Welcome To The UK You Magnificent B@stard.

Don't forget Hamas/Hezbollah and the IRA, what a round table that would be

CCU wrote: Just said on the News that Corbyn, Cable and Bercow won’t be attending the State dinner.

I’d call that a result personally!

Bercow would take ages to order,order.

Waltero wrote: Don't forget Hamas/Hezbollah and the IRA, what a round table that would be

I wonder if all the people trying to make edgy comments about Corbyn supporting the IRA would like it if people started falsely accusing THEM of supporting the IRA. If you don't like Corbyn then fine. If you think his policies are wrong then that's also fine. But since when did it become acceptable to make such vile false accusations against someone because you disagree with them?

Files just released by the National Archives show Margaret Thatcher took part in negotiations with the IRA during the 1981 Hunger Strikes, BBC investigative journalist Peter Taylor has said.


Mr Taylor said Mrs Thatcher altered by hand one statement sent to the IRA.

"When I read these documents I was astonished," he said.

"I think that they are revelatory and of genuine historical importance because they give lie to all sorts of assumptions that were made incorrectly about the Hunger Strikes and the relationship between the government and the IRA.

"These documents spell it out large that Mrs Thatcher was involved in negotiations with the IRA."

"That was all to do with the government's insistence, Mrs Thatcher's insistence, that she did not negotiate with terrorists, she did not and would not negotiate with the IRA.

"The documents clearly indicate that that was nonsense, that was going on all the time behind the scene."

More strong, stable and trustworthy Tories
www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-16366413

So all the photos, his statements, are all lies then

Waltero wrote: So all the photos, his statements, are all lies then

Ah so are you now saying that Corbyn made a statement declaring his support for the IRA? I must have missed that, but I'm sure you will be able to reference it for me.

Waltero wrote: So all the photos, his statements, are all lies then

The Conservatives are there for the taking, a wounded animal but nobody wants that IRA loving scumbag and his sidekick who cannot count either.

Don't know why someone hasn't kicked them into touch yet, the Conservatives realised that it wasn't working with May and there will be change.

Labour however plod on with Corbyn, let us not forget that he was part of screwing up Brexit as well so I cannot see why that scumbag is not shown the door as well - ffs he is the squaddies 'pin up' poster guy as well, pop pop, he was their first choice.

munchymagic wrote: The Conservatives are there for the taking, a wounded animal but nobody wants that IRA loving scumbag and his sidekick who cannot count either.

He doesn't love the IRA, you have been told that it is a lie multiple times yet you keep posting it.

I think that regardless of what people think about Corbyn and his policies, we should all agree that falsely accusing someone of terrorism to try and discredit them is wrong. It is an absolutely vile and disgusting thing to be accused of, it has no place in modern politics.

You have to admire the state propaganda though. The US/UK/French armies kill a million from the border of India to the Atlantic Ocean but Hezbollah is the terrorist. How many people has Hamas or Hezbollah killed in Britain? How many have we killed in the middle east? The 300 British soldiers killed in the last 20 years in the middle east, victims of terrorists? Blair, May, Cameron, Johnson, what's the difference between them and Bernadette Devlin or Martin McGuinness? Corbyn actually wants to stop this crap

Why don’t you arrange for Corbyn to go over to Syria and break bread with Assad or the remains of Isis-see how he gets on.No protection of course.

Markovitch wrote: Files just released by the National Archives show Margaret Thatcher took part in negotiations with the IRA during the 1981 Hunger Strikes, BBC investigative journalist Peter Taylor has said.


Mr Taylor said Mrs Thatcher altered by hand one statement sent to the IRA.

"When I read these documents I was astonished," he said.

"I think that they are revelatory and of genuine historical importance because they give lie to all sorts of assumptions that were made incorrectly about the Hunger Strikes and the relationship between the government and the IRA.

"These documents spell it out large that Mrs Thatcher was involved in negotiations with the IRA."

"That was all to do with the government's insistence, Mrs Thatcher's insistence, that she did not negotiate with terrorists, she did not and would not negotiate with the IRA.

"The documents clearly indicate that that was nonsense, that was going on all the time behind the scene."

More strong, stable and trustworthy Tories
www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-16366413

Don't know whether you'd noticed, but Thatcher died 6 years ago. Or, are you suggesting if the IRA were good enough for Thatcher to talk to, then it's OK for Corbyn ? So, two wrongs make a right ?

