All they lacked, it seemed, was the right combination of circumstances for organising themselves into a coherent power. That this analysis was correct was demonstrated by the results of Colonel Algosaibi’s coup in Saudi Arabia in 2011.
Algosaibi succeeded, where so many would-be unifiers of Islam had failed, because he quickly took control of almost all the Gulf’s oil; because he could point Muslims towards a new geopolitical target; and, above all, because by 2011 Muslims felt that at last they had a chance to work off their ancient resentment against the now-splintered western world.
So, it “predicted” an uprising as it were in the ME in 2011. Wrong location but uncanny all the same?
The nation-state is dead. Long live the nation-state.(The Shape Of The World) The Economist (US) December 23, 1995 .
https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-17969326.html
so anyone have any idea who the anointed bllairite saviour is? clearly there is one.
I would not be too confident that these people have any idea what they are doing. If you give a lunatic a chainsaw then maybe he will fell a tree or maybe he will saw his own leg off.
Wendy,
Go ask Jim, he’s in his element slagging off the democratically elected head of the Labour Party, someone whom I attempted to vote for myself, until I was added to the list of ‘unwanted’ by Labour’s Blair faction.