Ohhhhh Jeremy Corrrrrrbyn
Comments
-
Even if it was woman...
...he is only muttering what most of the country think anyway.1 -
-
Isn’t it quite obvious that he said “stupid people”
I mean... look for yourselves
Couldn’t believe the job the BBC did on him by dubbing “stupid woman” over the top of the video of him on newsnight - quite literally putting words in his mouth
I’m not committed to Labour by any means... but that was out of order
When we are facing issues the size of those we are currently facing, what the hell is this nonsense distraction?8 -
Course I did. 3 pages of Henry v Seth ffs.....mcgrandall said:
I take it you skipped to the end of the thread?ValleyGary said:‘Stupid woman’ or ‘stupid people’ who really gives a shit. Someone finally with a bit of truthful reaction. The guys a bell but what a palava.
5 -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-46623188/corbyn-denies-calling-may-stupid-woman-at-pmqs
Corbyn says 'stupid people' at Conservatives trying to turn the debate on Brexit national crisis into a pantomime.
If you listen to the ridiculous noise the Tories were making at the time, you can see he says stupid people and why.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-46619703/three-second-pmqs-clip-what-does-corbyn-say-to-may
Agreed it is a ridiculous distraction. Working out what to do next and suspending Article 50 to allow for that time, rather than a no deal Brexit threat to try and force the terrible May deal through.2 -
If you need a run down on where everyone stands just imagine any other discussion on Labour/Corbyn.ValleyGary said:
Course I did. 3 pages of Henry v Seth ffs.....mcgrandall said:
I take it you skipped to the end of the thread?ValleyGary said:‘Stupid woman’ or ‘stupid people’ who really gives a shit. Someone finally with a bit of truthful reaction. The guys a bell but what a palava.
0 -
When I first saw it I thought it was 'stupid woman', but on looking again it seems to me there is a 'plosive' lip movement at the start of the second syllable of what could be 'people'.
It seems unclear what was actually said.0 -
Underdevoloped countries do not have the infrastructure to declare war on a colonialist invader. They do the best with the scant resources they have. Who is the terrorist? Bush, Blair, Thatcher, Hitler,Truman, LBJ, how many innocents did they murder? Or Mandela, Collins, aborigines, Palestinians, Ortega, Castro, native Americans. (you may have noticed a heavy influence of the US in that list) FFS the Chagoans can"t even rustle up a bow and arrow.kentaddick said:
Because he was a terrorist, he ordered people to be murdered.MuttleyCAFC said:
Cobyn is against terrorism and the evidence is from his own words. But sometimes you have to look at things from the other side of the wall. As has been said, one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter. An example of that is that one poster on here on the EU thread was not aware there were loyalist terrorists. This ignorance never gets problems solved.se9addick said:
Fair enough, Hezbollah or the IRA are not my “friends”, not are people who allow anti-semitism to perpetuate for that matter.MuttleyCAFC said:I don't think it is - but you have to sit down with them and shake their hands and understand them. Those that are always outraged never provide the solutions - just perpetuate the problems. IMO of course, not yours.
Indeed, Nelson Mandela was a great man and was considered a terrorist by the establishment, including this country for a considerable time.
What are your thoughts on trump entertaining kim jong un? @MuttleyCAFC ?1 -
Until 2016 there was never any suggestion that Labour was A-S. Then JC got voted in against massive right wing media and centrist pressure. He endured. Resulting in a vicious campaign against him, seemingly supported by a government financed black-art organisation targeting him. Smell the coffee. In two years (admittedly anti-Israel, but food for thought) JC supposedly has turned Labour into rabid anti-semites or are there dark forces at work? Sadly a seemingly Liberal (small L) prolific poster is outdoing the Mail in his hatred for Corbyn, a previous champion of any predudice.newyorkaddick said:Labour have until now been the natural home for any minority because social justice is at the heart of their agenda, and throughout most of history minorities in the UK (and elsewhere) have also largely been poorer than the majority.