Are you confusing love with hate ?

Trump faces giant penis mowed into field near airport where he lands for UK state visit, in climate change protest

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/...tm_source=reddit.com

thesilentone wrote:

Markovitch wrote: Files just released by the National Archives show Margaret Thatcher took part in negotiations with the IRA during the 1981 Hunger Strikes, BBC investigative journalist Peter Taylor has said.


Mr Taylor said Mrs Thatcher altered by hand one statement sent to the IRA.

"When I read these documents I was astonished," he said.

"I think that they are revelatory and of genuine historical importance because they give lie to all sorts of assumptions that were made incorrectly about the Hunger Strikes and the relationship between the government and the IRA.

"These documents spell it out large that Mrs Thatcher was involved in negotiations with the IRA."

"That was all to do with the government's insistence, Mrs Thatcher's insistence, that she did not negotiate with terrorists, she did not and would not negotiate with the IRA.

"The documents clearly indicate that that was nonsense, that was going on all the time behind the scene."

More strong, stable and trustworthy Tories
www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-16366413

Don't know whether you'd noticed, but Thatcher died 6 years ago. Or, are you suggesting if the IRA were good enough for Thatcher to talk to, then it's OK for Corbyn ? So, two wrongs make a right ?

Are you confusing love with hate ?

Being willing to talk with these groups is not the same as sympathizing with them. Either people are getting confused about that or they are deliberately trying to blur the difference to push the establishment narrative of Corbyn as a bad guy.

Laffy wrote: No protection of course.

What a ridiculous idea.

Kessler wrote:

thesilentone wrote:

Markovitch wrote: Files just released by the National Archives show Margaret Thatcher took part in negotiations with the IRA during the 1981 Hunger Strikes, BBC investigative journalist Peter Taylor has said.


Mr Taylor said Mrs Thatcher altered by hand one statement sent to the IRA.

"When I read these documents I was astonished," he said.

"I think that they are revelatory and of genuine historical importance because they give lie to all sorts of assumptions that were made incorrectly about the Hunger Strikes and the relationship between the government and the IRA.

"These documents spell it out large that Mrs Thatcher was involved in negotiations with the IRA."

"That was all to do with the government's insistence, Mrs Thatcher's insistence, that she did not negotiate with terrorists, she did not and would not negotiate with the IRA.

"The documents clearly indicate that that was nonsense, that was going on all the time behind the scene."

More strong, stable and trustworthy Tories
www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-16366413

Don't know whether you'd noticed, but Thatcher died 6 years ago. Or, are you suggesting if the IRA were good enough for Thatcher to talk to, then it's OK for Corbyn ? So, two wrongs make a right ?

Are you confusing love with hate ?

Being willing to talk with these groups is not the same as sympathizing with them. Either people are getting confused about that or they are deliberately trying to blur the difference to push the establishment narrative of Corbyn as a bad guy.

So he is willing to talk to terrorist organisations, but not the President of the USA, that is the point.

Why is the president of America not a terrorist? I don't understand the distinction. Why is Hamas killing Israelis terrorism but the US drone attacking Pakistani villages isn't. The first raf bombing raid in Syria was on a granary, it killed 28 people half of whom were women and children.

Dentonholmersimpson wrote:

Kessler wrote:

thesilentone wrote:

Markovitch wrote: Files just released by the National Archives show Margaret Thatcher took part in negotiations with the IRA during the 1981 Hunger Strikes, BBC investigative journalist Peter Taylor has said.


Mr Taylor said Mrs Thatcher altered by hand one statement sent to the IRA.

"When I read these documents I was astonished," he said.

"I think that they are revelatory and of genuine historical importance because they give lie to all sorts of assumptions that were made incorrectly about the Hunger Strikes and the relationship between the government and the IRA.

"These documents spell it out large that Mrs Thatcher was involved in negotiations with the IRA."

"That was all to do with the government's insistence, Mrs Thatcher's insistence, that she did not negotiate with terrorists, she did not and would not negotiate with the IRA.

"The documents clearly indicate that that was nonsense, that was going on all the time behind the scene."

More strong, stable and trustworthy Tories
www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-16366413

Don't know whether you'd noticed, but Thatcher died 6 years ago. Or, are you suggesting if the IRA were good enough for Thatcher to talk to, then it's OK for Corbyn ? So, two wrongs make a right ?

