Jeremy Corbyn isn’t anti-war. He’s just anti-West

And his inability to state his true beliefs defines his leadership of the Labour party

21 November 2015

9:00 AM

21 November 2015

9:00 AM

Before the bodies in Paris’s restaurants were cold, Jeremy Corbyn’s Stop the War Coalition knew who the real villains were — and they were not the Islamists who massacred civilians. ‘Paris reaps whirlwind of western support for extremist violence in Middle East’ ran a headline on its site. The article went on to say that the consequence of the West’s ‘decades-long, bipartisan cultivation of religious extremism will certainly be more bloodshed, more repression and more violent intervention’.

This flawless example of what I once called the ‘kill us, we deserve it’ school of political analysis takes us to the heart of Corbyn’s beliefs. Even his opponents have yet to appreciate the malign double standards of the new Labour party, though they ought to be clear for all to see by now.

Whatever its protestations, Corbyn’s far left is not anti-war. Pacifism may not be a moral position in all circumstances but, in my view at least, it remains an honourable belief, rooted in Christian teaching. Corbyn does not share it. He does not oppose violence wherever it comes from, as the BBC’s political editor claimed this week. When anti-western regimes and movements go to war, his language turns slippery. Corbyn never quite has the guts to support the violence of others, but he excuses it like a gangster’s lawyer trying to get a crime boss off on a technicality.

He defended the Russian invasion of Ukraine by saying the West had provoked the Kremlin. His spin-doctor, Seumas Milne of the Guardian, the nearest thing you can find to a Stalinist in the 21st century, joined the leaders of Europe’s far-right parties at Putin’s propaganda summits. Meanwhile Corbyn and John McDonnell have defended the IRA, Hezbollah and Hamas. Like many on the far left (and right), they are pro-Assad. So committed to Syrian Ba’athism are Stop the War that they tried to stop Syrian refugees from Assad’s terror speaking at their meetings.

You cannot describe a far left that can overlook Assad’s atrocities as pacifist. Nor can you call its members little Englanders. True isolationists think we have no business wasting our blood and treasure in other people’s conflicts — a view I suspect the majority of the British share. They do not want to call radical Islamists, Assad, or Putin their ‘friends’ and take up their grievances. They hope, vainly I fear, that we can ignore them.

Corbyn, along with too much of ‘progressive opinion’, has a mistrust bordering on hatred for western powers. They do not just condemn the West for its crimes, which are frequent enough. They are ‘Occidentalists’, to use the jargon: people who see the West as the ‘root cause’ of all evil.

Their ideology is in turn genuinely rootless. They have no feeling for the best traditions of their country, and their commitments to the victims of foreign oppression are shallow and insincere. They rightly condemn western support for Saudi Arabia. But if the Saudis were to become the West’s enemy tomorrow, their opposition would vanish like dew in the morning sun.

These double standards were once a problem for those of us who thought the British left deserved better. Now that we have learned from Corbyn’s landslide victory that the British left neither deserve nor want better, they are everyone else’s problem too.

Stop the War revealed the devious inability of the new left to stick by what they mean. As soon as they realised that outsiders were reading the site, they removed the offending article. Corbyn was as shifty. On Monday, Labour MPs implored him to reject the idea that an attack on Parisians by a fascistic Islamist movement was the West’s fault. He ducked into woozy bureaucratic language and said Stop the War’s argument was ‘inappropriate’. He refused to condemn it, however. How could he when he would be rejecting everything he believed for 40 years?

Those who want to see the far left for what it is should be able to detect a pattern in his statements by now. Corbyn’s response to the Paris killings was to join with other apparently moral voices and denounce the media for not giving equal space to atrocities ‘outside Europe’. You do not understand Corbyn if you reply, as Helen Lewis of the New Statesman did, that ‘the media is full of foreign news that barely gets read’ — telling though her putdown was. Nor is it enough to go further and say that Corbyn does not want foreign news that contradicts his Manichean worldview.

Conspiracy theories certainly riddle his far left, who dismiss reports of inconvenient war crimes as lies by corporate media designed to brainwash the masses into supporting western imperialism. The reality, however, is worse than a mere blocking out of unpleasant truths. Corbyn and his supporters do not want us to think about Paris because they cannot accept that privileged westerners can be victims. If Isis kills them, it is their own or their governments’ fault. All you should do is mutter ‘blowback’ and turn off the news.

Understand that the far left believe that only favoured groups can be victims, and you understand the growth of left-wing anti-Semitism, the indifference to demands for women’s equality in rich countries, as well as the ease with which they dismiss bodies on Parisian streets. Privileged whites are the problem. We should shed no tears for them.

Corbyn’s inability to state his true beliefs defines his leadership of the Labour party. To take the most brazen instance, he condemned the assassination of Mohammed ‘Jihadi John’ Emwazi by saying it would have been better if he had been brought before a court. So it would. But Corbyn would not have supported sending special forces to Syria to kidnap Emwazi and bring him to trial. He does not believe in deploying the armed forces. Indeed he is ‘not happy’ with police shooting to kill terrorists murdering British citizens on British streets. His apparently moral stance was built on an outright lie.

A chorus of approval from ignorant cliché-mongers accompanied Jeremy Corbyn’s election as Labour’s leader. He was authentic. He was not afraid to say what he thought. He was not the creation of focus groups and media manipulators, but an honest man making a new politics.

Every claim they made was false. Jeremy Corbyn and the left he comes from cannot campaign for office by saying what they really think or they would horrify the bulk of the population. They say enough to keep their ‘base’ happy, and then dodge and twist when they speak to the rest of us. Far from being authentic, Jeremy Corbyn is one of the most dishonest politicians you will see in your lifetime.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10

Show comments
  • freddiethegreat

    The left wing – not so much a political direction as an infestation.

    • Shazza

      What I find unbelievable is that not a single MP of the ‘decent’ Left in the Labour Party has not resigned yet. By remaining MPs in the current Labour Party, even if they snipe from the sidelines, they are in tacit agreement with Corbyn’s stance and will be tainted by association.

      The real tragedy is that we will effectively soon have no rational opposition to the Conservatives. I say this as a Conservative voter and supporter – we need effective opposition to any government in power to maintain our democracy. If the government in power has nothing to fear from a weak opposition this can lead to tyranny. We were saved from despotic government in 2010, despite Labour doing their utmost to achieve that unhappy state on a permanent basis via their grateful imported voters/benefit claimants/grossly expanded public sector/postal votes etc.

      For all his gaffes and daft ideas, Red Ed did offer the prospect of a Labour government – he kept the Conservatives on their toes. Labour is headed for the history books, we can only hope that UKIP in 2020 will replace them as the official opposition and that successful, effective, democratic rule will prevail.

      • SkyBluePM

        Not really Shazza. Remember Corbyn has been the most disloyal Labour MP in their history! It is Corbyn who is out of step with the labour party ethos NOT the “moderate majority”

        He was shoe-horned in as a candidate to provide an alternate view remember. All the other candidates were basically on message!

        Now if Corbyn doesn’t like the status quo, and cannot get the majority to support him, it is Corbyn who should resign!

        I certainly don’t remember Corbyn shouting his anti west anti Trident manifesto when he was interviewed during the election – do you have footage where he did?

        No the TRUTH, is that comrade Corbyn is on a one man crusade to turn the labour party into the communist party!

        I mean where are the “new politics” of openness and ability to dissent?

        How has Ken Livingstone been brought in ABOVE the shadow defence minister?

        YOU ARE WRONG – Corbun is the one who MUST resign

        • Shazza

          But he won’t resign. If the Labour Party do not find a way to defenestrate him soon, the Labour Party will be consigned to the pages of history.

          • Claire Williams

            But how do you defenestrate him with the level of support he got in the election? Probably the earliest chance is after the May elections if they’re bad (which they probably will be as the council seats were last fought in 2012, a good year for Labour). Even then who would succeed him? There seems a paucity of potential candidates at present.

          • Shazza

            I agree.

          • Swarm of Drones

            We know you do Shaz. But what about the answers to my questions since you’re no longer busy having your friend(s) supporting your comments.

            Tell us how you managed to get your name deleted from the disqus top
            commenters list even though you spam this place every day with your
            candy. And who are all those militant superheroes that are following

          • eat your greens

            I cannot stop thinking of both Hamlet and Paddy McGuinness.
            No likey likey for Al Shazeera? Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.


        • JamesB0nd

          I keep thinking I’m going to wake up and find Khorbiyn is not after all the leader of the Labour Party; that Labour’s destruction was all just a lovely dream.

          But it’s real.

          The thing is, SkyBluePM, that it is actually the PLP who are out of step and Khorbiyn who is in step with Labour actually thinks. He got 60% of the vote, don’t forget. That’s the problem Labour now faces. Not only does Khorbiyn accurately reflect what they actually believe, but further, there is no one in the PLP who could get elected to replace him.

