TOPIC: Corbyn just like the rest..............

29-09-15

"Jeremy Corbyn has vowed not to back down on Trident nuclear weapons in a thundering conference speech - despite being defeated by his own party.

The Labour leader used his first keynote conference speech to publicly restate his view that spending £100 billion on replacing the Trident weapons system is misguided.

Shadow defence secretary Maria Eagle will lead a review of the role of the military, he announced.

Mr Corbyn said: "There is one thing I want to make my own position on absolutely clear, and I believe I have a mandate from my election on it.

"I don’t believe that £100bn spend on a new generation of nuclear weapons taking up a quarter of our defence budget is the right way forward," he said."

---

30-9-15

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has been forced to back down over his fierce opposition to Britain's nuclear deterrent.
The veteran anti-war campaigner just this week said he did not want Labour to vote for the renwal of Trident in order to 'fulfil our obligations under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty'.
However, Mr Corbyn has now accepted that Labour MPs will not unite against the government's plan to renew Trident in a vote next year.

---

One word from the Unions and the Trident vote is history...

Labour will not debate the case for scrapping Britain's Trident nuclear weapons system at its conference in Brighton this week.
A highly anticipated vote on the motion had been expected to take place on Wednesday.
But it failed to get the support it needed from activists in a ballot selecting the issues to be discussed.
Mr Corbyn will still have to convince his MPs and ministers to back nuclear disarmament when Parliament votes.
Some trade unions are against scrapping Trident because it will cost jobs but Mr Corbyn says Britain should ditch its "weapons of mass destruction".

---

Just like rest of the career politicians.......full of s**te..........
Challenged for the party leadership on policies he knew could never be delivered...

To be fair if you want to know who's full of shite you should be looking closer to home than Brighton.

Jeremy Corbyn's idea of defence for Great Britain...

Just like the rest of them, for having a different opinion to the rest of them. Aye alright then.

Unbelievable waste of money but pays me £30 grand a year so I'm all for it.

Moorlad wrote:
So, Moorland, your not buying into Jeremy's ' Kinder and Caring ' Politics then..................

Nuclear weapons should be banned. All weapons should be banned. War is bad. But we'd be fecked left right and centre if we didn't have a deterrent. They call it MAD. It surely is!

thesilentone wrote:
Erse holes down there.

Knockout_knockers wrote:
Would we really he any worse off if we didn't have a nuclear deterrent ?

Who is going to attack us that we would actually use them against ?

Plenty of other countries don't have Nukes and have never been attacked with them.

Seems like the rest of the world is protected under the NATO umbrella through weapons bought and paid for by the UK, France and America.

Germany don't have them so why do we need them.... Oh yes, because we've followed on America's coat tails for the last 70 years or so.

Surely 100 billion could be better spent?

Outdated bollocks.

No one is going to attack us with nukes. More countries don't have them than have them so what makes us so special that we need them?

Our biggest threat is from a pack of rock-throwing lunatics (ISIS) who don't even have the capability to launch a conventional military strike on the UK, never mind a nuclear strike. And if they ever did have the ability to launch a nuclear strike then do you think those radge c*nts would care whether we had the ability to launch one back or not?

Russia aren't a threat. If you believe they are then you're a bed wetter.

North Korea are gobsh*tes.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

There is one country that has used them

Corbyn has said he won't press the button. I'd be interested to know who out there would, or even could.

For instance, who on here could?

As some of you will know I spent 12 years in the armed forces, and during quite a lot of that time the terror alert was quite high. Obviously we had to do a fair bit of guarding duties, it's par for the course in the military. During my time the way we guarded camps changed, when I first joined you were stood out there with a pickaxe handle, then with a rifle (Self Loading Rifle at the time) with no magazine or ammunition, which obviously wouldn't have fooled any terrorist. Later with an empty magazine, then with a loaded magazine not attached and finally with a fully loaded rifle.

Obviously we were assigned a similar deterrence role to that carried out by trident, but in a much smaller way. There was a particular time when I was guarding a gate at RAF Northcoates (now closed), with a fully loaded weapon, in the middle of the night, and in the middle of winter. We had a great view of the road leading to the camp and were approached by a stranger, both myself and the lad I was with challenged the fella, and were ignored, he carried on walking towards us, he had his hands behind his back and was a complete stranger to both of us. We went through all the challenges even threatening to open fire on the bloke, but he just kept walking towards us. Finally about 15 yards away, he stopped and placed a package in the middle of the road, then turned and walked off. Now, my training says I should have shot him, so should the lad with me, but neither of us could, even faced with what he left in the middle of the road. We had to cordon the whole main gate area off and call in the army bomb disposal people. It turned out to be a Christmas cake. Me and my mate got a serious bollocking for not shooting an innocent man. It wasn't that I wouldn't, I actually couldn't, my mate was the same.