Are you confusing love with hate ?

Being willing to talk with these groups is not the same as sympathizing with them. Either people are getting confused about that or they are deliberately trying to blur the difference to push the establishment narrative of Corbyn as a bad guy.

So he is willing to talk to terrorist organisations, but not the President of the USA, that is the point.

I think he is wrong not to attend the banquet. But this is an interesting comparison. People are saying that Corbyn is a terrorist sympathizer because of people he met in the past. The US government is accused of supporting terrorists in Syria. Does that mean anyone who meets with the US head of state is a terrorist sympathizer?

Markovitch wrote: Why is the president of America not a terrorist? I don't understand the distinction. Why is Hamas killing Israelis terrorism but the US drone attacking Pakistani villages isn't. The first raf bombing raid in Syria was on a granary, it killed 28 people half of whom were women and children.

The media seems to go to great lengths in downplaying the amount of civilians our armed forces have killed, so in fairness the lack of criticism could be because people simply aren't aware of it.

Oh she's sweet but she's psycho, when she's on her cycle mah mah, mah mah mah.

Great song that one.

Of course Corbyn and McDonnel supported the IRA. There's mountains of proof so I'm not sure what you are on about Kessler.

nobbyblue wrote: Of course Corbyn and McDonnel supported the IRA. There's mountains of proof so I'm not sure what you
are on about Kessler.

Well where is that proof then? I have heard plenty of people repeat the line about Corbyn supporting terrorists but they all go quiet or evasive when you ask them to back it up. Supporting a terrorist organization is a criminal offence. Corbyn is one of the most heavily scrutinized individuals in the country. If he did actually did support the IRA and there is mountains of proof for it, it's odd he hasn't been prosecuted for it right?

It's one thing to dislike a politician or disagree with their policies but people shouldn't be spreading discredited lies about them. Saying that he supports the IRA is factually incorrect. You wouldn't like it if people falsely accused you of supporting the IRA nobbyblue, so why is it ok for you to make the same false accusations about Corbyn?

CCU wrote: Must’ve missed Post 65...

Nope, I saw your link and read what I could. Nowhere does it say that Corbyn supports terrorists. Meeting someone does not necessarily mean you agree with their beliefs or support them.

Theresa May met Donald Trump last year. Trump is the head of a government accused of supporting terrorists in Syria. In your opinion does Theresa May meeting Trump make her a terrorist sympathizer? If not, why does Corbyn meeting people make him one?

Between 1986 and 1992, Corbyn attended and spoke each year at the annual “Connolly/Sands” commemoration in London to honour dead IRA terrorists and support imprisoned IRA “prisoners of war.

Sounds like supporting the IRA to me.

Corbyn and Mcdonnell were pro-terrorism. They were enemies of the peace process. They had a clear choice between the IRA and peaceful nationalism and they chose the IRA.

I think being guest speaker at the annual Sands/Connolly soire qualifies Corbyn for sympathetic views on the struggle-also calling them prisoners of war and soldiers when in fact they were blowing innocent civilians to bits.

McDonnell actually opposed the Peace Agreement, favouring a united Ireland which we know will eventually happen due to the demographics

Is it me?

In 2004 McDonnel was given a special award by Sinn Fein and another IRA-supporting body for the “unfailing political and personal support he has given to the republican community in the Six Counties over many years"

The award was presented to him at a Sinn Fein fundraising dinner by Gerry Kelly, the IRA terrorist who bombed the Old Bailey, killing one and injuring almost 200

Add that other head-case at the top of the RMT from Londonderry, and hey-presto, a conspiracy theory.......

Laffy wrote: I think being guest speaker at the annual Sands/Connolly soire qualifies Corbyn for sympathetic views on the struggle-also calling them prisoners of war and soldiers when in fact they were blowing innocent civilians to bits.

What name would you use to describe members of our armed forces who have bombed civilians in Syria?

What name do we call Cameron and May? Funded an anti Government terror group in Libya to attack the Gadaffi government. They then air lifted them out of Tripoli and brought them back to Britain where one of them blew up the Ariana Grande concert in Manchester


www.independent.co.uk/voices/manchester-...a-isis-a8369506.html

I call members of our Armed forces heroes-they are paid to protect our way of life and civilisation.To suggest otherwise is poor.

