Talking is one thing. Going to a party with them is another.

And selling them state of the art weapons is yet another thing altogether.

Well, not exactly, the difference is whether you're a person with some authority and support taking part in substantive negotiations that go somewhere, or just a weirdo off-kilter backbencher who gets a kick from rubbing shoulders with terrorists and telling them they're great.

Britain's relationship with Saudi is quite toxic, particularly as they spend billions financing terrorism against us, but it's become quite involved and difficult to undo for reasons I don't entirely understand except oil. And it may just be the oil. God, they've got a lot of it, and we need it (if you fall and break your leg, do you want an ambulance to come fetch you or don't you?), and Britain was right in there in 1918, so we're looking after that connection.

Saudi was fighting rebels in Yemen back in the early '70s, and using British-supplied Lightnings with British-supplied ground crew. The Lightning is considered a high-level interceptor, but the F53 export version could carry rocket pods and 1,000lb bombs as well as the 30mm guns and heat-seeking missiles and was probably pretty fearsome.

At the moment, Saudi is fighting the Houthis in Yemen, and the Houthis are Iranian proxies so Saudi regards it as an existential conflict with their ultimate enemy. (Sunni v Shia as well as pure clan interests at stake.) So, unless anyone can get talks going, the Saudis won't back off. I would mention that the bombs used in the infamous bus attack -- and the pilot can't have known there were children in the bus, and civilian buses shouldn't be attacked anyway but maybe the Houthis use buses as troop transports, as is normal in such conflicts -- were American-made. Though that doesn't necessarily mean they weren't supplied from the British armoury.

Wreath affair explained here by the BBC

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.b...itics-45196409

TLDR

uncontroversial event for PLO victims who died in Israel attack in 1985
claims made event visited graves of black september members who killed Israeli athletes in 1972. No suggestion Corbyn was there.
Corbyn seen near graves of Bsesio and Khalaf who were accused but not proven of orchestrating 1972 attack. Corbyn appears to offer remembrance for the contraversial pair who were assassinated in 1990s by Israel.

No wonder people are generally completely disinterested in this story

Overall, 16% of those who were aware of the story (that’s 16% of 74%, so about 12%) say it has made them think worse of Corbyn, but 68% say it has made no difference (21% because they had a good impression of Corbyn and still do, 47% because they had a negative impression of Corbyn and still do). Even that 16% is mostly made up of Conservative and Lib Dem supporters, who presumably were not Corbyn admirers to begin with. So while this affair may entrench existing negative views of Corbyn among those who already held them, it seems unlikely to do much to reduce his support. Full tabs for the YouGov polling are here.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

It's standard smear tactics. Make stuff up and try to force a defense which will always appear a bit murky because reality is messy and confusing.

One of the reasons it had limited effect at the last GE is that Labour offer substantive positive policies which is actually far more interesting to voters in elections than smear tactics. It's part of the vital importance of not following the 'not quite as bad as the other lot' approach which makes campaigns close to 100% negative/smear.

That could've been lifted directly from the Trump thread. Just missed out 'witch hunt'

The issue of negative vs positive politics long predates trump. The frothing of the Murdoch Press and the Daily Mail long predates trump. You cant defend it all on the basis that trump is so awful.

I'm in something like the 80:20 camp in favour of positive politics and one of the last things we need in the UK is more Americanisation of our politics.

I'd imagine most people are in favour of positive politics but that doesn't mean that we ignore or whitewash uncomfortable facts.

Lol gtf.

Or will I await the quotes of all the condemnation of every shade of politican from yourself?

Just this last year or so we have the Scottish tory leader courting the orange order, then there is the huge ****ing matter of the bigot party (DUP) basically having a veto over brexit and the lying tory bastards are still shipping arms to all sorts of filth.

Nah, you're another disingenuous ****er.

But yeah you're right, all politicians (named Jeremy) should be called out as and when they associate with some unsavoury folk.