However the country's Jewish population represent a very awkward blindspot for the hard left because whilst they are clearly a minority (of 250k or so), they're on average better educated, higher-earning and wealthier than the rest of the population and thus don't fit into their simplistic narrative of the rich/powerful/elite on the one hand and the poor/exploited/minority on the other.
Frankly it matters little whether Corbyn is an antisemite or not, he is the Labour leader and has shown virtually no leadership whatsoever on the issue which risks legitimising antisemitism by creating a culture that deems it insufficiently serious versus other forms of discrimination/abuse.
You then throw Israel into the mix (a country/government certainly not without its faults, but nonetheless one which attracts the most virulent and disproportionate bile) and thus the ease of anti-Israel rhetoric morphing into antisemitism in the brains and mouths of the unintelligent, and it's little wonder that the country's Jews are highly uncomfortable at the moment, a disgraceful position given their contribution across every important facet of UK life.7 -
Looked like stupid people to me. Non issue either way. More white noise from the pro Tory pro brexit wing of the media to distract from the absolute cluster fuck these stupid people have turned the country into.10
- Sponsored links:
-
Well saidExiled_Addick said:Looked like stupid people to me. Non issue either way. More white noise from the pro Tory pro brexit wing of the media to distract from the absolute cluster fuck these stupid people have turned the country into.
And @seth plum - you said yourself there is quite clearly a plosive lip movement at the start of the second word. It IS clear, even if the press can pull up a lip reader to argue its inconclusive, no doubt.
I was shocked by the Newsnight hatchet job on Corbyn over this.0 -
Or picanninies from our then foreign secretary in a serving government.Friend Or Defoe said:
Be interesting to see the posts on here following the calm down dear remark.SantaClaus said:People are worrying about someone muttering 'stupid woman'? This country has lost its mind.
1 -
Henry, would it be anti-semetic of me to point out that the Jews were persecuted in the war, murdered, had their property stolen and generally treated as 2nd class citizens during the holocast. It might be considered ironic that Israel is stealing Palestinian land under protection of tanks, murdering protesters on spurious grounds and legislating that they have less rights than Israelis. Scale not comparable but ironic? Yes.Henry Irving said:
Nick Griffin
Verified account
@NickGriffinBU
Follow Follow @NickGriffinBU
More
Go Jezza! I wonder how many Labour activists the hysterical #Zionist media campaign against #Corbyn is re-pilling?
Now, I think that what Griffin says is antisemitic but I'm sure @seth plum will ask for some more evidence4 -
Can I also say that despite lip-reading controversy, Theresa May is a stupid Prime Minister, was an inept and stupid Home Secretary and yes a stupid woman. Boris Johnson, JRM er Al and most male Brexiteers are stupid politicians and stupid men.4
-
I’d rather watch The Greatest highlights of Miguel Lira DVDmcgrandall said:
If you need a run down on where everyone stands just imagine any other discussion on Labour/Corbyn.ValleyGary said:
Course I did. 3 pages of Henry v Seth ffs.....mcgrandall said:
I take it you skipped to the end of the thread?ValleyGary said:‘Stupid woman’ or ‘stupid people’ who really gives a shit. Someone finally with a bit of truthful reaction. The guys a bell but what a palava.
3 -
What a stupid (excuse the pun) argument. Lip readers can't agree FFS! If you dislike him you will said he said one thing, if you like him you will say he said another. I think it is all a bit pathetic seeing as he has denied saying it.
If you ask somebody if he is saying stupid people, they would say he is, if you asked somebody if he was saying stupid woman, they would say he is.
I know I used to work with disabled people and we had a lip reader at a meeting that I got talking to as I thought it was an amazing skill. She told me it isn't 100% accurate in terms of every word, but you can get the meaning from the whole sentence. So these lip readers who are saying he definitely said it, can only say he probably said it IMO. Which is completely different. I suppose it depends what paper pays them to give their opinion.
