The quicker we get a serious labour leader and rid of Corbyn the better. The man is a spineless moron.

He is like the annoying nutter at a party who won't leave, so everyone else is driven out because he's spoiling it.

He does have an epic level of lack of self awareness, I'll give him that.

LOL that's exactly what he's like.

Of all the insults, 'spineless moron' is the most ridiculous.
Either people don't understand what Corbyn means, what this all actually represents, the underlying shifts in Labourism - the decomposition of Blairism, the politicisation of anti-austerity/anti-war feeling, the return of 'radical' politics, the un-ravelling of neo-liberal orthodoxy in the UK - strangely the breakdown of Labour in Scotland is in fact in tune with the popularity of Corbyn - I don't think it's been fully recognised that the smashing of Labour by the SNP is actual proof that Tory-lite politics is what is 'unelectable', not alternative politics so cleverly adopted by the SNP (fake though it is). Or, they are actually in fear of it. Either way, it looks like despite Peter Mandelson's attempts [cit needed] to price us out of the leadership election, you are either stuck with JC or join the lib dems.

because we'll all vote for someone we first heard of last week

OK how about 'venal sellout'.

Jeremy Corbyn was paid by an Iranian state TV station that was complicit in the forced confession of a tortured journalist

Wasn't that what happened last time?

You possibly mean Neil Hamilton. Nigel Hamilton is the biographer of Field-Marshal Montgomery.

Members of Parliament have to declare their outside earnings.

Abbott is a member of the actual elite.

Well, apart from the ones that 90% of British schoolchildren still attend, like the three within half a mile of where I sit. But of course that's on my planet. Yours evidently differs.

Sellout, no. He is genuinely, vocally, ideologically committed to the Iranian mullahs' revolutionary regime. Just as he is genuinely committed to Putin's.

western politicians who appear on Press TV can be regarded as useful idiots."

Corbyn fits this saying like a glove.

This does not make him an apologist for torture. Obviously you know this but since you ilk can't win a debate you try to attack him from the left, same thing over the anti-semitism business.
But you see everything is political and relative. Is everybody to ever appear on the BBC or ITV complicit in torture and hanging? Why not? The UK media helped the UK government lie it's way to Iraq, torture people in Abu Graib. The US still have the death penalty, is everyone on US news channels complicit in state murder?

Wait, no, Iranian people have brown skin and there are a lot of Muslims there so obviously this is much worse.

Does the US and UK hang people from cranes in the street, in front of huge crowds?

Lol at this reach trying to liken the BBC to an official Iranian propaganda outlet.

Quite right, the BBC is far worse.

No, just their puppets in places like Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
What you fail to remember, or chose to ignore, is that until about 60 years ago, Britain had an empire on which 'the sun never set, and the blood never dried'. The British were medieval in their brutality. Now the US is the dominant empire. Saudi Arabia is its key ally in the middle east which is widely regarded as the inspiration for ISIS - it is the same ideology. Go figure. And it's not just their puppets - guantanomo, Abu Graib, the use of phosphorous on Fallujah. This is recent history, UK and US history. Have you forgotten Vietnam for f sake? Nothing has changed, except people like Jeremy Corbyn have shown the world the ugly face of the west.

Yes there are lots of other f***** up places which are hostile to the US, places like Iran. But to say they are worse than the west is ridiculous, and to say, look Corbyn is a traitor because he did some paid work for Iranian TV is stupid. It's people like Corbyn who have the balls to say, 'wait a minute, this isn't quite right is it?'

No, it's not obvious at all - and I didn't say at any point that he was a torture apologist, those are your words.

I quoted a factual article that stated he got paid around £20,000 for speaking on an Iranian State TV station SIX MONTHS AFTER that station was sanctioned and banned by OFFCOM for broadcasting a statement extracted by torture.

What I will say is that had, say, Cameron done the same thing then the left would have been all over it like a rash. But because it's lovely, gentle, beardy Jeremy you just hand wave it away.

The hypocrisy is mind boggling.

What?

Mayo

it's just third level ****s n giggles. Don't sweat it.

None of this is new, we've all known about this since before Corbyn became leader. Why would you bring the British empire up? who cares it's the past, just like Saddam killing hundreds of thousands with chemical weapons in the 80s, then butchering hundreds of thousands more in the 90s. Or the Ottoman empire committing genocide last century. We all have a dirty past, but hanging out with Iran and Hamas isn't the answer.

Add the IRA to that list.

Because there is still an empire right now - it's just changed hands to the US (and to a lesser extent Russia, China) and their hangers on - like the UK. Nothing has really changed. We supported Sadaam in the 80s, sold him weapons, came in handy keeping Iran at bay, then he got to much to handle so we invaded, kept him in place though so he could slaughter more, then the neo-cons decided they needed regime change etc etc etc. Meanwhile millions die.

Someone mentioned Cameron - Cameron just slaughtered Syrian families, he is a ****ing war criminal in a just society. This is empire. Today.

There is a major difference between Iran and Hamas. Iran is a major player in the region, allied to the Russian axis, and is just as awful a place as anywhere. Hamas is a complex formation which I can't do justice right now, but safe to say it is born out of the Israel-Palestine struggle - it's existence is legit being a self-determination struggle, it's methods and ideology is far more complex and has many different facets from the abhorrent to the inspirational.

Same with the IRA, hugely complex question.

I'm not denying it, it's just not all that clear cut. Maybe he didn't know, maybe he gave the money back or gave it to amnesty international or something. Whatever it's a pretty tenuous link. Cameron has done far worse when he beat the war drum to murder innocent Syrians for oil. Actual guilt is worse than guilt by 'sort of tenuous association to discredit a left wing politician'. I mean come on, Cameron gets paid to lie for the rich, no comparison.

You blew my cover

You do realise Syria doesn't actually have all that much oil?