          The only way Labour can get a moderate leader now is if Khorbiyn goes and if that conjectural moderate is the only candidate as his successor. Look at how well that worked with Brown, and consider what hay the Tories would make of it (“he’s a puppet and the real Labour Party still thinks like Khorbiyn”). It can’t happen.

          Labour are so screwed there genuinely may not be a way back.

    • Malcolm Knott

      I agree that Corbyn & Co are deeply dishonest. But there is a lot of intellectual dishonesty on the left, at all levels.

      • JamesB0nd

        Yes, it’s structural. There is no way to be honest, intelligent and of the left all at the same time.

    • Hear hear, they make me sick. They don’t use their minds, rather their black twisted despicable hearts.

  • David Woolford

    where’s mongo?

  • steve patriarca

    This is of course the “Russia Today” narrative, It has a very strong hold still on the Labour Left and amongst many of the Old Left in the Universities. It is a narrative which relates much to “post colonialism” in France and UK, and the rest to so the called “Zionist Conspiracy” – but as a narrative it is quite coherent in itself – it is almost a parallel world and a parallel political language. But if RT viewers are anything to go by, and Mr Corbyn’s supporters are of the same cohort, it’s a very effective narrative. The Russians have poured millions into the propaganda and it appeals to the anti establishment forces as a new anti western ideology. We underestimate it at our peril.

    • victor67

      And our Billionaire owned press is just a propaganda tool for multi nationals and their political wing the Tory Party.

      Slashing the Police budget is a far greater security threat than Corbyn questioning the use of lethal force.

      In the Context of the ME all Western media downplay or deny Western interest for example Iran and Russia have an interest in a certain outcome in the Syrian tragedy but US/ Israel / Saudi Arabia only want a peaceful resolution.

      RT while not neutral shines a needed light on this hypocricy.

      • starfish

        “Slashing the Police budget is a far greater security threat ”

        And the proof for this assertion is….?

      • Sunshine Sux

        It has been nearly 6 years, (since the first moment of the Arab Spring), that Israel and the US have not seen eye-to-eye.
        If anything, Israelis were horrified at everything Obama/Kerry perpetrated onto the Middle East, showing very clearly where their loyalties lie.
        It is also a strict Israeli policy not to comment internationally, on any political developments in the region that do not directly involve Israel.
        Stop your lying propaganda.

        • victor67

          Nonsense. Like all the major powers in the region Israel like Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia has a stake in Syria.
          In 2011 they saw it as a chance to weaken the Shia axis of resistance and get rid of Assad. Now its not so clear cut. The stalemate suits Israel. It keeps Hezbullah bogged down fighting ISIL and Al Nusra but they don’t want Assad to fall and an ungoverned space filled with the likes of ISIL and Al Qaeda on their Northern border.
          Why do you think they have helped the Russians?

    • PW

      I couldn’t agree more Patricia! If we underestimate this man and his particular narrative we will come to regret it!

  • afriendtothecourt

    Talking of dodging and twisting Nick Cohen is an expert. he misquotes and misrepresents Corbyn’s views and then calls him out for them. Most of what Corbyn says is common sense, but Cohen is so unwilling to take responsibiltiy for the chaos of the Iraq war for which he was a gungho supporter that he does everything to blame corbyn for his own irresponsibility and preference for the howings of the Blairite mob to any calm and rational analysis of what’s necessary for peace in the Middle east

    • PW

      Most of what Corbyn says is common sense!!?? Maybe on the planet Zog but not in Britain it doesn’t!

  • afriendtothecourt

    Nick Cohen “ignorant cliche monger” check Outright lies misrep

    “To take the most brazen instance, he condemned the assassination of Mohammed ‘Jihadi John’ Emwazi by saying it would have been better if he had been brought before a court. So it would.”

    So you criticise a man for saying something you agree with. The level of Blairite denial knows no bounds .

    “ndeed he is ‘not happy’ with police shooting to kill terrorists murdering British citizens on British streets.”

    Either Cohen is an outright liar,or a man whose ability to dodge and twist beats anything that the Labour left can come up with. That’s not what Corbyn said despite the best efforts of those from the BBC to the Spectator to distort him. He is not happy with a shoot to kill policy which involves killing people who the police think might one day murder British citizens, which off course includes as collateral damage killing people who are on their way to the tube in the morning. I would expect most liberals’ (as Mr Cohen once claimed to be) to share Mr Corbyn’ concern with summary execution. But Cohen’s bile is so enormous he’s prepared to abandon all his principles to strike a blow aginst his straw man

    • ill-liberal

      He didn’t criticise him for saying something he agreed with, he criticised him for refusing to provide an option to deal with a man who was murdering innocent people. It’s because he’s quite happy with the likes of Jihadi John killing westerners because he hates the west as well. This article is on the money, you can tell by the amount of comments by Corbynites that are attacking it. Truth hurts, enjoy it as there will be a lot more of it.

      • Lenin

        ” It’s because he’s quite happy with the likes of Jihadi John killing westerners because he hates the west as well. ”

        What hyperbole. Funny that you right wingers call left wingers “totalitarians” and “PC police” yet have no problem with extrajudicial assassination without trial and ultra-militarized gang-ho police shooting innocent people in the tube by accident.

        Funny it’s the left standing up for freedom and not cowering in fear of Terrorism, while the right would be fine with military/police checkpoints on every street it seems.

        • ill-liberal

          Quite funny to accuse someone of hyperbole and then finish with your last sentence. When did I generalise the left as totalitarians ?? I didn’t as I realise a totalitarian can come from either side and that I’m much closer politically to a left winger at the libertarian end than I am to a right winger at the totalitarian.

          But as we’re generalising, ‘the left’ , by which I’m referring to Marxists and wet blanket, bleeding heart liberals are definitely cowering in fear. They seem happy to give up our defences and allow our wonderful society to be rolled over as long as they can’t be accused of islamaphobia. The ‘left’, thankfully is a complete mess and the one good thing about Corbyn is that it will make people realise the term is meaningless there isn’t simply two sides to every debate.

    • JayPee28bpr

      You know full well that what Corbyn actually said was that he would not authorise police/military to kill terrorists actually in the process of killing members of the general public, as in the case of the concert venue in Paris. He may subsequently have tried to adjust his position, but he knows what he said (and really meant), and so do you. More importantly, so do the rest of us.

      Where I disagree with Cohen’s argument is that “privileged westerners” were the victims in Paris. None of the survivors I’ve seen speaking about their experiences last Friday looked very privileged to me. Nor, incidentally, can I visualise 200 passengers on a Russian low-cost airline flight meeting my definition of privilege (as an aside, what is Corbyn’s view on Putin taking military action in retaliation for that? Must be a bit of a dilemma. Has super-communicator Seumas Milne not got his orders from the Kremlin on the line to take yet?)

      We have seen Corbyn and his crew (Livingstone) for what they really are this week: people with no respect, understanding, or even the remotest interest in progressing the interests of the working class and our most vulnerable. They are as far removed from the traditions of Labour’s founders as it is possible to get.

      • afriendtothecourt

        What he * actually said was
        “Mr Corbyn said: “I’m not happy with the shoot-to-kill policy in general – I think that is quite dangerous and I think can often can be counterproductive.
        “I think you have to have security that prevents people firing off weapons where you can, there are various degrees for doing things as we know.
        “But the idea you end up with a war on the streets is not a good thing.””

        Operational matters in these cases are not the business of the Prime Minister

        • JayPee28bpr

          Unfortunately for you, Andrew Neil has just tweeted a link to a document signed up to by Shadow Chancellor McDonnell prior to the election. That document calls for the disbandment of MI5, and the disarming of the police. So, whilst “operational matters in these cases are not the business of the Prime Minister”, it’s pretty easy to limit the police’s options if you take away the ones you don’t like by withholding the equipment necessary for them to have the option in the first place.

          Like I say, we all know what Corbyn was trying to say: terrorism is always honourable, and terrorists are more deserving of the right to life than the rest of us.

          • afriendtothecourt

            The links that Mr Neil may or may not tweet, are not really reelvant to what Mr Corbyn said. Bt you and Mr Cohen have decided that it doesn’t matter what Corbyn did or didn;t say to the BBC. The words the Daily Telegraph are assigning to him are enough to condemn him as a traitor. Incidentally if Mr neil’s life were to have the same level of scrutiny there would i’m sure be some interesting revelations.

        • starfish

          So which shoot to kill policy was he talking about Comrade?

          The normal 24 hourly one by which the police fills the morgues with thousand of bodies or the specific anti-terrorist one when a terrorist threatens people’s lives and gets cleanly dispatched by a well-trained police firearms officer in accordance with the law of the land?

  • WFB56

    “Far from being authentic, Jeremy Corbyn is one of the most dishonest politicians you will see in your lifetime.” A fantastic line which should be oft-repeated.

    • PW

      It’s a line that as voters we should never forget.

    • bladerunner998

      The last time I checked he’s stuck with his principles that he had decades ago.

      • Kjafc

        True, he’s been consistent with his sympathy for terrorists! His pacifism knows no bounds.

