Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
4 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

 

At first sight, it looks dubious that a prominent critic of Corbyn gets suspended on sexual harassment allegations. If these are trumped-up charges, though, you'd hope that will become clear - by media investigation, if nothing else.

It's worth remembering, though, that a Corbyn supporter, Kelvin Hopkins, has already been suspended on similar grounds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelvin_Hopkins#Sexual_harassment_allegations

 

If someone has made allegations and there is any question that there might be some substance to them, the party has to investigate.

Indeed, if it did not do so, the media would be all over them for being weak on sexual harassment as well as anti-semitism, Corbyn being a weak leader etc. This is potentially a lose-lose scenario for Corbyn, unless Woodcock's proven clearly guilty.

 

Interesting that the investigation has apparently been ongoing since December, but has just been leaked.....and it could have been leaked by either side.

 

  • Like 1
Guest Foxin_mad
Posted
1 minute ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

At first sight, it looks dubious that a prominent critic of Corbyn gets suspended on sexual harassment allegations. If these are trumped-up charges, though, you'd hope that will become clear - by media investigation, if nothing else.

It's worth remembering, though, that a Corbyn supporter, Kelvin Hopkins, has already been suspended on similar grounds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelvin_Hopkins#Sexual_harassment_allegations

 

If someone has made allegations and there is any question that there might be some substance to them, the party has to investigate.

Indeed, if it did not do so, the media would be all over them for being weak on sexual harassment as well as anti-semitism, Corbyn being a weak leader etc. This is potentially a lose-lose scenario for Corbyn, unless Woodcock's proven clearly guilty.

 

Interesting that the investigation has apparently been ongoing since December, but has just been leaked.....and it could have been leaked by either side.

 

I think its high suspicious. This was also in the article:

 

"I am therefore very concerned that one of the very few individuals with knowledge of the case chose to place selective details of it in newspapers this weekend. Labour's new general secretary has cited this publicity as a reason to suspend me from the Labour whip.

The decision at this politically charged time to place details of my case in the press and then suspend me places a serious question mark over the integrity of the process, which serves neither those making complaints nor those facing allegations."

I actually don't think Corbyn is a weak leader, I think he is a pretty nasty chap despite his kind caring rhetoric. 

 

Posted
46 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

I think its high suspicious. This was also in the article:

 

"I am therefore very concerned that one of the very few individuals with knowledge of the case chose to place selective details of it in newspapers this weekend. Labour's new general secretary has cited this publicity as a reason to suspend me from the Labour whip.

The decision at this politically charged time to place details of my case in the press and then suspend me places a serious question mark over the integrity of the process, which serves neither those making complaints nor those facing allegations."

I actually don't think Corbyn is a weak leader, I think he is a pretty nasty chap despite his kind caring rhetoric. 

 

I fail to see what it's got to do with Corbyn

Posted

Liam Fox apparently doesn't like it very much when control is taken back by parliament. It was supposed to be handed straight to him dagnammit!

 

Seriously though, absolutely sensible decisions by the lords this week. Brexiteers might bluster on about the will of the people but it would be ridiculous to show a situation where refusing a bad deal forced a no deal. Besides, a possible no deal has only ever been on the table at the GE and only got 41% of the vote. 

 

Liam Fox accuses Lords of trying to block Brexit

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/01/liam-fox-accuses-lords-of-trying-to-block-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

Guest Foxin_mad
Posted
3 minutes ago, toddybad said:

I fail to see what it's got to do with Corbyn

Anti Corbyn Labour MP suddenly has sexual harassment charges made against him, said charges leaked to the press. Seems very suspicious, almost Soviet style retribution. Its not what you know its who you know and all that. 

 

There is a massive culture problem (bullying/intimidation) within the party, I would say that is very much the leaders concern. Some could say he is perhaps not bothered. 

Guest Foxin_mad
Posted
5 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Liam Fox apparently doesn't like it very much when control is taken back by parliament. It was supposed to be handed straight to him dagnammit!

 

Seriously though, absolutely sensible decisions by the lords this week. Brexiteers might bluster on about the will of the people but it would be ridiculous to show a situation where refusing a bad deal forced a no deal. Besides, a possible no deal has only ever been on the table at the GE and only got 41% of the vote. 