4 -
If it was 'stupid woman' aimed at May, or 'stupid people' aimed at the collective Tory party - both are accurate observations as far as I am concerned.MuttleyCAFC said:What a stupid (excuse the pun) argument. Lip readers can't agree FFS! If you dislike him you will said he said one thing, if you like him you will say he said another. I think it is all a bit pathetic seeing as he has denied saying it.
If you ask somebody if he is saying stupid people, they would say he is, if you asked somebody if he was saying stupid woman, they would say he is.
I know I used to work with disabled people and we had a lip reader at a meeting that I got talking to as I thought it was an amazing skill. She told me it isn't 100% accurate in terms of every word, but you can get the meaning from the whole sentence. So these lip readers who are saying he definitely said it, can only say he probably said it IMO. Which is completely different. I suppose it depends what paper pays them to give their opinion.5 -
BTW Andrea Leadson is a stupid woman. Not sure why any woman should get offended by me saying that that, I am referring to her not them and generally from my experience, women are far more intelligent than men.1
-
I just don’t give a monkeys. Its a diversion from those on the right generally. You just cannot take people seriously who are crying foul on this and yet will not condemn the returning of the whip to the two Conservatives suspended for behaviour far far worse than saying “ stupid women”MuttleyCAFC said:What a stupid (excuse the pun) argument. Lip readers can't agree FFS! If you dislike him you will said he said one thing, if you like him you will say he said another. I think it is all a bit pathetic seeing as he has denied saying it.
If you ask somebody if he is saying stupid people, they would say he is, if you asked somebody if he was saying stupid woman, they would say he is.
I know I used to work with disabled people and we had a lip reader at a meeting that I got talking to as I thought it was an amazing skill. She told me it isn't 100% accurate in terms of every word, but you can get the meaning from the whole sentence. So these lip readers who are saying he definitely said it, can only say he probably said it IMO. Which is completely different. I suppose it depends what paper pays them to give their opinion.
As for this site ; there are some who don’t want anyone to focus on the policy proposals under JC leadership for at least two reasons
1) when exposed to the public just as policy proposals the public really like them
2) this in and of itself exposes those who support policies that perpetuate advantage and disadvantage those with less
I support the higher taxes on the rich and re Nationalising industries which make huge profits for shareholders whilst increasing prices for the public
Just two to get us going2 - Sponsored links:
-
She’s probably smart enough to spell her own name right!MuttleyCAFC said:BTW Andrea Leadson is a stupid woman. Not sure why any woman should get offended by me saying that that, I am referring to her not them and generally from my experience, women are far more intelligent than men.
I agree that she is, but why don’t you just say “Andrea Leasdom is stupid” and leave her gender out of it?0 -
Because it is the English Language - It is why we call Duchatelet a Belgian **** and for some reason missing out a descriptor doesn't feel right . You have to put a word in there and you can easily do it if you have nothing against Belgians. Which I don't as I'm just about to go there for a few days
6 -
The policies are not the problem. It's the lack of clarity on how they will be delivered, how they will be paid for and how it will impact the wider economy.holyjo said:
I just don’t give a monkeys. Its a diversion from those on the right generally. You just cannot take people seriously who are crying foul on this and yet will not condemn the returning of the whip to the two Conservatives suspended for behaviour far far worse than saying “ stupid women”MuttleyCAFC said:What a stupid (excuse the pun) argument. Lip readers can't agree FFS! If you dislike him you will said he said one thing, if you like him you will say he said another. I think it is all a bit pathetic seeing as he has denied saying it.
If you ask somebody if he is saying stupid people, they would say he is, if you asked somebody if he was saying stupid woman, they would say he is.
I know I used to work with disabled people and we had a lip reader at a meeting that I got talking to as I thought it was an amazing skill. She told me it isn't 100% accurate in terms of every word, but you can get the meaning from the whole sentence. So these lip readers who are saying he definitely said it, can only say he probably said it IMO. Which is completely different. I suppose it depends what paper pays them to give their opinion.
As for this site ; there are some who don’t want anyone to focus on the policy proposals under JC leadership for at least two reasons
1) when exposed to the public just as policy proposals the public really like them
2) this in and of itself exposes those who support policies that perpetuate advantage and disadvantage those with less
I support the higher taxes on the rich and re Nationalising industries which make huge profits for shareholders whilst increasing prices for the public
Just two to get us going
They're soundbites.