        • bladerunner998

          Is there nothing else you can say other than unsupported assertions and smears on Corbyn?

          • Old Fox

            I repeat: the man that happily shared platforms with Sinn Fein at the height of the IRA bombing campaign (but not with other parties to the conflict) is clearly a terrorist sympathiser. This is known, demonstrated, irrefutable public knowledge and will remain so, despite the strenuous propaganda of a few vicious, Stalinist trolls.

          • Mach III

            Instead of naming someone a ”terrorist sympathizer” – look at what that means.

            It means that beneath ideology we are all humans. Before thought has a chance to play around, we’re humans.

            Terrorists are humans that have become corrupted by extreme fanatical ideologies. The bombings going on in their countries makes sure that the people there are susceptible to these extremist ideologies.

            The way to get rid of terrorism is to change the conditions in which it strives. That is by putting peace in those areas.

            You seem like quite an intelligent human being; where in this logic do you not understand, or disagree with?

            When a flower is not healthy, we don’t mess around with the flower, we change the environment in which it grows. It’s the same with humans.

            The president of America, Barrack Obama, has said that ISIS started from the conflict that the USA brought to the middle east. This is fact. So more conflict is not going to change that. Furthermore, it is because there is conflict that all the refugees are leaving their countries. It’s too unstable for them to live there, they take their chances at drowning at sea. It’s hard for countries to accommodate all these people, so why not have collaborative efforts to restore their countries to accommodate them?

            There has been conflict for both yours and my life time, and our parents life times, and our parents parents life times etc. How is conflict supposed to seize if countries are pro war?

            We can’t have a world of peace if we are pro violence. A world of peace is a world I want to live in, and J Corbyn is one of the few that are for that kind of paradigm.

            If you happy for someone to go to war, would you be willing to participate – to be one of those soldiers; ready to die for your beliefs? Realizing that you are going to kill another human being that is wanting to die for his beliefs.

            Why not just put beliefs to bed treat humans as humans, and help those caught in belief to stop with their nonsense. It is belief that separates, and it is belief that brings conflict.

          • TheJustCity

            A world of peace is a world I want to live in, and J Corbyn is one of the few that are for that kind of paradigm.

            A ‘world of peace’…what in the name of sanity? – You clearly haven’t read the piece. Like any conventional extremist ideologue, Corbyn is quite comfortable with politically-sanctioned death.

          • S M


    • smoke me a kipper

      Must be why Corbyn poll ratings are higher than those of any other political party leader

  • mickey667

    This article is based on anger, not analysis.

    It is bullshit. Utter bulshit

    • PW

      The truth sometimes hurts!

      • Claire Williams

        Sounds like his supporters are in denial: they’ve bought faulty goods but can’t accept that they’ve made a mistake. “No, no, it’s really a valuable item, just needs a little more time to sort things out and it will be as brilliant as I thought it would be.”

    • Bob-B

      You’ve assembled an impressive array of facts in support of your argument.

    • S M

      Profound analysis, right there.

    • JayPee28bpr

      Thanks for your example of the kinder politics Mr Corbyn encourages. Not quite in the league of Ken Livingstone’s contribution, but a good first attempt.

    • SkyBluePM

      Which part can you PROVE is bullshit? Were any of the quotes inaccurate? Or what you are REALLY saying is bullshit = found out ? If so then YES it is bullshit utter bullshit.

      • Lenin

        Everything in this article is based on moronic hyperbole. “The lefts opinion” is literally the opinion of the CIA, other intellegence agencies and US think tanks. Are they anti-west? Are you seriously going to argue that western imperialism isn’t the primary driving factor of Terrorism when even the CIA identifies it as such?

        • starfish

          You chose the right pseudonym comrade

    • Kjafc

      Mickey667. If you do not like this article and claim it is BS, why not provide your reasons why? You have the right to put your case and provide evidence to support it, as we live ina democracy. So please provide your reasoning..

      • starfish

        This is the level of political analysis in the left these days

        Ad hominem abuse and whataboutery

    • Sunshine Sux

      Corbyn supporters: eloquent and impressive as per usual.

  • PW

    Superb article that nails Corbyn for what he is! A slippery, devious politician with a pathological hatred of the West. He is also dangerous. God help us all if he ever became PM of this country!

  • Blindsideflanker

    The Corbyn left have always taken an instinctively hostile position to the West while excusing the other party. We saw it over the cold war and we see it now with Corbyn.

  • Ed O’Meara

    That’s rich! If the Conservatives actually stated their true aims and true beliefs, they wouldn’t have got into government. How is life in the bubble?

  • Mark

    If you listen to radio phone-ins, you will still hear people pushing the “he talks honestly,” line.

    For them, he is apparently an economic genius and they shut their eyes and ears to everything else.

  • eileen morris

    What I would love to know is who exactly voted for Jeremy Corbyn, No doubt someone will correct me if I am wrong but by my calculations, he only had 49% of the Labour members, 57% of the union members and 83% of the rest – so who exactly are the rest?

    • Aberrant_Apostrophe


    • Kjafc

      Idiots like those who come on here to make crude comments to other commentators; take a bow Anthony Cavanagh. These people are not interest in facts; they are following an ideology. Corbyns history is easy to research so it is bizarre that people deny it. He is anti-establishment and for a lot of people that is good enough.

      • Anthony Cavanagh

        Thank you Kjafc, funny all I am interested in his facts, but since you are such an expert.
        The are allies the erstwhile saudies are equipping Syrians with portable SAMs.
        Can you tell me does ISIS have an airforce.

      • Anthony Cavanagh

        But you can call me an idiot and I can call you a pompouse windbag ponce, if you want to swap insults

  • SkyBluePM

    I always find it amusing how the comrades are so quick to pronounce Cameron a liar. Maybe he is maybe he isn’t, but NOT ONCE have they ever quoted a lie he is supposed to have made! If you are going to base your entire attack on a supposition, either PROVE your case or withdraw it! And the ultimate irony is they do this in the defence of a man whose been PROVEN a communist sympathiser for nearly 50 years!

    Unless of course you can prove that the morning star isn’t a communist publication, and that Corbyn hasn’t been producing editorial content for them for decades! If so I will gladly withdraw my assertion that Comrade Corbyn is NOT a labour politician, but a communist one using the labour party as a “flag of inconvenience” for him!

    • LG

      Cameron during election campaign (on telly): “There will be no cuts to child tax credits”. – We know what happened after the election.

      Cameron: Before the election (on telly): “Vote blue, go green”, then after the election (in private): “Cut the green crap.”

      If that ain’t lying………….?

      • Dominic Stockford

        ‘No third runway’ – that’ll prove to be a lie.
        ‘We are not considering bringing in same-sex marriage’ – did prove to be a lie.

  • Lucas Thomas

    Brilliant article

    Imagine what a country run by Corbyn and his cronies would end up like….

    Yep, exactly

    • Anthony Cavanagh

      Yes a stop to a never ending war
      A stop to the banks and corportaions bleeding us dry
      maybe the chance to get a decent tory party as well

      • starfish

        Never-ending war?

        You still reading 1984?

        • Anthony Cavanagh

          So you are telling me we are not fighting a never ending war. I do half agree with you. last time I came back from Iraq, some civvies at aprty asked me were we stil in Iraq. I guess Xfactor and Big Brother and corry street is more important.

          • starfish

            We are not at war

            If we were we would be committing a darn sight more resources to it

      • David S

        Corportaions? Are they like Mysterons?

    • starfish


      • Dominic Stockford

        That good? Gosh you’re hopeful.

    • Sunshine Sux

      Gaza? Southern Lebanon? North Korea?

    • Richard de Lacy

      Great Britain, post-1997

    • Mach III

      Would be close to heaven.

  • Fenman

    Of course he is dishonest, he’s a Marxist-Leninist, and so the end always justifies the means. The end in Corbyn/McDonnel/ McCluskeys case means the destruction of British society as we know it.
    Notice too they have all been passionate supporters of the IRA , that psychopathic murderous bunch of anti-British criminals.

    • Frank

      The other fundamental problem with Corbyn is that he doesn’t appear to be very bright. I don’t say that to be nasty, but just what was the Parliamentary Labour party doing putting him forward. Surely they knew he was thick and had childish opinions? Neither am I being partisan. As far as I can tell as an outsider, the Conservatives have plenty of thick MPs with childish opinions, but at least the party does not promote them to the top position.

      • Anthony Cavanagh

        Doesnt it

        • Kjafc

          “Doesnt it”.
          You don’t appear to have the intelligence to realise that you undermine yourself with every comment! That’s funny.

      • Fraziel

        Think you forgot about IDS there, but apart from that i would agree.

      • John P Hughes

        Yes. See further comment on Jeremy Corbyn’s academic record and attitude to education, above.

      • madasafish

        The PLP have as many brains as a flock of sheep. They act like a flock of sheep as well..

  • RogueTrooper

    Superb article.

