Jeremy Corbyn's Anti-American Agenda[W:296]

[Jack Hays]

The new Labour leader looks to be a probable electoral disaster for his party, and that's good for us because he is an enemy of the U.S.

The Threat of Jeremy Corbyn's Anti-American Agenda - Washington Post

"SOME IN the United States see Jeremy Corbyn, the newly elected leader of Britain’s Labour Party, as an analogue of Bernie Sanders, the surging socialist in the Democratic presidential primary. Mr. Sanders himself said he was “delighted” by Mr. Corbyn’s win. Yet what the Guardian newspaper called “the most astonishing leadership victory in any major British political party in modern times” was not merely a blow against “mass income and wealth inequality,” as Mr. Sanders described it. It also validated a radically anti-American agenda that could accentuate Britain’s drift away from the trans-Atlantic partnership.

Mr. Corbyn espouses a foreign policy whose guiding principle is to oppose the United States and Israel by all means. It has led him to label as “friends” such disparate political forces as Hamas, Hezbollah and the populist government of Venezuela and to accept funding from organizations designated by the U.S. government as terrorist groups. Mr. Corbyn endorsed the Iraqi insurgents who fought U.S. troops and equated the Islamic State’s overrunning of Iraqi cities with the 2004 U.S. offensive in Fallujah. He said that Washington, rather than Moscow, is to blame for the civil war in Ukraine. In an interview with Iran’s state television channel, he called the U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden a “tragedy.”
. . . . "

 

[Gardener]

The new Labour leader looks to be a probable electoral disaster for his party, and that's good for us because he is an enemy of the U.S.

The Threat of Jeremy Corbyn's Anti-American Agenda - Washington Post

"SOME IN the United States see Jeremy Corbyn, the newly elected leader of Britain’s Labour Party, as an analogue of Bernie Sanders, the surging socialist in the Democratic presidential primary. Mr. Sanders himself said he was “delighted” by Mr. Corbyn’s win. Yet what the Guardian newspaper called “the most astonishing leadership victory in any major British political party in modern times” was not merely a blow against “mass income and wealth inequality,” as Mr. Sanders described it. It also validated a radically anti-American agenda that could accentuate Britain’s drift away from the trans-Atlantic partnership.

Mr. Corbyn espouses a foreign policy whose guiding principle is to oppose the United States and Israel by all means. It has led him to label as “friends” such disparate political forces as Hamas, Hezbollah and the populist government of Venezuela and to accept funding from organizations designated by the U.S. government as terrorist groups. Mr. Corbyn endorsed the Iraqi insurgents who fought U.S. troops and equated the Islamic State’s overrunning of Iraqi cities with the 2004 U.S. offensive in Fallujah. He said that Washington, rather than Moscow, is to blame for the civil war in Ukraine. In an interview with Iran’s state television channel, he called the U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden a “tragedy.”
. . . . "

I was reading this article earlier today, and it is spot-on.

His being elevated to the leadership of labor would be analogous to David Duke leading the republicans or Louis Farrakhan the democrats. What on God's green earth can the British be thinking to elect a man who is in bed with Hamas and would turn the U.K. into a client state of Russia?

 

[Politicshead]

The new Labour leader looks to be a probable electoral disaster for his party, and that's good for us because he is an enemy of the U.S.

The Threat of Jeremy Corbyn's Anti-American Agenda - Washington Post

"SOME IN the United States see Jeremy Corbyn, the newly elected leader of Britain’s Labour Party, as an analogue of Bernie Sanders, the surging socialist in the Democratic presidential primary. Mr. Sanders himself said he was “delighted” by Mr. Corbyn’s win. Yet what the Guardian newspaper called “the most astonishing leadership victory in any major British political party in modern times” was not merely a blow against “mass income and wealth inequality,” as Mr. Sanders described it. It also validated a radically anti-American agenda that could accentuate Britain’s drift away from the trans-Atlantic partnership.

Mr. Corbyn espouses a foreign policy whose guiding principle is to oppose the United States and Israel by all means. It has led him to label as “friends” such disparate political forces as Hamas, Hezbollah and the populist government of Venezuela and to accept funding from organizations designated by the U.S. government as terrorist groups. Mr. Corbyn endorsed the Iraqi insurgents who fought U.S. troops and equated the Islamic State’s overrunning of Iraqi cities with the 2004 U.S. offensive in Fallujah. He said that Washington, rather than Moscow, is to blame for the civil war in Ukraine. In an interview with Iran’s state television channel, he called the U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden a “tragedy.”
. . . . "

A load of untruths, misrepresentation and quotes taken out of context.