There is nothing that should be unsettling about a Trump comparison on the common issues of media hostility and a (pre-election) policy programme which in both cases included opposition to war and re-building domestic infrastructure with direct investment. Many commentators suggest that should Bernie Sanders have beaten Clinton he would have picked up a significant portion of the Trump vote. Trump=Sanders=Corbyn has some truth.

Hello. You wanted some sources on Corbyn's wreath-laying escapade which you were too lazy to find yourself, I believe.

https://twitter.com/LatestMessiah/st...37340026806272
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45185931
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-95TdSUG_k
https://twitter.com/VJRichMcCarthy/s...51739005313024
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/mass...04843?mode=amp
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Daoud
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10500189
https://twitter.com/TimesCorbyn/stat...43057103290368
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-pol...ery-in-tunisia

Go knock yourself out.

Like almost zero people criticise Corbyn for *meeting* with Hamas or whoever - if you need to use such a clear lie to defend your position ... maybe you're on the wrong side of the argument?

NO!!!.

Thank you.

Firstly twitter is not a credible source, I'm not trawling through it I'm afraid.

With regard to the Irish Times piece about Munich I was expecting to find the names of Bseiso and Khalaf since they are the pair that are buried on the site in question, as explained in the BBC clip you posted, and accused of involvement in Munich. But according to your source the orchestrators were apparently men named Abu Daoud and Abu Iyad, of which Daoud far from being buried in the Corbyn grave may even still be alive:

Abu Iyad and Abu Daoud planned the Munich hostage-taking. Abu Iyad was murdered in Tunis in 1991. Although Abu Daoud was second on the hit-list drawn up by former Israeli prime minister Golda Meir, he survived an assassination attempt and has reached the age of 79. He lives in Damascus, where he told The Irish Times his version of what happened in Munich.

The issue is about Bseiso and Khalaf, this is from the definitive BBC report I posted:

But critics have pointed out that a photograph from the event appears to show him standing opposite the graves of Atef Bseiso and Salah Khalaf, two senior PLO officers who were accused of links to the Munich attack and were assassinated.
The Daily Mail, which first published the image, quoted Ilana Romano, the widow of weightlifter Yossef who was killed at Munich, saying: "To go to the grave of a person behind the killing of 11 athletes, he should be ashamed and apologise."
There is no photograph of Mr Corbyn laying the wreath at this spot. A memorial for the 1985 air strike is feet away.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45196409

Another of your sources is about a perpetrator of Munich named Oudeh. I suspect he was not at the Corbyn grave because of this:

Oudeh was buried in the Martyrs' Cemetery at the Yarmouk Palestinian refugee camp in Syria with officials from various Palestinian groups in attendance.


I've no idea how you arrived at your conclusions based on what you have posted here. Perhaps it is all from the twitter feeds and as I pointed out I prefer to stick to facts.

Which alternate universe do you live in?

https://twitter.com/hogan451/status/1033013194338521089

Here's a real world problem....

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics...irish-politics

Put some **** in charge that hasn't a clue about the place. That's a dereliction of duty from May just so she could look after one of her cronies.

Place is still a **** show but at least the useless ****ers are facing a 13k paycut.

You're deliberately lying and deliberately not paying attention. You didn't read the sources given. Abu Daoud -- Mohammed Daoud Oudeh -- was the leader of the Munich attack team. He was given his orders by 'Abu Iyad' (Salah Khalaf) and 'Abu Mohammed' (Fakri Al-Omari), the leaders of Black September, at a cafe table in Rome in summer 1972, as he explained in his memoirs and in subsequent interviews, including the cited interview with the Irish Times. Khalaf and Al-Omari, assassinated by an Abu Nidal gunman at the house of 'Abu Houl' (Hayel Abdel-Hamid) in Tunis in 1991, are buried, with Abdel-Hamid, in the Palestinian cemetery in Tunis. It was on the grave of Khalaf that Corbyn was photographed laying his wreath and he admitted to Channel 4 News that he had done this, identifying Khalaf correctly as 'Arafat's No.2' but lying that he was killed in the 1985 Israeli air raid, which he wasn't. (And we know that Corbyn knew he wasn't because of Corbyn's article in the Morning Star shortly after the event.)