  • Lenin

    This article is literally one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read. Seriously, you don’t deserve a Journalism degree.
    Looking at complex geopolitical issues deeply and understanding motivations, drive and failure of western foreign policy (which IS imperialist and has brought unfathomable horror to the developing world) isn’t accusing or supporting IS. In fact, go read what captured IS prisoners say when they join IS, fun fact, most don’t even know anything about Islam, they talk about how their families were bombed and killed and how their lives were ruined during Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Yemen and other countless Western clusterf***s in the region.
    It only isn’t IS members that say this, the CIA, MI6 and US geopolitical thinktanks have all said the same thing. Is the CIA and MI6 and washington thinktanks all anti-west? Oh, they must be in your moronic braindead opinion because how dare they identify Western escapades as the primary driving cause of anti-western Terrorism.

    Again, you’re an idiot and the vast majority of people in these comments are idiots. My god, pull your heads out.

    • madasafish


      Pity then that all the Paris bombers were EC citizens.. so disproving your ” , they talk about how their families were bombed and killed and how their lives were ruined during Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Yemen and other countless Western clusterf***s in the region.”

      And Jihadi John was British born and bred.
      As were the killers of Lee Rigby
      And the 7th July 2005 UK bombers were – British born.

      So your comments about others being “idiots” just show how pitifully wrong and ignorant of the facts you are.

      • rolandfleming

        spot on

      • nancoise

        Furthermore, then why are they killing the Yazidis? The Yazidis never bothered anyone.

        And why are British born and raised Muslims getting on planes to go murdering with Daesh? Their friends and relatives are all here, safe and sound, educated and having their health care from the state, the same as the rest of us.

        Lenin (above) is looking for a geopolitical explanation. Perhaps it is more elemental than that. Perhaps the explanation lies deep in the human heart. Put a gun in my hand and I am powerful, ‘most wanted man in Europe’, I have an apocalyptic importance. Give me a job as a waiter…not so much.

        • Kaisa Chi

          as far as i know, it’s actually written in islamic law, that should there be a caliphate, then devout muslims are honour bound to go and live there. This is a big part of ISIS/Daesh’s pulling power, as they were able to get territory to declare a caliphate.This is what makes them so seductive to hardcore muslims and fundamentalists.

          And of course, this was only made possible by the iraq war stirring everything up and also, being waged with (shall we say) a patina of genuine understanding for the people /religion/culture and for democracy, given that its primary goal wasn’t really any of that (more a side issue). Followed of course by flooding of guns and ars into Libya and Syria, to anyone who wasn’t part of the regime, irrespective of whether they were fundamentalist or not.

          • Dominic Stockford

            It is part of the effort they have to make to bring about the end-times. Firstly, reconquer all the territory that Islam has previously held. Look out Spain, Portugal, and on, and on…

      • Dominic Stockford

        We don’t yet know who thyey all were – and to call them EC citizens is rather disingenuous. Several were not born in the EC, and only recently arrived.

        • madasafish

          Reports say they were. The ringleader certainly was.

          It matters not.. The UK ones were all UK born. So Lenin was writing rubbish and had not even the simple basic knowledge of his subject . Either he’s stupid or disingenuous – or both.


          None of what Lenin says explains Boko Haram who killed over 6,000 last year I believe. They’re all in Africa.. No doubt Lenin could explain that Africans invaded Muslim lands and the action BH took was in retaliation..Or some such gibberish.

          He’s just a child with no knowledge of his subject.

          • Lenin

            What I’m writing is rubbish? Jesus christ just listen to yourself. How stupid can you be?

      • Lenin

        “so disproving your”
        Or you know, maybe you can not be braindread for once.
        How can you be angry about France if you are not directly related to one of the victims in your retarded opinion? Its almost like Muslims feel they are globally under attack with MILLIONS of people for decades have been killed by Western Foreign Policy. An Arab in London can feel pain for the 500,000 children in Iraq alone killed by the US and that pain is what IS and other such groups prey on.

        But of course, all Arabs are genocidal robots who hate the west for no reason aren’t they in your opinion?

        • madasafish

          You are ranting and accusing me of of things I have not said.
          Typical leftwinger then..

    • starfish

      Perhaps your research should extend beyond the press releases of Stop The War

      Perhaps you could research the schism in Islam and the consequences down through the Crusades, the Ottoman Empire and two World Wars to the present day oil-wealthy middle east islamic states

      It ain’t as simple as your anti-western groupthink comrade

      • Lenin

        Sorry, the head of MI6 and the CIA are “Stop the War”? Cool story bro.

  • Kjafc

    One of the most accurate things I have read for a while. Corbyn has spent most of his career courting and supporting terrorists. Let us not forget his feelings about the IRA. He attended and spoke at official republican commemorations to
    honour dead IRA terrorists, He referred to the IRA terrorists as “prisoners of war” and the active
    “soldiers of the IRA.”.

    Corbyn was general secretary of the editorial board of a hard-Left magazine which wrote an article praising the IRA’s Brighton bombing. In its article.The editorial board of London Labour Briefing said the atrocity showed that “the British only sit up and take notice when they are bombed into it.”
    According to an authoritative parliamentary reference work, Mr Corbyn
    was general secretary of the editorial board. He wrote the front-page
    story in the same issue of Briefing. Is this the work of a pacifist? Corbyn is not a pacifist, he seems to be a supporter of terorrism.

    He cited Bin ladens death as ‘a tragedy’ and claims Hezbollah and Hamas are his ‘friends’. Now he blames the Paris bombings on the West and was forced by other Labour members to make a U Turn on his comments about the shoot to kill policy. Corbyn has a pathological hatred for us. A very, very treachorous and dangerous man.

    • Anthony Cavanagh

      Nice read apart from a;ll you wrote was to use the polite term a pile of sweaty bollox

      • Kjafc

        Anthony. It is all true. Why don’t you go and do the research instead of making yourself look stupid with such childish comments. Andrew Gillgan himself wrote an excellent well researched article exposing Jermey Corbyns links with the IRA and the Labour Briefing.

        Just because you dont like what you read does not mean it is untrue. Trying to debate without presenting any facts by simply resorting to abuse is pretty pathetic.

        • Kaisa Chi

          the quote about bin laden, was that he disagreed with extra judicial killing, and thought it was a tragedy that western democracy wasn’t upheld, by bringing him to trial… so anti west yep, you’re right…

          • Robert Eckert

            He was making an equivalence, that this was just as tragic as anything bin Laden did. “It’s a tragedy that Hitler invaded Poland. It’s a tragedy that Hitler bombed London. It’s a tragedy that Hitler murdered millions. It’s a tragedy that we didn’t get to put Hitler on trial.” One of these things is not like the others.

          • Sunshine Sux

            A round of tissues for Bin Laden over here please.

          • JamesB0nd

            In the case of both Emzawi and bin Laden Corbyn’s regret that they weren’t brought to trial is wholly disingenuous because he knew that it was impossible, and that if it were left to him it would never even have been attempted.

            So in Corbyn’s world both would still be alive, and constructively, it appears that’s what he would prefer to be the case.

            When he said bin Laden’s death was a tragedy, a rational interpretation is that he meant exactly that.

        • Anthony Cavanagh

          I agree about the IRA, but many on the right had strong links with the UDA and the UFF.
          But everything I have posted is true.
          Training and arming insurgents
          Arming or losing weapons
          Saudies are mani allies supporting terror groups
          In fact even when I was based in Basra, you would think they were all Iran sponsored groups. There was Sunni Suadi grpup taking pot shots at us.
          So I want you to tell me now, saying that Iraq to Syria was a total cluster f**k, is that anti western or not ?

        • Kaisa Chi

          as far as hamas and hez’bollah are concerned – he referred to them as friends in a public meeting, but has never said that they were specifically friends. And I’m not sure why that is so bad tbh… yes they are terrible, but so is the situaltion of the palestinians. I can’t imagine growing up in gaza, being bombed, no freedom, separated from the land my parents and grandparents etc lived on for centuries. I’m not in the slightest anti jewish, but the manner in which the state of Israel was formed, and what that has led to, was wrong. No good can come of ‘means to and end’ look what happened in Iraq…

          • Bob-B

            If ‘friends’ was just a matter of being polite and didn’t really mean anything, you should be able to show that he has applied the same term to various Israeli groups such as Likud. Of course, he hasn’t.

            In much the same way, if his links with the IRA were just a matter of promoting a peace process in Northern Ireland, you should be able to show that he has had similar links with Protestant paramilitaries. Again, he hasn’t.

          • JamesB0nd

            I’m sure there is plenty of evidence of his sharing a platform with the National Front and the BNP, as well. Many are the times, I feel sure, that Jeremy has sat down with members of Combat 18, or visited America and met wizards of the Ku Klux Klan as his friends, in order to understand where they are coming from.

            No doubt he regularly meets British soldiers, in order to understand all perspectives.

            Or maybe it’s only anti-western terrorists he’s bezzy mates with.