Laffy wrote: I call members of our Armed forces heroes-they are paid to protect our way of life and civilisation.To suggest otherwise is poor.

Trump is here to commemorate the people who made the ultimate sacrifice on D-Day.

1 million US troops fought in that conflict, to help keep us free. To call him a facist is laughable, if we had capitulated 75 years ago some of these people would know what real facism is.

God help us if we were subjected to that again, I don't know how many would fight on our side.

Laffy wrote: I call members of our Armed forces heroes-they are paid to protect our way of life and civilisation.To suggest otherwise is poor.

That hasn't been the case for a while. Iraq and Libya didn't pose a threat to our way of life, there was no need to attack them. The ironic thing is that while you talk about the armed forces getting into wars to protect our way of life, their involvement in that part of the world has done the opposite. It's created a lot of instability and power vacuums that have allowed terrorists to thrive.

Dentonholmersimpson wrote: To call him a facist is laughable, if we had capitulated 75 years ago some of these people would know what real facism is.

It's what the kids of today are like now. If you don't agree exactly with what they say then you are a nazi and they will shout and scream and have a tantrum and in some cases even get physical. The worst part is they think all of this is completely justified because they truly believe that not agreeing with them makes you as bad as a nazi. I worry about the state of this country at times.

Glad that you moved on to hassle other people to be honest Kessler but instead of worrying about the state of the country I would start with sorting your own head out first.

You act very immature and you should grow up.

munchymagic wrote: Glad that you moved on to hassle other people to be honest Kessler but instead of worrying about the state of the country I would start with sorting your own head out first.

Speaking of people who get abusive when someone disagrees with them....

I go above and beyond that and I also like to disagree with people who agree with me....

munchymagic wrote: You act very immature and you should grow up.

That's like Barry telling people not to talk nonsense about men in balaclavas and smashing windows.....

Kessler wrote:

munchymagic wrote: You act very immature and you should grow up.

That's like Barry telling people not to talk nonsense about men in balaclavas and smashing windows.....

Hahaha - I didn't think that you were daft enough to walk into that one, but you did and you didn't let me down.

Night night.

Munchy

munchymagic wrote:

Kessler wrote:

munchymagic wrote: You act very immature and you should grow up.

That's like Barry telling people not to talk nonsense about men in balaclavas and smashing windows.....

Hahaha - I didn't think that you were daft enough to walk into that one.

Night night.

Munchy

Night!

Dentonholmersimpson wrote:

Laffy wrote: I call members of our Armed forces heroes-they are paid to protect our way of life and civilisation.To suggest otherwise is poor.

Trump is here to commemorate the people who made the ultimate sacrifice on D-Day.

1 million US troops fought in that conflict, to help keep us free. To call him a facist is laughable, if we had capitulated 75 years ago some of these people would know what real facism is.

God help us if we were subjected to that again, I don't know how many would fight on our side.

A man who manipulated the population by propaganda in the press owned by his backers. Blamed the ills of the country on immigrants, homosexuals and religious minorities. Vilified foreigners for plundering the wealth of his country. Advocated making the unemployed work for nothing. Nigel walks a well worn path

They talked about up to 250,000 protesters today, I think they have a zero to many, maybe two.........

Funny how there are all these protests against Trump this week because of the State visit.
Putin and Mugabe have also been on state visits and China have had four in the last twenty years and very few people protested about those.
And USA are supposed to be our closest ally

He certainly caught the mood with Corbyn-just ignore him and his pathological negativity and criticism and hopefully he will just wither on the vine.Brilliant.

Won't have helped his chances of winning a General Election with this stance. Trump would just tell him to [censored] off if he tried to deal with him after this.

If they really wanted to get to Trump no-one should turn up and show indifference to him. He loves attention whether good or bad.

I see trump has said that the NHS has to be on the table in any trade deal with the USA.
Brexit just gets better and better the dick thinks that we will be so desperate for any deal that he can screw us over.

The speech I saw he said everything was on the table and May said of course it was before negotiations start.

Not good times these for those who believe in civilised values and social justice etc. Material prosperity killing socialism and community spirit? Maybe people have forgotten the war now and are too well off and that's why we seem to be sliding into madness with these joke leaders and dumbed-down hate politics. Shame if so because there's so much that's great these days and if people could just open their eyes and have a bit of vision.


The US presidents are certainly colourful these days: first a black one, now an orange one. Whatever next?