For example, What he actually said about Bin Laden's death was this:

"There was no attempt to arrest him or put him on trial and is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy.

The world trade centre was a tragedy, the attack on Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died. Can't we learn some lessons from this?"

The Hamas friends thing was just diplomatic talk. He used the word "friends" in a "collective way" at a meeting in parliament. "I'm saying that people I talk to, I use it in a collective way, saying our friends are prepared to talk.

"Does it mean I agree with Hamas and what it does? No. Does it mean I agree with Hezbollah and what they do? No. What it means is that I think to bring about a peace process, you have to talk to people with whom you may profoundly disagree.

"There is not going to be a peace process unless there is talks involving Israel, Hezbollah and Hamas and I think everyone knows that."

 

[Gardener]

A load of untruths, misrepresentation and quotes taken out of context.

For example, What he actually said about Bin Laden's death was this:

"There was no attempt to arrest him or put him on trial and is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy.

The world trade centre was a tragedy, the attack on Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died. Can't we learn some lessons from this?"

The Hamas friends thing was just diplomatic talk. He used the word "friends" in a "collective way" at a meeting in parliament. "I'm saying that people I talk to, I use it in a collective way, saying our friends are prepared to talk.

"Does it mean I agree with Hamas and what it does? No. Does it mean I agree with Hezbollah and what they do? No. What it means is that I think to bring about a peace process, you have to talk to people with whom you may profoundly disagree.

"There is not going to be a peace process unless there is talks involving Israel, Hezbollah and Hamas and I think everyone knows that."

I have a lovely selection of ocean front property you might be interested in.

If that doesn't suit your tastes, I also have a number of very nice bridges I would be wiling to sell to you.

 

[Andalublue]

A load of untruths, misrepresentation and quotes taken out of context.

For example, What he actually said about Bin Laden's death was this:

"There was no attempt to arrest him or put him on trial and is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy.

The world trade centre was a tragedy, the attack on Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died. Can't we learn some lessons from this?"

The Hamas friends thing was just diplomatic talk. He used the word "friends" in a "collective way" at a meeting in parliament. "I'm saying that people I talk to, I use it in a collective way, saying our friends are prepared to talk.

"Does it mean I agree with Hamas and what it does? No. Does it mean I agree with Hezbollah and what they do? No. What it means is that I think to bring about a peace process, you have to talk to people with whom you may profoundly disagree.

"There is not going to be a peace process unless there is talks involving Israel, Hezbollah and Hamas and I think everyone knows that."

It's not surprising that the enemies of socialism and the Labour Party should be spinning for all they're worth. They need to get in quickly to set the public image of Corbyn as an extremist before people hear what he says and see what he does and realise that he's a very different, sane, humane and radical politician who's not in it for the bungs, the cosying up to dictators and plutocrats, and who doesn't spin and lie his way to power.

Yesterday's PMQs (Prime Minister's Question Time) in the Commons was a great start. Corbyn absolutely walked it, showing Cameron to be the typical dishonest, aloof, out-of-touch politician whose only interest is in scoring silly political points rather than address how voters are really feeling. More of that, Jeremy!

Whilst he's got the most enormous uphill struggle to come to overcome the entire mass media, finance, military and corporate sectors and the massed ranks of Tories, Liberals and Blairites, he's a good head on his shoulders and something that none of them can match - honesty and integrity. I don't think the Westminster clique really realise in just how much disdain and low regard they are held by the majority of voters.

Time will tell, and all these silly, baseless accusations will dissipate in the light of reality.

 

[Apocalypse]

A load of untruths, misrepresentation and quotes taken out of context.

For example, What he actually said about Bin Laden's death was this:

"There was no attempt to arrest him or put him on trial and is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy.

The world trade centre was a tragedy, the attack on Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died. Can't we learn some lessons from this?"

The Hamas friends thing was just diplomatic talk. He used the word "friends" in a "collective way" at a meeting in parliament. "I'm saying that people I talk to, I use it in a collective way, saying our friends are prepared to talk.