          • Sunshine Sux

            That’s nothing! You should read up how 50+ enormous muslim countries were formed on 3 continents.
            Especially Turkey, Lebanon, Syria and Egypt – all of which used to be 100% Christian.

      • KingEric

        And you would recognise sweaty bollox. Every single one of your posts is comprised of 100% bollox.

    • GUBU

      ‘The British only take notice when they are bombed into it’.

      Hopefully that is not the approach Labour’s new leadership are going to take for the 2020 general election campaign.

      Though looking at the way more conventional methods are working for them…

  • sidor

    “Islamists who massacred civilians”


    Dear Nick! There is no branch of Islam called “Islamism”. Possible reason for your writing this rubbish:

    1. You are sincerely unaware that the terrorists represent Wahhabi Islam which is the official ideology in KSA.

    2. You know who exactly they are, but dare not to name them because of political correctness.

    3. Any linear combination of 1 and 2.

    • Soondra Appavoo

      What a ridiculous comment. There clearly is an understood form of Islamic fascism which is Islamism. And Islamism is not limited to Wahhabi Islam. Cohen’s article is cogent and clear; your comment is not.

      • sidor

        Islamism isn’t limited to the Wahhabi Islam because the term “Islamism” has no real meaning: it is a part of political demagoguery intended to hide the reality. But the phenomenon of Islamic terrorism is limited to the Wahhabism.

        • Bob-B

          Islamism is a set fo totalitarian political philosophies based on Islam. If we don’t call these philosophies Islamism, what else should we call? And the phenomenon of Islamic terrorism is not limited to the Wahhabism. Hezbollah are not Wahabis..

          • sidor

            You should call a spade a spade. Provided you know how to distinguish a spade from a brush. You cannot win if you don’t dare to name the enemy, using idiotic euphemisms.

            And what kind of problem have you noticed with Hisbollah? Was it involved in any terrorist act in the West? Or you are possibly unhappy that it fights against ISIS?

  • Mungus Blanchart

    Corbyn and the Guardianistas policy on ISIS, Hamas etc is very reminiscent of their recent positions on Latin America from 2000 to about last year.

    FARC guerrillas, Hugo Chavez, Kirchner, the Castros, Rafael Correa were all emblematic of rejecting the Western consensus, the rights of indigenous minorities, ending poverty etc. On the other hand the Pacific Alliance of Mexico, Colombia, Chile and Mexico with it’s commitment to a liberal market economy was the bastion of evil, corrupt, pro-American elites. People like Uribe used ‘right-wing militias’ to kill innocent peasants etc, thwart democracy.

    Come 2015 Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador are all basket cases with rising poverty, crime and debt levels. The regimes are happy to use extrajudicial killings and control the media to stay out of prison. Cuba has jumped ship. The only positive is Morales in Bolivia, who happened to ride out a giant wave of natural gas discoveries. FARC and nearly all the left wing guerrilla movements have given up.

    On the other hand ‘neoliberalism’ has seen economic growth, sustainable debt levels, massive decreases in poverty in Colombia, Mexico, Peru, Chile. All of them still bona fide democracies with actual changes of elected government. Only Mexico has seen a rise in crime rates, Colombia in particular benefiting from Uribe and Santos’s continued military action against FARC.

    Where are all the Chavistas now? Ken Livingstone and the other supporters of Chavez and the Venezuelan regime have blood on their hands.

    • new_number_2

      Mexico is a paradise on earth. No problems there. Nope, no way.

  • Anthony Cavanagh

    Maybe invading Iraq was not a good idea. Shut up you are just anti west

    Maybe supporting one islamic group after another with weapons and training was not a good idea. Shut up you are just anti west

    Maybe the lifes of our soldiers are not worth all these foreign entanglements Shut up you are just anti west

    So why are you not in the army. Shut up you are just sorry force of habit, i would but I have flat feet a sickly chest and rather write poncy articles

  • dazheb

    More lazy misrepresentation of Jeremy Corbyn’s views. Why do some people find it so hard to believe there might be genuine pacifists out there, that they have to twist and misrepresent those people’s views into something they are not. Journalism at its most irresponsible.

    • Kjafc

      dazheb You seem confused. You cannot be a pacifist and support terrorism. Corbyn is not a pacifist he has history as a supporter of terrorism. His involvement with the IRA back in the seventies and eighties is well documented, so too his support for them. He argued against the peace treaty. A pacifist?

    • Dominic Stockford

      “If Isis kills them, it is their own or their governments’ fault.”

      Which means that ISIS is justified in using violence, which means that those such as Corbyn’s mates who say such things (and probably Corbyn himself, if he ever stood still long enough to give a straight answer on it) cannot possibly be pacifists.

  • Martin

    didn’t Tony make friends with the IRA…. just sayin’

  • Minnie the Sooh

    Spot on again Nick. We both grew up with these people in North London, I opposed them all my life – why did it take you so long to see them for what they are? It was tough being introduced as “my right-wing friend” at QC D’s parties all those years. Thankfully, something I no longer have to put up with. SC

    • Anthony Cavanagh

      Ask a question what is a QC D’s parties, I grew up in the east end but had mates in finsbury Park

  • Anthony Cavanagh

    You write “This flawless example of what I once called the ‘kill us, we deserve it’ school of political analysis” You got it wrong you mean, dont kill us, here is money and weapons go kill, but pinky swear not to use them against us

  • Anthony Cavanagh

    Is this another exaple of being anti west

    The Pentagon is unable to account for more than $500 million in U.S. military aid given to Yemen, amid fears that the weaponry, aircraft and equipment is at risk of being seized by Iranian-backed rebels or al-Qaeda, according to U.S. officials.

    With Yemen in turmoil and its government splintering, the Defense Department has lost its ability to monitor the whereabouts of small arms, ammunition, night-vision goggles, patrol boats, vehicles and other supplies donated by the United States. The situation has grown worse since the United States closed its embassy in Sanaa, the capital, last month and withdrew many of its military advisers.

    Is it anti west to lose so much military kit

    • Pioneer

      Correct. Obama is anti west.

  • sammy gravano


    Jeremy Care-in-the-Community’s ‘passivism’ all there.

    Along with Liar O’ Donnell’s.

  • sammy gravano

    ps Abdelhamid Abaaoud dec’d.

    Long hair – tick

    Beard – tick

    Mass murderer – tick

    Comeuppance – tick

    Woohoo, the nasty left have found their new tee-shirt boy.

    Move out Che

    • new_number_2

      Lord Kitchener had a mustache and died during a war.

      Just sayin’.

    • The_greyhound

      Brilliant! Bennie cumberbatch will certainly be pre-ordering.

      The morons at the grauniad produced a Che-type T shirt design with Snowden’s face on it. They waxed wrathful with me when I pointed out that it was yellow, the traditional colour of cowards and traitors. I often think modern pinkos are a lot dimmer than when I was young.

      This one is good too : young people have such a wide choice of exciting role models!

  • Anthony Cavanagh

    Russia’s military intervention in Syria is helping to support the “butcher” President Bashar al-Assad, David Cameron has said.

    The prime minister said Russian forces were not discriminating between Islamic State militants and others fighting the Syrian president.

    Earlier, Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said Russia’s “unguided” bombing in Syria led to civilian deaths.
    is this anti east or anti west. Come on Nicky Boy

  • Anthony Cavanagh

    Saudis Agree to Provide Syrian Rebels With Mobile Antiaircraft Missiles
    U.S. Also Giving Fighters Millions of Dollars for Salaries AMMAN, Jordan—Washington’s Arab allies, disappointed with Syria peace talks, have agreed to provide rebels there with more sophisticated weaponry, including shoulder-fired missiles that can take down jets.
    Is this anti or pro west

  • Fraziel

    Its not even worth debating to be honest, we all know he is an anti west, terrorist sympathiser but he has no chance of getting a sniff at power so why waste time and energy talking about him, and yes i know i am doing it now.. Labour will get slaughtered at the next election and i full expect them to post the worst result in their history.He wont last until 2020 though. When the horrendous results come in for the first elections with him in charge he will be bulleted shortly after. I hope not, would love to see them gutted in 2020 and i am not even a tory. I am popping along to the bookies to see what odds i can get on them getting under 200 seats, maybe even less than 175. I expect i will get short odds.

  • starfish

    Is it just me or is the current crop of leftie trolls even worse than the last?

    Beginning to thing they might have reached the high water mark with Telemachus

    And there’s a thought

    • Desperate Dan’s Porridge

      There is no limit, absolutely no limit, to the sheer crass banality and stupidity of leftists. Telemachus is but the tip of their iceberg of idiocy.

      • JamesB0nd

        He is all tip and no iceberg.

    • Malcolm Stevas

      Shouldn’t that be “low water mark”? The smelly mudflats exposed when the tide goes out..?

  • Torybushhug


    “Make no mistake, this has nothing to do with ordinary Islam, this is about criminal behavior”

    “The vast majority of Muslims want nothing to do with extremism”

    “Immigrants do not come here to claim benefits” (so why don’t they shun the border people showing
    them a menu of entitlements then?)