Scale it up, could you launch trident? I couldn't.

It's one of those who blinks first situations isn't it.

If it ever did come to us needing to use trident, and I use that word losely, it would be the end of the world.

Moorlad wrote:
Would you have been the first and last ever person to shoot someone for giving you a Christmas cake?

I can imagine the kind of support I'd have got from the RAF and Ministry of Defence if I'd done it. I made that plain while I was getting told how stupid I'd been, I also asked the senior officer bollocking me what he'd have done in my situation, and he yelled at me for being insolent.

There certainly were people I worked with in the RAF who I believe would have shot the man, he's very lucky it was me and my mate that night. I was holding the rifle aimed squarely at the bloke's chest for around a minute, and fully loaded they are reasonably heavy, but that really wasn't the reason my arms were shaking.

I'd have shot him, no doubt about it, probably a few times just to make sure.

I frigging hate Christmas cake


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I quite like it, but it was no use after the bomb disposal lot were finished with it.

Let's face it, Corbyn is a slightly watered down communist lunatic. Was in a London pub a few months back and this guy started talking politics and got drawn into the debate. Corbyn was his hero, the saviour for mankind in the UK.

After further discussion, it turned out that this guy was in his 50s and had never contributed a single penny to the state. He lived on dodging tax, doing odd jobs although highly educated but felt it was perfectly fine to extract as much from the system as possible and contribute as little as possible because the system should protect people who are not as fortunate as others.......err he meant the system should expect people to work their nuts off to pay for those who don't want to (aside from those who are genuinely not able to work etc who should in my view be protected).

Vote for this Corbyn guy and the system will be further shifted to look after these idiots at our expense.

I'm proud to say that I'm from a council estate and had nothing but was brought up to work for what you get, I won't be voting Labour with this idiot around. And as for him being buddies with Gerry Adams.....that just boils my P"""

Follow the Americans coat tails why because we owe them a massive debt thats why and it should not be forgoten .The numbers they lost during the second world war helping us from the evil of Hitler .We would be not around now on this messageboard or anywhere else if Hitler had got his way .Think of this if Corbyn had been leader instead of Churchill it would have been so easy ,you can have our country because i dont want to fire a gun or fight what a fanny .Putin will be laughing the uk will be a soft touch .The brave souls who fought in two world wars will be turning in there graves if they came back now to see how soft our country has become.

I know that when I contribute to any of these political debates I bang on about the same point usually, who is going to pay? Trident is in my view a waste of money, there is no threat of equal magnitude as these things can basically backfire on the agressor if the wind blows the wrong way, apart perhaps from those numpties across the atlantic! Disengaging with them fookers could save us some coin!

Socialism is a fine ideal but that is now precisely what it is, an ideal. Sadly the ideal of strong health service, strong schools, free university, re nationalisation, Is probably unaffordable because nobody in our new greedy society is prepared to pay for it. You can tax the rich, the bankers, big business but don't ever forget, these businesses employ people and need customers. If they pay more tax, they make less profit, If this happens, they put prices up and /or shed jobs. Does this help the socialist ideal? I think not. I would gladly pay more tax if it was at source and not my taxed income being taxed again through back door taxation as has grown over the last two decades or so. i.e. vat on leccy, hot food, insurance premium tax, airport tax, higher fuel duty, etc Yes, scrap trident, and prevent tax avoidance where possible and cost effective Yes, tighten regulation on business to prevent market rigging, Yes, don't get involved in other folks wars on a fookin whim, yes, renegotiate or get out of europe (it's no longer what we signed up to and finacially no longer fit for purpose, we're a fookin charity for the poorer eastern european countries who recently joined)

So, in a nutshell, Mr corbyn has fine ideals, admirable ideals, but if his Labour got hold of the economy, etc, heaven fuckin help us!!!

CumbrianView wrote:
Firstly WW1 was a war between kings, nowhere near the same as the reasons for WW2.

So by your logic why aren't we following what the Russians and Chinese say ? They lost 27m and 20m respectively. To put that into context the Germans lost 7m, we lost 450k and the USA lost 420k, those numbers are including civilians.

So fair enough they were brave men who fought in the wars, but we owe other countries far greater debts than the Americans.

And maybe a Corbyn like figure in WW2 would have adopted neutrality ?

