Well then let's examine the logical constructions that he used:

"Muslim friends" and "Jewish friends".

Totally down with this. Here are two groups of people with an identity with whom we have no quarrel at all that is any way related to that identity. These groupings are real, and equatable. Anyone can easily accept these concepts of identity based groupings as things that are very much alike.

I have been led by the construction of the logic in this argument to consider that we are now equating things that are, as with the above, very much alike.

So where do we go now? Israel and the Islamic State. The democratically elected government of Israel, and the Islamic State. Before we had two things that were very much alike, and now we have Israel and the Islamic State.

If you are not personally offended by this then cool. Personally I have the same problem with that attitude that I do with those Leave voters who backed a coalition of racists pushing a nationalist agenda saying that they are not personally racist. Yes they are, they looked in the face of xenophobia and fscking shrugged. If the real lives of real people are just collateral damage in your analysis of what you want and how you get it then you're a 2@.

It's not much of a conspiracy to say that when the narrative at that moment in time is on the complete lack of leadership of those who got us to this position, to turn it on yourself because of your spectacular tone deafness on these issues then you're not just not a leader, you're actively damaging to the interests. If you do it in the shadow of a recent smear campaign deigned to discredit you on exactly this issue then you're beyond stupid. Incalculably stupid. Dangerously stupid. The kind of well meaning stupid that shows exactly how you will be derailed from every last item on your agenda.

But he doesn't actually stop there.



No, fsck you. There is no "at the same time". That first sentence is complete as it stands and needs no qualification at all. No one should be expected to do anything at all, at any time, to satisfy some artificial expectations placed on them because of their faith, race, nationality, gender identification or sexuality.

Do not condemn Jews, the most vilified group in human history, for the actions of a government. Excellent position to take. You do not follow this up with 'At the same time, don't be surprised if the Labour party membership start moaning about Jews and "Zionists" purely because of it'. This is an obscene false equivalence.

Seriously, how stupid is this person? The more I consider the actual words he used, and the constructions of logic that he used, the less charitable I am towards him.

edit: The word of the week is Verschlimmbesserung. Look it up.

VBFG, I recommend you listen to Shami Chakrabati who chaired the inquiry discussing the findings and Corbyns position. www.lbc.co.uk/chakrabati-defends ... ism-133112 To summarise she pointed out the media manipulation of the story and the way the media have attacked Corbyn who instigated this inquiry, while at the same time ignored the blatant racism displayed by the Conservative and UKIP parties in recent times.

VBFG, I recommend you listen to Shami Chakrabati who chaired the inquiry discussing the findings and Corbyns position. www.lbc.co.uk/chakrabati-defends ... ism-133112 To summarise she pointed out the media manipulation of the story and the way the media have attacked Corbyn who instigated this inquiry, while at the same time ignored the blatant racism displayed by the Conservative and UKIP parties in recent times.

It doesn't matter what her opinion is. I know damn well it's media manipulation. The point is that he's a rank amateur with no hope of ever controlling the narrative. He cannot lead. It was what, three weeks ago when to save face one of the most famous party members of all was being ejected. And he's making lazy comparisons like this. It's just stupid, and he's a liability.

If he wanted to not be a liability then the thing to do would have been to act with knowledge that the media does manipulate. I have yet to see much evidence that he's capable of it. Who, apart from Sideshow Bob, walks into exactly the self same trap over and over? Why would you even be going there at all when there are real, pragmatic and in everyone's faces issues of racial hatred going on right here and right now? You can't find an actual, relevant analogy from the practical issues of the surge of violence and intimidation following the vote? Then what's the point in you? Why are we abstract at all?

I'm very much not against a candidate from the left who can actually lead. Corbyn is not that person entirely on his own merits. This kind of crap is his leadership from now until the day it is over.