    “Before we go dropping bombs, isn’t it about time we cut off ISIS funding” (trying to down play the role mainstream Muslims have in ousting all the bigotry and division enshrined in the cult)

    “If imperialist Britain and America had kept their noses out of the Arab world we wouldn’t be
    reaping this wind”

    “The real issue is Saudi funding of ISIS, the very kingdom we rolled out the red carpet

    • Anthony Cavanagh

      So are you saying that you

      Dont want to cut of ISIS funding

    • Anthony Cavanagh

      The saudies are equipping “moderate ” syrian fighters with portable SAMS
      When did ISIS get a airforce

  • Oliver

    Nick, you are one of the most important voices in Britain today.

  • AlexanderGalt

    It is amazing. I’ve spent the last few days in Facebook arguments with liberals. I quote a fact followed by a sentiment or an outrageous silly fact from them, e.g., “Hitler was a catholic, so should we blame catholicism for the Holocaust?” I think it’s going to take several nuclear strikes on our major cities to shift liberal thinking an inch away from their multicultural safe zone.

  • Anthony Cavanagh

    When President Obama announced in August 2010 the end of U.S. combat operations in Iraq, he complimented the soldiers who had served there for completing “every mission they were given.” But some of military’s most senior officers, in a little-noticed report this spring, rendered a harsher account of their work that highlights repeated missteps and failures over the past decade, in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

    There was a “failure to recognize, acknowledge and accurately define” the environment in which the conflicts occurred, leading to a “mismatch between forces, capabilities, missions, and goals,” says the assessment from the Pentagon’s Joint Staff. The efforts were marked by a “failure to adequately plan and resource strategic and operational” shifts from one phase of the conflicts to the next.

    Bloody US generals with there liberal anti west rhetorik

  • @MisterSob

    What a preposterous column; stacked full of ad hominem attacks but lacking in critical thought or analysis.

    Is this really the best you have to offer, Mr Cohen?

    “Defends terrorists…hates the West…loved Stalin”

    Really? This is junior school analysis.

    If Milne is a Stalinist, is Peter Hitchens too? He also disputes your baseless assertion that Russia “invaded” Ukraine – as made clear even by Ukranian officials http://youtu.be/b3nL4i914m0

    If Russia was to invade Ukraine, they have a 1200 mile border in which to invade from, yet the troubles were concentrated in the south east – coincidentally where the native Russian population were being massacred by Western sponsored fascists.

    The rest of the column follows in similarly uninformed, immature fashion – “Corbyn defended the IRA, Hezbollah, Hamas”. Are you really unable to analyse the distinction between defending the goal of these organisations and defending the method in which they go about achieving those aims? Or are you just paid to obfuscate these issues instead of actually critically analysing why these organisations exist in the first place?

    I suspect I am similar to Corbyn in that I condone all violence, but do support the right of people to organise against oppression. If he hates the West, why has he spent his entire political life fighting for the rights of working class people in the West? Or are you suggesting all working class people are also “anti-West”? What does it even mean? What is anti-West? Aren’t ISIS anti-West? Are you equating Corbyn with ISIS?

    This article is so profoundly parochial, I am left wondering whether you’re paid specifically to espouse this rhetoric. Shame on you either way.

    • David R

      I don’t think it’s Milne’s opinions on Ukraine that make him a Stalinist, more the fact that he’s spent his career defending, erm, Stalin.

      • @MisterSob

        Except he hasn’t at all, has he?

        What he has done is challenged the historical narrative surrounding communism, whilst accepting that Stalin was a brutal dictator. That’s not a defence of Stalin, it’s an attempt to provoke discussion about the economic systems people live under.

    • Robert Eckert

      “Are you equating Corbyn with ISIS?” He’s a “fellow traveller”.

  • Anthony Cavanagh

    The Pentagon foresaw the likely rise of the ‘Islamic State’ as a direct consequence of this strategy, and warned that it could destabilize Iraq. Despite anticipating that Western, Gulf state and Turkish support for the “Syrian opposition” — which included al-Qaeda in Iraq — could lead to the emergence of an ‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the document provides no indication of any decision to reverse the policy of support to the Syrian rebels. On the contrary, the emergence of an al-Qaeda affiliated “Salafist Principality” as a result is described as a strategic opportunity to isolate Assad.
    More anti west liberalism is it Nicky Boy

  • Certainly if the police are going to pull in for questioning people whose words and actions are likely to encourage terrorism, we shall be seeing Steptoe in a police cell before long.

  • Steve Ennever

    Zip it, Cohen. We’re no longer an Empire. We’re just Washington’s “go to” thugs. If you’re happy with that then fine.
    But a lot of us aren’t & prefer to study what is actually happening objectively. It can be painful, but it’s necessary, because if we don’t then the same cycle of war & destruction will just continue.

    • The_greyhound

      In English that reads

      “Here in me tin hat, with me hands over me ears”

      • Steve Ennever

        ‘The official Kuwait News Agency said police arrested a Lebanese citizen described as the ringleader named Osama Khayat, who admitted to helping IS recruit fighters and raise money that was sent to IS-related bank accounts in Turkey. The Interior Ministry said Khayat also admitted to closing weapons deals in Ukraine and using Turkey as a route to send weapons to IS fighters in Syria, where the group controls territory.’

        Ukraine – Mr Cameron’s attempt at a post soviet utopia.
        That’s our tax money.
        But I digress.

        This is a tiny example of the real problem. The one that Corbyn eluded to.
        You must cut the off veins to ISIS, some of which we & are allies are directly & indirectly involved.

        If you attack them before doing this you are simply fueling the hatred that caused them to form in the first place – not only abroad, but within your own countries.


  • Dominic Stockford

    “If Isis kills them, it is their own or their governments’ fault.”

    Which means that ISIS is justified in using violence, which means that those such as Corbyn’s mates who say such things (and probably Corbyn himself, if he ever stood still long enough to give a straight answer on it) cannot possibly be pacifists.

  • Mark Whitehead

    I like Nick Cohen’s attack on “ignorant cliche mongers”. Very drole! In fact the whole piece is surely some kind of joke. Serious journalism, it is not.

    • Desperate Dan’s Porridge

      It is perfectly reasonable assessment of a hypocritical, dishonest leftist. You do not agree that is all. There is nothing wrong with the article.

  • John P Hughes

    From the various summaries of his life, it appears that Jeremy Corbyn was the least successful academically of his family – he has three brothers who all did better. He didn’t make University, started a course at a Polytechnic, dropped out after a year.

    Then when his second wife Claudia insisted on sending their eldest son to a good school, Queen Elizabeth’s School Barnet (founded by the Queen’s charter in 1573 hence the name), he split up with her. (Whether Corbyn’s second and third sons followed the first to QE Barnet the press doesn’t seem to to found out.)

    A good education doesn’t appear to be something that Corbyn either prides himself on having had or was particularly interested in obtaining for his children. This would indicate that he is not someone who should lead a major political party in a country which possesses some of the world’s top universities and is a leader in research.

    • David Jenkins

      Elitist ar*eh*le. Many people don’t do well academically but have intelligence.

      • Ahobz

        Many people do, but Corbyn is not one of them.

      • The_greyhound

        An ar*eh*le like corbyn is both thick and uneducated. And it shows.

      • Ooh!MePurse!


      • John P Hughes

        An earlier comment below by a reader is:
        “The other fundamental problem with Corbyn is that he doesn’t appear to be very bright. I don’t say that to be nasty, but just what was the Parliamentary Labour party doing putting him forward.”

        Jeremy Corbyn’s academic career and his attitude to his sons’ education – he didn’t want them to get the best education available and accessible, and split his family over it – indicate that he does not have the education that other political leaders have ot attach importance to it. Jim Callaghan (born 1912) did not have a degree because, although he passed exams that qualified him he did not have the money to attend university and went into the civil service direct. All other Labour leaders since World War Two have had university degrees.

  • 1958Paul

    Hezbollah are currently fighting ISIS alongside Assad. It is ridiculous to say that decades of Western destabilization of middle-Eastern states has done nothing to create the situation we are in. And if we are so concerned with murderous regimes why don’t we cast our net wider – into Africa for instance. No, it’s rubbish. We created Al Qaeda, we currently fund Al Nusra, and our mucky fingerprints are all over it.