"Tax the rich more" and "make companies pay more tax and wages" are not strategies to deliver on these policies.
3 -
Much more shaggable too from my experience.MuttleyCAFC said:BTW Andrea Leadson is a stupid woman. Not sure why any woman should get offended by me saying that that, I am referring to her not them and generally from my experience, women are far more intelligent than men.
1 -
we are talking about the racist abuse of Dianne abbot on this forum - to which i cannot see any, correct me if i am wrong.PaddyP17 said:
You're kidding, right? Someone called the Chinese "a truly insensitive race of people", that's pretty abusive (Yulin dog meat festival thread).palarsehater said:
firstly i didn't mention you in a comment and secondly i do not think i have ever seen any racist abuse on this board, if i am wrong please do show me it.Henry Irving said:
I don't defend Abbot at all.palarsehater said:
hes not a politician or saying it in parliament - so not really compariable. #Leuth said:
Why don't we find some things you've said about Diane AbbottJensenwasclass said:Just seen the gutless weasel Corbyn call TM a stupid women
on politics live. The new gentler, kinder lefts politics.
Then he sneaked out of the the HOC. What a see you next tuesday!
how anyone can even defend that idiot abbot is ridiculous.
But i don't defend the often racist and sexist abuse she receives which is nothing to do with how bad she is at her job either.
i find abbot herself quite racist, and this theory has been proven a few times also if you are going to beat the drum of something on your agenda - you need to be able to do the simple maths to cover it, everything must be costed for.
anyone getting back on subject what someone writes on a public forum compared to what someone says in the house of commons are 2 very different things.
whether he said stupid woman or stupid person there are a lot of things to criticise him on this isnt really one of them
There's a lot more that I've picked up on, too, generally at the expense of Far East Asians, but I have very little desire to actively look for examples of abuse against people like me.1 -
and then the rich go abroad and corporates also move out of uk - there goes the funding, this is my issue the man bangs on and on about things he cannot deliver and people believe it.WSS said:
The policies are not the problem. It's the lack of clarity on how they will be delivered, how they will be paid for and how it will impact the wider economy.holyjo said:
I just don’t give a monkeys. Its a diversion from those on the right generally. You just cannot take people seriously who are crying foul on this and yet will not condemn the returning of the whip to the two Conservatives suspended for behaviour far far worse than saying “ stupid women”MuttleyCAFC said:What a stupid (excuse the pun) argument. Lip readers can't agree FFS! If you dislike him you will said he said one thing, if you like him you will say he said another. I think it is all a bit pathetic seeing as he has denied saying it.
If you ask somebody if he is saying stupid people, they would say he is, if you asked somebody if he was saying stupid woman, they would say he is.
I know I used to work with disabled people and we had a lip reader at a meeting that I got talking to as I thought it was an amazing skill. She told me it isn't 100% accurate in terms of every word, but you can get the meaning from the whole sentence. So these lip readers who are saying he definitely said it, can only say he probably said it IMO. Which is completely different. I suppose it depends what paper pays them to give their opinion.
As for this site ; there are some who don’t want anyone to focus on the policy proposals under JC leadership for at least two reasons
1) when exposed to the public just as policy proposals the public really like them
2) this in and of itself exposes those who support policies that perpetuate advantage and disadvantage those with less
I support the higher taxes on the rich and re Nationalising industries which make huge profits for shareholders whilst increasing prices for the public
Just two to get us going
They're soundbites.