"Does it mean I agree with Hamas and what it does? No. Does it mean I agree with Hezbollah and what they do? No. What it means is that I think to bring about a peace process, you have to talk to people with whom you may profoundly disagree.

"There is not going to be a peace process unless there is talks involving Israel, Hezbollah and Hamas and I think everyone knows that."

You've literally just said; "It's not true that he had called bin-Laden's killing a 'tragedy' and Hamas and Hezbollah his 'friends', because he had also called 9/11 a tragedy and said he 'doesn't agree with Hezbollah and Hamas'". If you were trying to make a point, you really haven't.

No matter how you're going to put it, the man is an insane radical who identifies with terrorists and is a very convincing example of how the far-left agenda is walking hand in hand with radical Islam as claimed by many of its opposers frequently.

 

[Gardener]

You've literally just said; "It's not true that he had called bin-Laden's killing a 'tragedy' and Hamas and Hezbollah his 'friends', because he had also called 9/11 a tragedy and said he 'doesn't agree with Hezbollah and Hamas'". If you were trying to make a point, you really haven't.

No matter how you're going to put it, the man is an insane radical who identifies with terrorists and is a very convincing example of how the far-left agenda is walking hand in hand with radical Islam as claimed by many of its opposers frequently.

It's like watching religious zealots some times, the degree of the true believer syndrome being so severe among a sizable portion of the left. A pity, that, since the left used to be more or less defined by liberalism instead of all this dogmatic double talk. I suppose if people do not act according to anything even remotely resembling principles they do not see the patent hypocrisy of their attitudes, but pretending something isn't what it is strikes me as downright delusional.

Corbyn has visited Gaza to work with Hamas, what, about eight or ten times by now? It would be as if some extreme right winger were defending a fellow who meets regularly with the kkk and goes out with them on some cross-burning expeditions by claiming the fellow didn't actually light the torch so it's really all okey dokey.

 

[Politicshead]

You've literally just said; "It's not true that he had called bin-Laden's killing a 'tragedy' and Hamas and Hezbollah his 'friends', because he had also called 9/11 a tragedy and said he 'doesn't agree with Hezbollah and Hamas'". If you were trying to make a point, you really haven't.

No matter how you're going to put it, the man is an insane radical who identifies with terrorists and is a very convincing example of how the far-left agenda is walking hand in hand with radical Islam as claimed by many of its opposers frequently.

No, I said it was taken out of context. What he thought was the tragedy was Bin Laden not being tried for his crimes. Personally, I'm not that bothered that Bin Laden was killed instead of arrested, but I can understand why someone might think extrajudicial killings were wrong.

How is he walking hand in hand with terrorists when he has said he doesn't agree with Hamas or Hezbollah and 9/11 was a tragedy.
The guy is a pacifist. When you are trying to get two sides to talk to each other, you don't go around insulting them. It's called diplomatic language.

 

[Politicshead]

It's like watching religious zealots some times, the degree of the true believer syndrome being so severe among a sizable portion of the left. A pity, that, since the left used to be more or less defined by liberalism instead of all this dogmatic double talk. I suppose if people do not act according to anything even remotely resembling principles they do not see the patent hypocrisy of their attitudes, but pretending something isn't what it is strikes me as downright delusional.

Corbyn has visited Gaza to work with Hamas, what, about eight or ten times by now? It would be as if some extreme right winger were defending a fellow who meets regularly with the kkk and goes out with them on some cross-burning expeditions by claiming the fellow didn't actually light the torch so it's really all okey dokey.

Well Cameron was wanting to give ISIS weapons back in 2013, so let's not get all high horsey shall we? And let's not forget Dubya's best friends, the Saudi government.

 

[Gardener]

Well Cameron was wanting to give ISIS weapons back in 2013, so let's not get all high horsey shall we? And let's not forget Dubya's best friends, the Saudi government.

....and that has what to do with your adoration of an Islamist collaborator, exactly?

 

[Apocalypse]

No, I said it was taken out of context. What he thought was the tragedy was Bin Laden not being tried for his crimes.