 

Liam Fox accuses Lords of trying to block Brexit

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/01/liam-fox-accuses-lords-of-trying-to-block-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

Was it only 41% of the vote though? it could be said it was closer to 80%. At that point Labour were coming out with some bluster about a 'jobs first' Brexit which means absolutely nothing. They are still taking about 'a' Customs Union and not 'the' Customs Union. Its very much a suggestion of having a cake and eating it, its just a red cake. The EU will not allow Labours suggestion of a 'deal' any more than they will a Tory one. The only deal they will accept is a bad deal for us. 

 

The Lib Dems were the only 'mainstream' anti Brexit party and they didn't do very well. 

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Anti Corbyn Labour MP suddenly has sexual harassment charges made against him, said charges leaked to the press. Seems very suspicious, almost Soviet style retribution. Its not what you know its who you know and all that. 

 

There is a massive culture problem (bullying/intimidation) within the party, I would say that is very much the leaders concern. Some could say he is perhaps not bothered. 

Hold on, you've been shouting about the fact labour should have been responding quicker to other sorts of allegations yet when they do so you make other complaints. There'll be more than one disciplinary going on in a party of 500,000+ . This is just the one you've heard of. Only last week you were reading about how one of corbyn's closest allies was chucked out of the party and trying to link that to him in the opposite direction. Basically whether it's a friend or enemy of Corbyn in your mind it always proves something about him. Despite the fact he's not involved in the disciplinary process. It's complete nonsense.

Edited by Guest
Posted
2 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Was it only 41% of the vote though? it could be said it was closer to 80%. At that point Labour were coming out with some bluster about a 'jobs first' Brexit which means absolutely nothing. They are still taking about 'a' Customs Union and not 'the' Customs Union. Its very much a suggestion of having a cake and eating it, its just a red cake. The EU will not allow Labours suggestion of a 'deal' any more than they will a Tory one. The only deal they will accept is a bad deal for us. 

 

The Lib Dems were the only 'mainstream' anti Brexit party and they didn't do very well. 

Labour said about 1000 times they would make a deal. They categorically shouted down the idea that no deal was any sort of possibility. So yes, 41%.

 

See mine and strokes conversation last week about a very similar point.

Posted
1 hour ago, Foxin_mad said:

I think its high suspicious. This was also in the article:

 

"I am therefore very concerned that one of the very few individuals with knowledge of the case chose to place selective details of it in newspapers this weekend. Labour's new general secretary has cited this publicity as a reason to suspend me from the Labour whip.

The decision at this politically charged time to place details of my case in the press and then suspend me places a serious question mark over the integrity of the process, which serves neither those making complaints nor those facing allegations."

I actually don't think Corbyn is a weak leader, I think he is a pretty nasty chap despite his kind caring rhetoric. 

 

 

I don't know. I'm not naive about how dirty politics can be. Maybe your suspicion is justified. 

 

Whoever leaked it acted irresponsibly - particularly in an election week and just when the Tories have been in a big public mess. But it could just as easily have been leaked by Woodcock's side. Who knows?

 

It remains true that, unless it has been fabricated (in which case the media will probably discover that), then the party was in a no-win situation. They couldn't just ignore such allegations in the current climate.

 

Were you similarly suspicious when the left-wing Corbyn ally Kelvin Hopkins was suspended based on similar accusations - or when Damian Green was ousted by the Tories for the same reason?

Guest Foxin_mad
Posted
1 minute ago, toddybad said:

Hold on, you've been shouting about the fact labour should have been responding quicker to other sorts of allegations yet when they do so you make other complaints. There'll be more than one disciplinary going on in a party of 500,000+ . This is just the one you've heard of. Only last week you were reading about how one of corbyn's closest allies was chucked out of the party and trying to link that to him in the opposite direction. Basically whether it's a friend or enemy of Corbyn in your mind it always proves something about him. It's compete nonsense.

They have been dealing with this since December. My question is why now does somebody see fit to leak it to the press.

 

There is clearly major issues in this party from top to bottom.

 

We still don't see much action on Ken Livingston. 