    • steve patriarca


  • Doodoorudoo

    Beef wrote a massive ‘crocodile tears’ tabloid about a guy who got promoted for crying crocodile tears as well but now is considering changing FROM his PAST like how they’re probably trying to change theirs and he deserves to get bull but they don’t because their hiding?
    If it’s so genius to fire him then isn’t that just 1 sentence- ‘I and his voters think he should be fired.’
    Assad Besharam doesn’t deal in politics nor care to listen open mindedly to other people. How do we know how many rich girlfriends support him or if he actually lives in Paris/America/UK in a safe place?
    Pacifsm as a moral?
    Pacifism was what build politics/the tax money not Assad/US/Afghanistan.
    The roots are pacifists but what’s that got to do with evil tabloids throwing sticks and stones?
    I’m just a passionate learner- I got faith.
    ‘We have no business wasting our blood and treasure in other people’s conflicts’
    Amen. Is a rightly moral if reworded.
    ‘We have no INTEREST OR MONEY spending our hard work/deprived society into crumbles by other society’s wealth’s conflicts/tabloids.’
    Morals are happy endings not tabloids. Tabloids are from English essays, English is from politics, politics is from negotiation of facts not tabloids/crocodile tears.
    So is Assad gonna pay off the deficit of UK in 1 day as he’s better than education, faith and politics from the UK?
    What has Christianity got to do with politics/negotiating/socialising/justified people?
    Christianity is a choice of spirituality. Is he in a church that’s already separate from civilianisation/negotiation of politics? Why so biased? Articles with biased material is considered a failed article in English essays.
    Where is the understanding as it’s picking on the wisdom of passion of transferrable equality?
    So it’s like trying to say the rest of the world is scum who should give their tax money to Egypt who aren’t scum, right like US to Afghanistan? So even the question is a form of unsolicited faith/spiritually.
    -seeing as we’re being biased, crying crocodile tears and failing the English essay on writing a pass grade article all at once-
    Wow I haven’t done this much SherlockHolmes detective work for a long time!
    So how’s SherlockHolmes at detectivry?
    Is he good or am I worse than him?
    This has got nothing to do with me, I believe in sacrifices/giving Assad’s money to away so we could negotiate. I’m not a leader. I have less to worry about. Is there a light at the end of the geographical tunnel?

    • The_greyhound

      The words mean something, if you take them one at a time. Apparently.

  • Kjafc

    Jeremy Corbyns Stop the War Coalition are extremists who seem to want to blame everyone but terrorists for their actions. Thankfully, there are members of the Labour Party who were so outrgaed
    by some of the articles published by Corbyns Stop the War, that they had
    them deleted.

    These articles include one with the headline: “What threatens us most – terrorist attack by radical Islam or being killed by a bee”. Incredible that any sane or sensible person would compose an article
    comparing the mass murders in Paris to being stung by a bee. You would
    have to be pretty stupid and devoid of all compassion for those who died
    in France to publish that load of extreme nonsense. An article that tries to mock those that died Friday night and is nothing short of a disgrace. Well done Coirbyn and Abbot.

    Sorry but it is clear that Corbyn is totally unfit to lead any opposition party, let alone a mainstream one.


  • new_number_2

    Note though that Cohen had no argument for what Stop the War wrote, besides a furious, seething diatribe against Corbyn and the Left.

    The British and Americans backed “a fascistic Islamist movement” in Afghanistan in the 1980’s and the having not learnt any lessons after 9/11 proceeded to back “a fascistic Islamist movement” in Syria from 2011 onwards. In that intervening time numerous Muslim countries were repeatedly bombed, invaded, occupied and destroyed by the West. This is not to absolve the terrorists of their crimes but to make a more nuanced argument for the appearance of al Qaeda and ISIS, something Cohen refuses to engage in, instead waving furiously and pointing saying “quick, look over there”.

    This suits him of course, because opposition to Western military intervention must be discredited to allow future invasions to take place without criticism or proper analysis.

  • Kjafc

    Corbyn is more than just anti-West. He is a sypathiser of terrorism – he always has been. His election as leader of the Labour party will be short lived but the fact this dangerous traitor ever gained that position is very worrying for our Country.

    • new_number_2

      Terrorists in Syria were openly supported, armed and trained by the UK government.

    • bladerunner998

      “He is a sypathiser of terrorism – he always has been”

      Proof and evidence please.

      • Old Fox

        Inviting Adams to Parliament two weeks after the Brighton bomb – oh, not “proof” of actually lighting the blue touch paper – but proof enough of sympathy. And don’t pretend you disapprove of mass butchery – like your friend the shady Shadow chancellor you probably wish Mrs Thatcher had been murdered, don’t you? Be aware that enough of us are fully cognisant of the hard left’s real opinions and attitudes from bitter experience – and of its talent for pious lies.

        • bladerunner998

          If you think Corbyn was inviting Adams for a good ole chat over a nice cup of tea and biscuits then you are obviously deluded.
          As for your Thatcher comment, you are quick to make assumptions. Do you make that mistake a lot?

          • JamesB0nd

            Corbyn was a backbench opposition MP. What could be possibly have contributed except comfort to the IRA?

      • Kjafc

        Read the Labour briefings and in particular Corbyns views on the Brighton bombing. Check Corbyns support for the IRA murderers he called,’soldiers’ and the convicted bombers of innocent people he wanted honoured. Perhaps his ‘friends’ in Hamas and Hezbolla (his words). You may even look up the recent stop the war article (Corbyn is Chair) which was taken down after Labour MP’S complained. In fact there was even an article that claimed Islamic terrorism was less dangerous than bees on the stop the war site – want the link?

        For a pacifist, he sure chooses his friends well.

        He’s a terrorist sympathiser.

        • bladerunner998

          Yup, throw me the link.

          If you really think that Corbyn believes Hamas and Hezbolla are “friends” then I think maybe you should just nod and believe anything that anyone says. He wants to stop wars, not create it.

  • The PrangWizard of England

    We saw the same bizarre self-loathing in a debate today in the House of Commons about climate. The Green party MP Caroline Lucas, and a Tory MP were in agreement that it is vital something is done to reduce greenhouse gases urgently.

    Lucas acknowledged that the UK’s emissions are relatively low and will be inconsequential when our coal-fired power stations are closed shortly. She also acknowledged that other countries including Indonesia (mentioned by the Tory) will rise as they are building new ones.

    However, she said, we should not criticise the Indonesians because we had to take a historical view; we have burned a lot of coal in the past, and should carry on closing our coal-fired stations, she obviously sees this as a form of penance.

  • Mongo

    Telling that Corbyn’s first concern after the Paris massacre was that some Muslims may experience ‘Islamophobia’ as a result

    show exactly whre his loyalties lie

    • Mach III

      It shows that he understands political agendas.

      Yup, shows exactly that his loyalties lie with humanity.

    • E.I.Cronin

      I’d save your buckshot on this nutter Mongo – she’s as mad as a cut snake! Apparently IS are ‘victims’ crying out for ‘understanding’. One trite lecture by a Marxist fairy-godmother and they’d be braiding each other’s beards and talking about home husbanding! :))

  • colchar

    A Marxist hates the West? Colour me shocked!

  • Kenneth Dobson

    Was there ever a “leader” more hopelessly and embarrassingly out of his depth ?

    • Mach III

      Nope, Cameron is the highest of the high.

  • Anybody who thinks that Western governments have not contributed over decades to producing the current mess in the Middle East is either ignorant or wilfully blind. It is deeply worrying that those who are prepared to say so are accused of supporting or justifying terrorism. Nothing can justify the bloodbath in Paris but it cannot be used to inhibit serious discussion about how we got to this point.

    • Miss Floribunda Rose

      Most of those who died in Paris would no doubt agree with your analysis.

    • Mongo

      The mess in the Middle East is largely due to Islam – an ideology which is incapable of producing a functioning democracy, or even a functioning country unless it’s one ruled by a tyrannical murderous dictator.

      The West intervenes, we’re criticised. The West doesn’t intervene, we’re criticised (usually by the same hypocritical people).

      Damned if we do, damned if we don’t. Frankly, I agree with you that it’s probably time to just end all interventions and let the region fight itself to oblivion, since nothing ever seems to change.

      but try to understand one thing, the ISIS terrorists who slaughtered all those people in Paris don’t give the tiniest sh*t about western foreign policy or geopolitics. They just want to kill as many non-Muslims as possible and spread their hideous ideology. And they will continue to do so regardless of our foreign policy decisions

      • red2black

        It seems they didn’t care who they killed.

      • JustSomeChap

        They also want to kill Muslims that don’t adhere to their brand of eschatological Wahabbism. Never forget that for all the Left’s hand wringing about the West, the overwhelming majority of the deaths in the Middle East over the last 50 years have been Muslims killing Muslims.

      • There is some truth in what you say but ‘hideous ideology’ does not offer a total explanation. You have to explain why it has exerted such an appeal and examine the conditions which have incubated it. Ideologies do just drop out of the sky.

    • The_greyhound

      Trying to redraft Stop the War’s last, now humiliatingly withdrawn, attempt to blame the victims?

      • Old Fox

        “Stop the War” is just the cover name for “Keep up the Jihad”.

        • Mach III

          Old fox is just the cover name for “delinquent child.”

          • Old Fox

            Mach III is the cover name for all sorts of personalities: adolescent poseur; snot-nose, left wing git; patronising, limp-wristed Guardian reading luvvie; supercilious, terminally ignorant, socialist drama queen; Pol Pot’s favourite catamite; the Muslim Brotherhood’s preferred doormat; there is no end to his personal diversity.

          • Mach III

            Hahahaha! Very creative!