You can't possibly believe that after reading his words within their right context. It can't be interpreted as anything other than the expression of sadness over the fact that bin-Laden was killed, not that justice was not seen with the terrorist in court or anything like that. The guy really thinks and believes that the action that killed bin-Laden was a tragedy, his excuse is that he opposes 'extrajudicial killings' (every killing of an enemy combatant is extrajudicial but we'll let it pass) because he can't just say "Hey, that guy that everyone in the Western world hates for bringing down the WTC? I kinda liked him".

How is he walking hand in hand with terrorists when he has said he doesn't agree with Hamas or Hezbollah and 9/11 was a tragedy.

First of all it is key to note that these two statements were only released after he was confronted for the initial statements. Secondly making these statements is obviously a weak attempt to divert attention from the initial statements where he's been practically throwing his support for terrorists either by calling them his 'friends' (what sane person could do that?) or by calling the killing of terrorists a tragedy using the extrajudicial killings accusation excuse.

Corbyn is a far-leftist who has an anti-Western obssession, as many others like him he too shares sympathy for the defined enemies of the West no matter how evil they are (Islamic terrorists, Russia, IRA, etc.) and he plays down their immorality while at the same breath he hypocritically emphasizes how immoral Western nations are. I read an article where the author mentioned his hypocrisy when he's claiming that Islamic terror groups should be talked with to see that their "claims" are met by using diplomatic methods and not war, while at the same time he's been calling for a complete disconnection from Saudi Arabia and an ending to its relations with the UK.

The guy is a pacifist. When you are trying to get two sides to talk to each other, you don't go around insulting them. It's called diplomatic language.

The two sides trying to talk with each other are Israel and the Arab world or Israel and the Muslim world or Israel and the Palestinians, certainly and absolutely not in any way Israel and Hamas and Hezbollah. Hamas and Hezbollah are two antisemitic genocidal organizations that besides of targeting Jews for murder and believing they can bring an end to the state of Israel through the use of rockets on civilians do nothing and plan to do nothing to reach a diplomatic solution to any conflict, because they aren't interested in one. If Corbyn thinks so, how can it be claimed that the man is sane? Would he also suggest the world to try and talk with ISIS to stop what they're doing in Syria and see how everyone get what they want diplomatically?

 

[Jack Hays]

A load of untruths, misrepresentation and quotes taken out of context.

For example, What he actually said about Bin Laden's death was this:

"There was no attempt to arrest him or put him on trial and is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy.

The world trade centre was a tragedy, the attack on Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died. Can't we learn some lessons from this?"

The Hamas friends thing was just diplomatic talk. He used the word "friends" in a "collective way" at a meeting in parliament. "I'm saying that people I talk to, I use it in a collective way, saying our friends are prepared to talk.

"Does it mean I agree with Hamas and what it does? No. Does it mean I agree with Hezbollah and what they do? No. What it means is that I think to bring about a peace process, you have to talk to people with whom you may profoundly disagree.

"There is not going to be a peace process unless there is talks involving Israel, Hezbollah and Hamas and I think everyone knows that."

From a link in the OP article:

Mr Corbyn, The Telegraph can reveal, has taken thousands of pounds in gifts from organisations closely linked to the terror group Hamas, whose operatives he once described as “friends”.

 

[Red_Dave]

A load of untruths, misrepresentation and quotes taken out of context.

For example, What he actually said about Bin Laden's death was this:

"There was no attempt to arrest him or put him on trial and is yet another tragedy, upon a tragedy, upon a tragedy.

The world trade centre was a tragedy, the attack on Afghanistan was a tragedy, the war in Iraq was a tragedy. Tens of thousands of people have died. Can't we learn some lessons from this?"

The Hamas friends thing was just diplomatic talk. He used the word "friends" in a "collective way" at a meeting in parliament. "I'm saying that people I talk to, I use it in a collective way, saying our friends are prepared to talk.

"Does it mean I agree with Hamas and what it does? No. Does it mean I agree with Hezbollah and what they do? No. What it means is that I think to bring about a peace process, you have to talk to people with whom you may profoundly disagree.

"There is not going to be a peace process unless there is talks involving Israel, Hezbollah and Hamas and I think everyone knows that."

It should also be noted that he was talking to terroists in Northern Ireland back in the 1980s, long before the British government was openly doing so, and it worked in terms of bringing about the Belfast agreement.

 

[le bouffon]

What is an anti-American agenda? If a country opposes our foreign policy, it doesn't make them anti-American.