Halpinsleftpeg wrote: As opposed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer who has millions ofpounds in offshore trusts and keeps the tax legislation as it is so that he can avoid tax? How can you accuse people on benefits and immigrants of being scroungers when thousands of them together receive less than the corrupt Chancellor? The people in public office have a duty to lead by example, that example is currently one of Nigerian style thievery. Still I suppose stealing is better than pig shagging

The UK is not a communist country, never has been, so the left wing militant republicans are a minority (thankfully). We do live in a global economy (like it or not) that has a massive amount of hypocritical values, such as sucking up to those tyrants in Saudi Arabia and China.

But, what can Mr Average do ? Well, the only thing we can do is protect ourselves and our families from the worst things in life and help and support each other to achieve the best life possible. The only solution for this is working hard and paying tax and NI, the more workers there are, the more tax revenue there is. Protecting ourselves against the Tyrants means having military strength as a deterrent, which is at least equal to or in excess of our enemy's. In addition ticking the box we like at election time.

There is NO need for food banks in the UK !!!! This service is being exploited by the passengers in life and is used as a political card by the left wing militants. Take a page out of Brother Johnstone's book and who suffers....the poor. The only thing he has in common with a Food Bank is, it looks like he ate one !!

So, the breath of fresh air that was Corbyn pre-leadership challenge, is not the Corbyn we see now. He appears to be almost anti-British !! As, for the rest of the snakes that have emerged looking for conscience redemption, hoping an apology for there previous " what I said was appropriate at that time" bu..s..it, please slide back to obscurity where you belong and let some new blood see the light.

thesilentone wrote:
With all due respect you're a gobsh*te who knows f*ck all about food banks. Have you sat outside every food bank in the country and surveyed those who use them to make that statement? Have you b*llocks. Typical Daily Mail-reading knobhead.

My mam is the regional manager for the food banks in west Cumbria. They do actually survey every person who uses them to get an understanding of their personal circumstances and I can assure you that we do need them.

Food banks are like tax credits, another form of benefits, they are part of the problem, not the solution.

Oh, and try a coherent answer without the *

When there was a show on the tv about food banks the woman who was using it had a better car and phone than me!!

Her other half also had a car, these things cost money to maintain and run and they were using the food bank as a means to be able to spend their money on nice things and not food.

Not saying that everyone is like that but this pair made me sick.

First a little about me.
As an idealistic yougster I was drawn to the left as it seemed ideologically fair for all and I was totally sold on the things like the NHS. As I became older and had a family I gravitated to the right as I started to more and more believe that it is up to the individual to stand on their own two feet and succeed or fail on your own efforts in life.
Now..... .. I feel too many people are swayed by the media and their own circumstances. I find it difficult to fully support the current right wing onslaught on the working/non working class and also find many of Corbyns thoughts more appealing.
Although the right has a clear mandate after the last election they may want to consider that the left will become a genuine option for many of those that they seem to be leaving behind.

loser wrote:
Nobody can predict what is going to happen in the next 50 years. Other countries have nuclear weapons, countries that are not necessarily certain to remain friendly to the UK, or certain to show restraint in the event of a major conventional war with other nations. Russia, China, Pakistan, North Korea, Israel. There's quite a few countries there who have the potential to be, or already are, quite unstable places. Others such as Iran may acquire them over the next 50 years. The chances of a situation in which the UK or an innocent country that required protection, was threatened with nuclear weapons is very slim. But there's still that slim chance and so is it not smart to cover yourself in case?

Other Western countries don't have them as they rely on those that do, the UK, France and the US, protecting them aka NATO. Do we want to completely rely on others if it came to a situation in which the survival of the country was at stake?

A few years ago people would have laughed at the idea of Russia invading Ukraine and the mini cold war that has resulted. The idea of a terrorist takeover of Syria wasn't a threat a few years ago. Things change. Unexpected situations do occur.

Thats the nature of defence. You have to be alert to all potential threats not just the main one you face at any one time. If the strategy was to focus on ISIS alone and neglect any other possibility then the government would be failing in the defence of the country.

thesilentone wrote:
There is a clear need for foodbanks silent one. Having volunteered in one I've seen the need first hand. The problem is unthinking, unfeeling, ignorant, uneducated people like you who have no idea about life outside of their own narrow experiences. What do you do for a living?

So the answer is to work hard and pay your tax. Or do what the Chancellor does does and keep it offshore! In a week when the NHS announces it is a billion over budget Mr Logic Cameron tells us if the Russians come near our bombing raids in Syria our planes will open fire. So killing Syrians is more important than saving British lives?