 

I am quite sure if it were Chris Williamson there would not be similar things going on. 

Guest Kopfkino
Posted
19 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Liam Fox apparently doesn't like it very much when control is taken back by parliament. It was supposed to be handed straight to him dagnammit!

 

Seriously though, absolutely sensible decisions by the lords this week. Brexiteers might bluster on about the will of the people but it would be ridiculous to show a situation where refusing a bad deal forced a no deal. Besides, a possible no deal has only ever been on the table at the GE and only got 41% of the vote. 

 

Liam Fox accuses Lords of trying to block Brexit

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/01/liam-fox-accuses-lords-of-trying-to-block-brexit?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

 

Tbf, I would take staying in the EU if it signed the death warrant of the Lords. 

Posted
Just now, Kopfkino said:

 

Tbf, I would take staying in the EU if it signed the death warrant of the Lords. 

They do tend to actually do their job properly unlike the commons though tbf.

With the current shower in government trying to take parliament out of the equation at every opportunity it's vital the lords exists imo.

Guest Foxin_mad
Posted
6 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Labour said about 1000 times they would make a deal. They categorically shouted down the idea that no deal was any sort of possibility. So yes, 41%.

 

See mine and strokes conversation last week about a very similar point.

The fact is though they are not the ones deciding that, the EU will probably call the shots. Labour has said it wants 'a' customs union, I am not really seeing why the EU would allows us to be part of a block and make decisions on future deals. They wont. 

 

The Tories have always said they want a deal of some kind, what has been said is that no deal is better than a bad deal, which I would tend to agree with. The likelihood here in my view is that the EU are unlikely to give us a deal unless the benefits for them outweigh the negatives. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

They have been dealing with this since December. My question is why now does somebody see fit to leak it to the press.

 

There is clearly major issues in this party from top to bottom.

 

We still don't see much action on Ken Livingston. 

 

I am quite sure if it were Chris Williamson there would not be similar things going on. 

It's just as likely to be somebody opposed to Corbyn trying to stir up trouble as it is a supporter. 

 

What was the outcome of the 4 tory disciplinaries for anti-semitism, islamophibia and racism that took place last week? Or is it only left wing problems that are newsworthy?

Guest Foxin_mad
Posted
6 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Were you similarly suspicious when the left-wing Corbyn ally Kelvin Hopkins was suspended based on similar accusations - or when Damian Green was ousted by the Tories for the same reason?

I am always suspicious of these things. Damien Green, was very clearly into some dodgy stuff. I understand it was found on his computer. The Kelvin Hopkins situation is still under review, I am not aware of any leaks about either of these 2 though. A very recent bust up happened in parliament over Corbyns columns in the morning star between Williamson and Woodcock, just seems very odd. 

Guest Kopfkino
Posted
4 minutes ago, toddybad said:

They do tend to actually do their job properly unlike the commons though tbf.

With the current shower in government trying to take parliament out of the equation at every opportunity it's vital the lords exists imo.

 

Depends what you define as properly? And how much attention you really pay it. Personally (and this isn't a result of Brexit) think it's a stain on our democracy. Almost shameful that we empower unelected elites.

 

As for the actual amendment. Suppose the Lord's veto the Withdrawal Agreement next February - there really is no saying they wouldn't even if the the commons passed it - then obviously no deal is blocked, what happens? And would you defend that? 

 

Guest Foxin_mad
Posted
6 minutes ago, toddybad said:

It's just as likely to be somebody opposed to Corbyn trying to stir up trouble as it is a supporter. 

 

What was the outcome of the 4 tory disciplinaries for anti-semitism, islamophibia and racism that took place last week? Or is it only left wing problems that are newsworthy?

I believe that they were suspended. No leaks to the press or secondary deselection agendas going on. 

Posted
8 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

I am always suspicious of these things. Damien Green, was very clearly into some dodgy stuff. I understand it was found on his computer. The Kelvin Hopkins situation is still under review, I am not aware of any leaks about either of these 2 though. A very recent bust up happened in parliament over Corbyns columns in the morning star between Williamson and Woodcock, just seems very odd. 

You're not aware of any leaks re damian green? He only got held to account because it leaked!

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...