From a link in the OP article:

Mr Corbyn, The Telegraph can reveal, has taken thousands of pounds in gifts from organisations closely linked to the terror group Hamas, whose operatives he once described as “friends”.

This will come back to bite him if he ever wishes to run for PM.

 

[Politicshead]

What is an anti-American agenda? If a country opposes our foreign policy, it doesn't make them anti-American.



This will come back to bite him if he ever wishes to run for PM.

You have to realise the British media are going insane with making stuff up about Corbyn.

one headline said Corbyn wanted to abolish the army!! They based this on the fact that he said at the Hiroshima memorial ceremony that it would be nice to have world peace.

I mean, that's one hell of a ****ing leap to make.

 

[Andalublue]

From a link in the OP article:

Mr Corbyn, The Telegraph can reveal, has taken thousands of pounds in gifts from organisations closely linked to the terror group Hamas, whose operatives he once described as “friends”.

Taking the Telegraph's word on anything relating to the Labour Party is like believing Russia Today's coverage of Ukraine. It's the mouthpiece of the enemy. You do know it's known as the Torygraph, don't you?

 

[Gardener]

What is an anti-American agenda? If a country opposes our foreign policy, it doesn't make them anti-American.



.

Considering that you live in London, then obviously it wouldn't.

 

[Jack Hays]

Taking the Telegraph's word on anything relating to the Labour Party is like believing Russia Today's coverage of Ukraine. It's the mouthpiece of the enemy. You do know it's known as the Torygraph, don't you?

Yes, I suppose quoting Mr. Corbyn is definitely unfair.:roll:

 

[Andalublue]

Yes, I suppose quoting Mr. Corbyn is definitely unfair.:roll:

It is if you don't bother to quote him correctly and in context. Wasn't it the Telegraph that invented the report that Corbyn had proposed disbanding the armed forces? Yes, I think it was.

 

[Jack Hays]

It is if you don't bother to quote him correctly and in context. Wasn't it the Telegraph that invented the report that Corbyn had proposed disbanding the armed forces? Yes, I think it was.

I suppose you have a link to support your claim.

 

[Jack Hays]

It is if you don't bother to quote him correctly and in context. Wasn't it the Telegraph that invented the report that Corbyn had proposed disbanding the armed forces? Yes, I think it was.

1. The anti manThe Economist‎ - 33 mins ago
   
   Mr Corbyn has supported anti-American leaders like Venezuela's late president, Hugo Chávez. He has suggested that Britain should share ...
2. Backwards, comrades!The Economist‎ - 2 hours ago

 

[Andalublue]

I suppose you have a link to support your claim.

Sure, here's what Corbyn really said.

Instead of saying only Britain should scrap its defences, he said it would be 'wonderful' if every country in the world stood down its arms.

Here's what Jeremy Corbyn REALLY said about getting rid of the Army - Mirror Online

Tim Stanley of the Telegraph accused him of wanting to disband the armed forces on BBC1's Question Time programme last night. I'd post the link to the programme (in fact, here it is) but you won't be able to watch it unless you're in the UK, or you have a clever proxy.

Here's another right-wing rag pushing the same lie, knowing it to be untrue.

 

[Jack Hays]

Sure, here's what Corbyn really said.

Here's what Jeremy Corbyn REALLY said about getting rid of the Army - Mirror Online

Tim Stanley of the Telegraph accused him of wanting to disband the armed forces on BBC1's Question Time programme last night. I'd post the link to the programme (in fact, here it is) but you won't be able to watch it unless you're in the UK, or you have a clever proxy.

Here's another right-wing rag pushing the same lie, knowing it to be untrue.

Even on the most favorable possible reading, it's still irresponsible twaddle.

 

[Andalublue]

1. The anti manThe Economist‎ - 33 mins ago
   
   Mr Corbyn has supported anti-American leaders like Venezuela's late president, Hugo Chávez. He has suggested that Britain should share ...
2. Backwards, comrades!The Economist‎ - 2 hours ago

You'll be linking us to Fox News and the WSJ next. Yeah, we know, right-wingers don't like him.

 

[Jack Hays]

You'll be linking us to Fox News and the WSJ next. Yeah, we know, right-wingers don't like him.

The Economist is hardly right wing.