"Tax the rich more" and "make companies pay more tax and wages" are not strategies to deliver on these policies.
i agree the nhs should have better funding - completely behind him, the free education i do not agree with.0 -
That’s where I was, just don’t believe the policies are anymore than popular sound bites and a large part weren’t going to work and probably have a negative effect. But they were certainly popular, why wouldn’t they be?WSS said:
The policies are not the problem. It's the lack of clarity on how they will be delivered, how they will be paid for and how it will impact the wider economy.holyjo said:
I just don’t give a monkeys. Its a diversion from those on the right generally. You just cannot take people seriously who are crying foul on this and yet will not condemn the returning of the whip to the two Conservatives suspended for behaviour far far worse than saying “ stupid women”MuttleyCAFC said:What a stupid (excuse the pun) argument. Lip readers can't agree FFS! If you dislike him you will said he said one thing, if you like him you will say he said another. I think it is all a bit pathetic seeing as he has denied saying it.
If you ask somebody if he is saying stupid people, they would say he is, if you asked somebody if he was saying stupid woman, they would say he is.
I know I used to work with disabled people and we had a lip reader at a meeting that I got talking to as I thought it was an amazing skill. She told me it isn't 100% accurate in terms of every word, but you can get the meaning from the whole sentence. So these lip readers who are saying he definitely said it, can only say he probably said it IMO. Which is completely different. I suppose it depends what paper pays them to give their opinion.
As for this site ; there are some who don’t want anyone to focus on the policy proposals under JC leadership for at least two reasons
1) when exposed to the public just as policy proposals the public really like them
2) this in and of itself exposes those who support policies that perpetuate advantage and disadvantage those with less
I support the higher taxes on the rich and re Nationalising industries which make huge profits for shareholders whilst increasing prices for the public
Just two to get us going
They're soundbites.
"Tax the rich more" and "make companies pay more tax and wages" are not strategies to deliver on these policies.0 -
Every lip reading expert was so sure about what was said to Sterling, but now they can't decide what Corbyn said.
Not as expert as they made out.1 -
There were three strands to the financial tactics two of which you have alluded toWSS said:
The policies are not the problem. It's the lack of clarity on how they will be delivered, how they will be paid for and how it will impact the wider economy.holyjo said:
I just don’t give a monkeys. Its a diversion from those on the right generally. You just cannot take people seriously who are crying foul on this and yet will not condemn the returning of the whip to the two Conservatives suspended for behaviour far far worse than saying “ stupid women”MuttleyCAFC said:What a stupid (excuse the pun) argument. Lip readers can't agree FFS! If you dislike him you will said he said one thing, if you like him you will say he said another. I think it is all a bit pathetic seeing as he has denied saying it.
If you ask somebody if he is saying stupid people, they would say he is, if you asked somebody if he was saying stupid woman, they would say he is.
I know I used to work with disabled people and we had a lip reader at a meeting that I got talking to as I thought it was an amazing skill. She told me it isn't 100% accurate in terms of every word, but you can get the meaning from the whole sentence. So these lip readers who are saying he definitely said it, can only say he probably said it IMO. Which is completely different. I suppose it depends what paper pays them to give their opinion.
As for this site ; there are some who don’t want anyone to focus on the policy proposals under JC leadership for at least two reasons
1) when exposed to the public just as policy proposals the public really like them
2) this in and of itself exposes those who support policies that perpetuate advantage and disadvantage those with less
I support the higher taxes on the rich and re Nationalising industries which make huge profits for shareholders whilst increasing prices for the public
Just two to get us going
They're soundbites.
"Tax the rich more" and "make companies pay more tax and wages" are not strategies to deliver on these policies
• corporation tax to increase
• higher rate tax to increase
• borrow to fund infrastructure projects
As you say these are not strategy. The strategy is to reverse austerity by a huge investment in infrastructure projects thus kick starting economic growth. The tax increases are tactics to meet the strategic aim
By growing the State new jobs would be created in the public sector, notably health which would keep the fly wheel turning increasing real employment.
The tax changes are tactics to meet the strategic aims. You may be sceptical about the veracity of the claims but as a strategic plan it has historical legitimacy and economic precedent
If nothing else it offers clear blue water between austerity strategy by the right and labour strategy
It was tricky to compare the manifesto commitments as the Conservatives could not be arsed to produce one. The height of arrogance perhaps2 -
I think we need a referendum on whether he said stupid woman or stupid people.6