Roshan M Salih, apparently a Corbynista member of Enfield North CLP, is a reporter for Iran's Press TV (banned in the UK). That is, he is an agent of a hostile foreign power, as is normal for Corbynistas. He was told not to film at the meeting but he did anyway.

I did in fact read them and after re reading them the situation is murkier still. I fail to see how you can draw such hard and fast conclusions. Let's examine this again and see who is the liar and who is being objective and factual.

Firstly the Irish Times article does not mention the name of Khalaf once. It is you who have inserted Salah Khalaf in brackets after the name of Abu Iyad, there is no substantiation given for this. We are told by Marlowe the 1972 attack was planned by Abu Iyad and Abu Daoud (whose real name is Mohamed Daoud Odeah) Notice there is no pseudonym given for Iyad.

Next according to the 2010 BBC obituary, Mohammed Oudeh, who has died in Damascus of kidney failure at the age of 73, was the Palestinian mastermind of the attack on Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics.. Oudeh is not an alternative spelling for Odeah as you appear to claim above because Odeah/Daoud was 79 in 2006. Your sources appear to contradict each other.

Thirdly the wiki reference claims As a commander of Black September, Abu Daoud was the mastermind behind the Munich massacre. No mention of either Iyad/Khalaf or of Oudeh. That's at least 3 important contradictions in the sources you yourself posted.

Your strongest line is to prove that Khalaf was indeed the same man as Iyad and helped plan/supervise/carry out the operation. This still falls short of proving your claim that corbyn commemorated the deaths of the perpetrators of the 1972 massacre by laying a wreath at the grave of Khalaf. He did not. Khalaf just happened to be buried at the site where the commemoration for the 1985 Israeli attack took place, along with Bsesio which the BBC suggests was implicated in 1972. Bsesio is not mentioned as being part of the attack in any of your other sources.

Just to put this one to bed, I will cut and paste the entire definitive BBC report which covers all aspects of this convoluted mess. If you have an issue with this then take the matter up with bbc newsroom instead of calling me a liar.

Jeremy Corbyn has faced questions about a wreath-laying ceremony he attended in Tunisia in 2014.

The Labour leader has said he visited the cemetery to honour innocent people killed in a 1985 Israeli air strike.

But he has faced criticism because the event took place near memorials for people who were accused of having links to a terrorist attack at the 1972 Olympic Games.

In recent days the issue has returned to the headlines. Here's what we know:

Why was Mr Corbyn in Tunisia?
In September 2014, when still a backbench MP, Mr Corbyn attended a conference in Tunis, organised by the Centre for Strategic Studies for North Africa.

It was called the International Conference on Monitoring the Palestinian Political and Legal Situation in the Light of Israeli Aggression.

One of its aims was to reconcile differences between the two main Palestinian factions: Hamas and Fatah. Other attendees included former US attorney general Ramsey Clark and Ossama Hamdan, the foreign representative of Hamas, as well as Conservative peer Lord Sheikh and Liberal Democrat Lord Phillips.

During the trip, Mr Corbyn took up an invitation to join a delegation paying respects to those killed in a 1985 Israeli bombing of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) headquarters in Tunis.

Photographs suggest a wreath was laid at the base of a large statue erected in memory of the victims and that Mr Corbyn was next to the memorial, mostly in the background, not holding a wreath.

The delegation then seems to have moved on to a cemetery three miles (5km) away, which houses a monument to those killed in the attack.

It also includes graves of people accused of having links to the 1972 Munich massacre, when Palestinian group Black September killed 11 hostages from the Israeli Olympic team and a West German police officer.

The Palestinian Embassy in Tunisia's Facebook page described the event as a memorial to the 1985 attack, making no mention of the controversial graves.

Among those present were high-level Palestinian figures including Fatah Central Committee member Azzam al-Ahmad, Maher Taher of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Palestinian ambassador to Tunisia, Salman el-Herfi.