It really is fun watching and reading the rubbish about Mr Corbyn. It's years since a politician has scared so many that what they say and write is anything that they hope will bring him down.
The faux labour politicians have shown themselves to be the Tory lite that they are and the media have tried to convince everyone that the man is dangerous by their actions. The trouble is they forget one key factor.
We live in interesting times and perhaps a change is in the wind. People are afraid of change, especially those who benefit from the status quo and they will say and do anything to ensure it stays that way.
Let the fun begin.

Yes mate. It's us v them. That's the spirit.

It's not about his beliefs. It's him.

I am amazed by the love for Cameron on here! He has been the most incompetent and embarrassing PM during my lifetime.

Angela Eagle is ridiculous, my a@@e has more charisma. Surely she would only ever be a name to get a leadership contest going and for one if the awful brigade then to actually get elected?

Labour has nobody credible and likeable to the public that I can think of. Corbyn is probably their best bet as at least people are getting used to him and there will be some respect for his willingness to be different. As I said before, Labour lost a great opportunity in not backing Brexit. If the PLP had followed Corbyn's principles rather than pushing their's on him they would be in a very strong position right now and could have legitimately argued for a General Election that they may have won. But they missed that opportunity and have probably destroyed themselves by once again showing that they are unrepresentative.

As to the voter disconnect of parliament generally, now could be a great opportunity for British politics. One that will not be taken.... why not all agree to PR and then let Labour and Conservatives splits occur? We could then have several parties who would be more representative of a divided nation's views and the centre ground would be secured via coalition. Seems the way to go from here to me.

Yep. If Corbyn's had backed the leave campaign labour would probably be in pole position to win the next election. He could've also moved attention away from the immigration argument, and made it more about the undemocratic, megalomaniac nature of the Eu.
Now we're left with fascists May, and Gove, or Angela Eagle, who described a report from the liberal Democrats in 2008, warning of a dangerous bubble in the housing market as "nonsensical".

Labour are not a credible party of government for the simple reason they have not even been able to execute a simple coup to get rid of Corbyn. Michael Gove showed how to get rid of the Etonians!

If Labour's self-professed brightest and best (actually dull and useless) can't organise an internal coup how could they lead a divided country, with a strong opposition and deal with complex post-Brexit international affairs? Answer: they simply could not.

I don't think that Gove can win the Tory leadership election. If May wins she will give him a low powered job while he desires one of the top jobs. If Leadsom wins (she's gaining popularity amongst Brexiters) she may give Gove a top job. At the moment I can't see Gove being one of the final two.

I was not expressing an opinion on whether Gove would be leader, simply that he did what a lot of the Tory party wanted.

One of the rare occasions that I generally agree with the comment from Dally

Toppling Johnson has near enough handed the job to May, a remainer. Surely Gove knew his actions would turn people against him. Whether it's all part of a clever strategy worked out between him and Boris I do not know. Boris would have been a shoe-in for PM had Gove not turned on him.

Gove's betrayal of Johnson came a day after Sky revealed the leaked email from [iDaily Mail[/i columnist Sarah Vine to hubby Michael Gove, warning that he must be careful in his support of Boris, as neither her boss, [iMail[/i editor Paul Dacre, nor Rupert Murdoch trusted the former London mayor.

People know how powerful the media is in terms of politics, but this is a rare piece of actual evidence. Plus, Dacre hates being dragged into issues and the subsequent declaration of the [iMail[/i for Theresa May has more than a hint of his being very, very unhappy with both Mr and Mrs Gove.

Imagining the conversations in the Give household, and between Mrs Gove and her boss is most amusing.

As to whether Gove thought his actions would turn people against him – who knows? We're apparently now in a world where, according to him, we don;t need experts and, if you lie often enough, people will believe you.

Someone needs to show that bar steward where the ocean is!

I'm genuinely at a loss as to why there is such strong support for him from Corbyn supporters. Why so much focus on him and not the policies?

The reason I ask is because he is simply unelectable, whilst a number of policies he espouses are not. The guy is an electoral asset only to a tiny base of rusted on supporters. All the evidence suggests he's simply not up to running a political party never mind a government.