I would encourage you to read this very well written article "THE UGLY SIDE OF THE FOODBANK GAME"

You must read the WHOLE article, it can be found here: marksimonfrankland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/0...f-foodbank-game.html

I tend to agree with parts of what thesilentone says regarding this particular question (I know, and it certainly isn't like me), and I will read the article he has linked. I really worry about foodbanks, and I don't really doubt that there are some genuine cases of need out there, but there must be better ways of ensuring the help gets to the right people. Where thesilentone is dead right is that there are unscrupulous people who are exploiting these well meaning, caring and hard working people who only want to help those worse off than themselves. That is a brilliant thing to want to do, and I certainly would not want to stop those people from doing that, however it is about genuine need. If there are people (and there are bound to be) who can afford to drink, smoke, have Sky TV and the best mobiles, then they do not need help from a food bank.

It's not just Corbyn his deputy Watson is a real bully boy.

loser wrote: So a survey organised by food banks says that food banks are needed? Well that is a surprise. I'm not being funny but it's hardly an independent survey is it? In theory food banks aren't needed as for those who don't qualify for benefits there is the Welfare allowance route... this is basically a budget that those outside the benefit structure, for example, victims of domestic abuse, those leaving prison etc. can claim assistance through whilst their benefit claims are processed. each local authority has this fund built into their budgets and is responsible for administering the welfare assistance. The total spend is something like £170m per year. Remember that is in theory... in reality many of those in trouble struggle to claim the assistance they are entitled to and end up using foodbanks as a result. Food banks do a good job in providing a safety net generally, and many work hand in hand with local authorities, however there is a lot of abuse and many simply see it as free food to make their tab and booze budget go further when on benefits. It is never going to be easy to design a system that genuinely protects the vulnerable without being open to abuse by those playing the system for as much as they get.

thesilentone wrote:
Why don't you go into the real world instead of reading articles online , your one of those people who'll disbelieve 1000s of pieces of fact and just believe the one piece of inconclusive evidence against, although some people abuse the system some people need it to survive.

Edited to add a good idea would be teaching people to cook properly as you can eat healthy for less than £20 a week easily.

Happyblue wrote:
I've just read that article.

In all honesty it's a pretty well balanced piece by somebody who volunteers in food provision, and although it mentions people abusing the system it is more aimed against big charity organisations with their franchise mentality. I found it very interesting to be honest, and thesilentone's views and mine don't often coincide.

"In theory foodbanks aren't needed"

Aye, and in theory there's easily enough food to go round to feed everyone on the planet easily. How's that one working out?

I've enough experience in the voluntary sector in the NW of England to know that foodbanks and similar charities are meeting a need. Cameron et al couldn't care less.

I was ignored last time so I'll try again. What do you do for a living silentone?

deeksme wrote: Deeks, I agree with you that they are meeting a need... however, the Local welfare Assistance Provision schemes are in place for those that fall between the benefit cracks. Local Authorities have a duty of care to individuals in need and it is now their responsibility to deliver this in any way they see fit. The Welfare Assistance scheme and crisis loan system used to be centrally organised and was normally cash based hand-outs to those that claimed they were in crisis. There was wide-spread abiuse of the system as it was based on cash, and the government had no way of knowing what the money was actually spent on. We are talking £170m here. About three years ago this was changed to cut abuse and provide a better local service... each local authority was given a substantial budget and told to come up with their own way of administering welfare assistance to those in crisis. Some local authorities have gone down the cash route again, but many have tried a different route, offering physical products... i.e giving somebody a bed instead of previously giving them £200 to buy a bed, giving them supermarket vouchers for food, etc. Interestingly this has resulted in a hell of a lot fewer claims... some councils I have spoken to have had 50% fewer claims because the claimants were no longer interested once they found out it wasn't a cash handout... the general feeling was that there was a huge amount of abuse with the central system and the results of falling claim levels certainly back that up. Many councils have also looked to work with large food banks to officially administer the food element of the Welfare assistance scheme, and pay the foodbanks to provide that service. So you see Foodbanks can be part of the official system of administering welfare... but this is never reported... it is always reported that it's a disgrace that people use food banks as a way of having a pop at the government. When in reaility it is often a well thought out co-operative plan between local authority and large food banks designed to meet the needs of the vulnerable and reduce abuse. I've spoken to about 60 local authorities and the same amount of foodbanks over the last couple of years on this area and to be honest it is very difficult the generallise... some councils run excellent schemes, others don't.... some foodbanks are superbly run, some are a shambles that basically hand out tins to anyone who asks. Both sides of the political spectrum have tried to use foodbanks for political gain and the lack of knowledge is startling. Blaming Cameron for this issue is just plain stupid ... it is nothing to do with central government.... it is local provision. If you want anyone to blame then it is the relevant local authority. However, the local authority may be funding the foodbank and you'd never know.