Mr Corbyn has confirmed he did lay a wreath, saying this was for those who died in the 1985 bombing.

But critics have pointed out that a photograph from the event appears to show him standing opposite the graves of Atef Bseiso and Salah Khalaf, two senior PLO officers who were accused of links to the Munich attack and were assassinated.

The Daily Mail, which first published the image, quoted Ilana Romano, the widow of weightlifter Yossef who was killed at Munich, saying: "To go to the grave of a person behind the killing of 11 athletes, he should be ashamed and apologise."

There is no photograph of Mr Corbyn laying the wreath at this spot. A memorial for the 1985 air strike is feet away.

The BBC's Rana Jawad, who has visited the cemetery, said she understood the area next to the pair's graves to be the spot where dignitaries and diplomats gather every year to remember victims of the 1985 bombing, as well as senior PLO members.

The cemetery signs, and markings on the graves and memorial, are in Arabic.

Mr Corbyn's spokesman has said he did not take part in laying wreaths on the men's graves. A Labour spokesman also told the Guardian the two men had denied having links with the terrorist group, and that the PLO also disputed this.

Since the controversy first hit the headlines during the 2017 general election campaign, Mr Corbyn has repeatedly said he was in Tunisia to promote peace in the Middle East and was commemorating victims of the 1985 Israeli bombing.

Attention has focused on a 2014 Morning Star article, in which he wrote that "wreaths were laid at the graves of those who died on that day and on the graves of others killed by Mossad agents in Paris in 1991".

Mossad is the Israeli intelligence agency. Mr Corbyn has not confirmed precisely who he was referring to in this article.

Atef Bseiso was killed in Paris in 1992, and Salah Khalaf was assassinated in Tunisia in 1991.

On Monday, after photographs from the event emerged in the press, Mr Corbyn was asked to clarify his involvement. He said he had been at the event as part of a conference which was "all about the search for peace".

Asked about his Morning Star reference to wreaths for "others killed by Mossad", he said he was present but added: "I don't think I was actually involved in it".

On Tuesday, when pressed further about the pictures of him holding a wreath, he said: "I laid one wreath along with many other people, as I have said, in memory of all those who died in the awful attack in 1985, which, as I keep repeating, was condemned by the whole world."

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has attacked Mr Corbyn, accusing him of laying a wreath "on the graves of the terrorist who perpetrated the Munich massacre" and saying he deserved "unequivocal condemnation".

Mr Corbyn said his claim was "false" and hit back at the Israeli prime minister, condemning his government's treatment of Palestinian protesters.

The Labour leader has also been criticised from within his own party by MP Luciana Berger, who tweeted: "Being 'present' is the same as being involved.

"When I attend a memorial, my presence alone, whether I lay a wreath or not, demonstrates my association and support. There can also never be a 'fitting memorial' for terrorists. Where is the apology?"

The Conservatives have sought to capitalise on the row, with Home Secretary Sajid Javid suggesting Mr Corbyn should resign.

But Mr Corbyn's supporters defended him.

Shadow chancellor John McDonnell said Mr Corbyn had "devoted his life to promoting justice and peace" which involved "meeting people who haven't shared those ideals".

Backbench MP Chris Williamson said the Labour leader's "enemies" were using the story to "destabilise" him, accusing them of "indulging in egregious smears".

But Press TV responded by saying that it had been doing its "reporting job".

"We can confirm that at no point were we asked to stop filming at last night’s Joan Ryan vote even though we filmed openly. We would have stopped had we been asked to. There were no “no filming” posters up and there was no public announcement. We just did our reporting job," it said.

Labour Friends of Israel said on Twitter that Ryan was “one of the most decent, courageous and principled people in British politics. Nothing about tonight's vote changes that fact”.

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/l...vote-891331566

My conclusion is that either the press TV spokesman is lying or the filming was allowed to continue to create a distraction from the vote itself and other substantive issues.