Surely there's another potential leader who can close the gap and make Labour firstly a credible opposition and then a party of Government, not just a party for the far left twitterati and rent-a-mob marchers?

One thing that seems to have come out of the woodwork from Corbyn defenders is the kind of language last heard publicly by Rik in the Young Ones. Neo-liberal and Blairite are two of the most annoying, completely meaningless words ever to be heard outside of a students union.

If anyone has the time and the popcorn he's about to give evidence to the Home Affairs Committee on anti-Semitism www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Inde ... 666415e8bf

If anyone has the time and the popcorn he's about to give evidence to the Home Affairs Committee on anti-Semitism www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Inde ... 666415e8bf

Which policies? The one that are for fairness and against greed?

In general yes. The working poor and unemployed want and need a voice. A lot of people who aren't necessarily Labour supporters support the idea of basic fairness in society - primarily that the 'have nots' should not be destitute. The design and implementation of actual detailed policies that try to create that fairness are not easy, and not something that can be brought into existence by marches or waving placards.

But if the main party that espouses such causes in a two-party system has a leader who cannot convince those directly around him to back him up, why should or would the general electorate? And why does Corbyn's awful leadership arouse incredibly strong feelings for him amongst his supporters? It seems that his core supporters blame the Tory press and the Blairite Labour MPs, rather than the man himself. Any Labour leader will be subjected to attack from parts of the media. Any political leader except in North Korea will (and should) face internal opposition - from those with ambition of leadership themselves and particularly when its clear that the party is headed for continued electoral oblivion. Corbyn has dealt with these both incredibly badly.

Corbyn supporters just remind me of the Labour left of the 80s and 90s (Militant Tendency and their ilk), who seemed perpetually enraged by the fact a large part of the population didn't 'get' their message and found their marches and shrill moral superiority an absolute turn off.

If any Labour MP wants to mount a Leadership challenge, they can gain the support from MP's and do so. The way they've gone about it with the attempted 'coup' & trying to force Corbyn to resign, is the type of crafty, underhand tactic that the majority of the electorate loathe about politicians. Ambitious, career-driven, self-serving people IMO.

At this moment in time, the party should be uniting and tearing the Tories to shreds, but since Corbyn was elected this has been in the pipeline.

I agree about your comment on the media. Every leader should face criticism and have their policies/actions questioned, but it's pretty obvious that Corbyn gets a great deal more scrutiny than the others, and faced almost no coverage of his own campaign & the positives surrounding that. I agree that while what he says, he needs to refine his policies and get the message out there to the voters. His PR/marketing etc is pretty poor.

The thing is, is there a credible candidate out there that would have more chance of winning an election for Labour? I'm not sure there is.

Andy Burnham has that polished look that drives the superficial to vote, I know he was looked over in the last leadership race, but I think he could take it to them.
Personally being a Green voter I wouldn't mind if Caroline Lucas defected over, she is strong, principled with the ability to tap into the leftwing, being in a more mainstream party. Granted it would weaken the Greens but it already became significantly weaker when she stepped down from the leadership and left Natalie Bennett in charge.

Andy is well out of all these shennanigans , yes he does have the ' look ' of a modern politician , probably the best of who is now available , but he has timed his Manchester bid to perfection , maybe he'll have one last chance in 5/6 years time

Maybe Corb's will call it a day now he's had his '15 mins of fame' on the Iraq stage which he's waited years for.

The conspiracy theorist in me always wondered if they wanted him out before this so that he wouldn't have 'apologised' on behalf of the Labour party.
All those MP's still protect that grining gobe

Best thing Labour could do is encourage Gove to cross the floor assuming his Tory leadership bid fails. Given his desire for social mobility and justice, he could give Labour some purpose. Not only that he is a good operator and would destroy May in the Commons.

And then you go and spoil it.
Sad!