There is without question enough food to go round. The amount of food wasted by Supermarkets and within there supply chain (due to supermarket demands) is obscene...

The extra help for the needy has always been available in Britain, no one starves, The recent food-banks are exploited by many and used as a card by the political idiots that know no better !! (Brother Johnstone for example)

The referral system is flawed, there are no end of agency's who can make a "Referral" so, unless your a pretty obvious repeat offender and constantly abusing the system, no one is refused. And, if they are, they simply go elsewhere for a referral (like the Church)

thesilentone wrote:
I'm afraid that is wrong, there have been recent deaths in the UK from starvation. There was a lad last year who had severe mental health issues, was passed fit to work, benefits stopped and he starved to death. Sorry I can't remember his name.

Moorlad wrote:
Looks to me that there's more to that than meets the eye...

Concerned about his patient's condition, Wood's doctor, Nicholas Ward, wrote a letter for Wood to pass to the jobcentre in support of his benefits application, stating that he was "extremely unwell and absolutely unfit for any work whatsoever".

The letter, presented to the inquest, stated that his anxiety disorder and obsessional traits had been made "significantly worse" because of the pressure put on him by benefit changes. It continued: "Please do not stop or reduce his benefits as this will have ongoing, significant impact on his mental health. He simply is not well enough to cope with this extra stress. His mental and medical condition is extremely serious."

It was not clear whether the letter reached the jobcentre.

Northumbrian wrote:
It's not "a survey" so to speak. I wasn't saying that food banks have published a survey saying that they are needed. I'm saying that each person is asked for the detail of why they need to use the food bank, I'm just saying from some of the answers my mother has got from folk they are definitely needed.

Of course people abuse it though, virtually everything is open to abuse. That proves nothing and doesn't change the fact that they are needed.

Your absolutely correct, everything is open to abuse, that is why the ' new wave ' of food-banks should be closed down. Do you think all these agency's carry out referrals FOC to the taxpayer ?

Is the local Militant Union rep, by camping outside the Councillors office collecting food for the food bank abusing the system ? I don't see him and his bunch of cowboys on the referral list !!

Referrers Carlisle Foodbank
1 Yewdale School
2 Kingmoor Community & Business Centre
3 Carlisle & District Credit Union
4 Oaklea Trust
5 Croftlands Trust
6 Carlisle & Eden CAB
7 Carlisle Key
8 Impact Housing (John Street)
9 Impact Housing (Lindisfarne Street)
10 Elim Community Church/CAP Debt Centre
11 Cumbria Gateway
12 Carlisle City Council
13 Cumbria County Council
14 Carlisle & District Credit Union
15 Carlisle City Council: John Street/Staffield House
16 Unity, Drug & Alcohol Service
17 Barnado's Carlisle
18 Riverside Housing Association
19 Carlisle Law Centre
20 Salvation Army
21 Cumbria Probation Service
22 Crisis Response & Home Treatment Team
23 Children's Services
24 Barnardo's Longtown
25 Probation
26 British Red Cross
27 Cumbria Action for Social Support Ltd
28 Victim Support
29 Local Area Coordinator for Currock and Upperby

thesilentone wrote:
Agreed there is more than enough food to go round... A lot is wasted but a lot also makes its way to food banks which is why people who need it get fed.

Incorrect assumption around referrals. Some stupid tw*t that I went to school with was getting food and putting it up for sale on Facebook sales and wants pages. She's now blacklisted so even if she manages to get a referral she'd just get knocked back at the food bank itself.

There is a staggering lack of intelligence on this thread. People are mistaking "food banks shouldn't be needed" with "food banks aren't needed" remarkably easily.

Present Labour are unelectable and we can all thank McCluskey and Unite for supporting Ed Miliband. Had David Miliband been elected the leader then there would be a Labour Government in power now.. I dont know what planet these lefties are on but they want to get real. However we will all have to accept that the Tories will be in Government for a considerabe time.

It really does not matter if you do not believe me about the referral system being abused, however I do strongly recommend you read the article i have left the link to above. Especially the part that says...................

It isn’t the end of the world for us, but it is pretty damned annoying. There are plenty of chancers out there who are receiving their full benefits who prefer to spend their cash on much more exciting stuff than food. We are engaged in an ongoing game of cat and mouse with these guys and they will be delighted to hear there is a new show in town. No doubt they will take their sob stories to the new foodbank, pick up their three parcels, and then they'll find their way back to us. These are characters who love nothing more than to play one off against the other. They are past masters. We have a head start, having played the game with these guys for twelve years. They know us and we know them.
They’re going to love the competition!

These lefties with a conscience. .is that what you mean ?

Which ones ?