          • Old Fox

            So glad you enjoyed it; there’s plenty more.

          • Mach III

            Absolutely brilliant, lol.

      • So many assumptions. I know nothing about Stop the War or what you call their attempt to blame the victims. it is precisely this sort of response that inhibits serious discussion

      • Mach III

        Attempt to blame the victims… ISIS are victims. The Syrians are victims. Their land is uninhabitable, and the reason why is because Cameron, and the US are bowing to Saudi’s.

  • Phil Jones

    An incredibly lazy and deeply arrogant piece from Cohen, full of hyperbole, stereotypes and ingrained prejudices.

    I happen to believe that Corbyn is remarkably ill suited to be leader of the Labour Party. I also think that several of his appointments to the shadow cabinet simply carry too much ideology driven historical baggage with them for a Corbyn led Labour Party ever to be successful at the polls. But, that is by the by. Let’s focus on the bile laden dross rehashed again by the author of this piece:

    The ‘kill us, we deserve it’ line is particularly offensive. There are millions of people living in the west who feel total revulsion and disgust at the actions of the barbaric death cult in Paris last Friday and absolute sympathy for the victims. Because that is what they were. There are no excuses for the casual slaughter of dozens of innocent people. These same millions also have the absolute right to vociferously question the long standing foreign policies of many major western democracies. Now, Blair, Obama, Bush Jr certainly didn’t blow themselves up outside the Stade de France last week, nor did they open fire on innocent people enjoying a Friday night out in Paris. But, to absolve the leaders of western powers of any responsibility for creating vast power vacuums in seriously unstable regions and helping to foment burning resentment at their often malign involvement in the affairs of sovereign nations is plainly absurd to all but the most one eyed of commentators. Unfortunately, Cohen is just that – the most one eyed of commentators.

    There is too much blinkered drivel to warrant the time to pull apart every paragraph but in the minds of most reasonable people, having a healthy disdain for the macho posturing of Putin and a deeply held weariness of his motives but also feeling alarmed at NATO expansion in Eastern Europe and its tacit support for the far right in Ukraine are not mutually exclusive.

    I also literally laughed out loud at Cohen’s ‘ignorant cliche-mongers’ line. Irony clearly wasted on a man so capable of producing a piece so full of ignorant cliches.

    To anybody who has flicked straight to the comments section before reading the piece, save yourselves the time and effort, it’s five minutes of your life you’ll never get back.

    • Miss Floribunda Rose

      You describe Islam as a barbaric death cult. Isn’t that going just a little bit too far?

    • Ooh!MePurse!

      I would suggest that readers ignore this attempt to censor Cohen’s piece, read it for themselves and form their own view. I found the article interesting and revealing.

    • whs1954

      If Corbyn feels true revulsion at the death cult that is ISIS, why did he drivel about how Jihadi John should not have been taken out by a drone, but how he should have been brought to trial; given that it is impossible to do this, and that the choices are killing him by drone or else leaving him free to butcher again?

      If Corbyn feels true revulsion at the death cult that is ISIS, why did he drivel about how the police should not shoot to kill; given that this is not the movies, and it is impossible to pinpoint a bullet into a terrorist’s arm to ‘disable’ him, and that the choices are shooting a suicide bomber with the aim of killing him or else leaving him to trigger his belt full of bombs?

      To talk about Bush and Blair is to absolve Muslims of all moral agency. It is to assume that Bush and Blair’s actions were so terrible, so awful, that jihadists had no choice but to be turned into suicide bombers and slaughterers. To believe this is not only truly racist, but it’s also anti-British, for it assumes we, having been responsible for 1/4 of the world such a short while ago, should simply turn our back on the world, let the likes of Saddam Hussain get on with gassing Kurds, so long as we Brits aren’t to blame. Our nation is greater than that abdication of moral responsibility.

      In taking the attitudes he does, and in aligning himself with those he does (particularly “Stop the War” [sic] who published their revolting article), Corbyn plainly does take the view ‘Kill us, we deserve it’. Now push off, Quisling.

      • Phil Jones

        I’m not here to defend all of Corbyn’s personal beliefs – I disagree with many of them, certainly his views on ‘shoot to kill’ in a terrorist situation. I commented on Cohen’s feverish, cliche riven nonsense because I disagree with his central theme that intensively questioning the cause and effect of western foreign policy is a treacherous activity.

    • The_greyhound

      Miss Disgusted of West Hampstead sounds mildly put out by a less than adulatory assessment of one of Labour’s silliest and least successful politicians. One would have to go back to Lord George George-Brown to find a parallel for the universal derision and contempt in which decent people hold corbyn. The slimy hypocrite is so appalling he really ought to consider joining the Scottish National Party – his combination of blinkered stupidity and perverse arrogance means he should fit in there.

    • Old Fox

      “Far right” in Ukraine? You despicable liar.

      • Phil Jones

        My mistake, extreme right.

  • Sunshine Sux

    Corbyn is anti everything that evokes fighting spirit, strength, courage, honesty, fairness, pride and fearlessness.

    • Mach III

      No my darling. He evokes fighting spirit by defying the status quo.
      That requires strength, courage, honesty, fairness. and not pride, that
      you are right on – it requires humility. Great humility to cater for
      all. And you are categorically wrong on fearlessness. He promotes
      fearlessness. To bomb them is to act out of fear. Terrorists goal is to
      promote fear. He is stepping away from the fear mongering and thinking
      and acting through compassion.

      Wakey Wakey.

      • Sunshine Sux

        From where I’m sitting the status quo is appeasement and dhimmitude.

        Churchill said ‘whoever is under 25 and not a liberal, has no heart, whoever is over 25 and nor a conservative, has no brain’

        The status quo are Chamberlains, when we’re in desperate need of a Churchill.

        • Mach III

          Well, stop sitting, and move about.

          The status quo is a corrupt system that favors the elite.

          Wars are very profitable, wake up to this reality.

  • Mark Whitehead

    There seems to be an assumption in Cohen’s piece and in much of the comment that if anyone attempts to discuss any of the underlying context of the attacks in Paris, or any other outrage, must by a ‘terrorist sympathiser’. This is simply ignorant, arrogant and bullying talk aimed at stifling discussion. It’s actually rather dangerous when you think about it. With reference to Corbyn it’s essentially character assassination. No reasonable discussion is possible with someone like Cohen who gets by on smear, false association, half-truths and prejudice. I would have expected a serious magazine like The Spectator to shun such low-grade hysterics and look for some intelligent analysis from someone who is prepared to examine the facts and weigh up what they mean, not just blurt out a load of childish rubbish. It’s nothing to do with whether I agree with Corbyn or not. I just want reasonably intelligent analysis, not ignorance.

    • Old Fox

      Once terrorism and murder have taken place discussion naturally ceases – as it should. What “context” could possibly “explain” or “justify” what has happened in Paris? Even if Mr Cohen were “hysterical” (which he is not) I should understand it as warmth, infinitely preferable to the nauseating, supercilious indifference on show in your response.

      • Mach III

        That is where you are so wrong lad.

        People are not evil, they have evil fanatical ideologies.

        If you give them understanding, to understand their fanatical ideologies; their fanatical ideologies will fall away.

        It’s simple.

        Bombing and bombing and bombing factually produces more fanatical ideologies. You are ill informed.

        • Old Fox

          Madam, you yourself are the living refutation of your first proposition. To disprove your second remark, I sincerely hope that you are consigned to ISIS controlled Syria and given half an hour in which to uncloud the understanding of your friends the terrorists. Bombing managed to clear Germany of fanaticism – so much for your historical knowledge – and as for information, you are incapable of it.

      • Mark Whitehead

        I didn’t say anything about the need to ‘explain’ or ‘justify’ the Paris atrocities. Those are your words which you have wrongly attributed to me. All I want is intelligent discussion and analysis rather than bile. You say ‘Once terrorism and murder have taken place discussion naturally ceases – as it should’ – really? So we shouldn’t even be talking about these vile murders? You think we should all just shut up and hope for the best?

        • Old Fox

          Pathetic. As anyone can see by “discussion” I meant negotiation with the terrorists – which is clearly what you have in mind – an eager Chamberlain to their little Hitlers. And no, we should not shut up, although the left is very successfully stifling our voices – especially those of us who admit the clear connection between our open borders and these urban massacres. Unsustainable mass immigration is doubtless the left’s revenge for 1989.

  • wycombewanderer

    “It must be incredibly frustrating as an Islamic Jihadist not to have
    your views and motives taken seriously by the societies you terrorize,
    even after you have explicitly and repeatedly stated them. Even worse,
    those on the regressive left, in their endless capacity for masochism
    and self-loathing, have attempted to shift blame inwardly on themselves,
    denying the Jihadists even the satisfaction of claiming responsibility.

    It’s like a bad Monty Python sketch:

    “We did this because our holy texts exhort us to to do it.”

    “No you didn’t.”

    “Wait, what? Yes we did…”

    “No, this has nothing to do with religion. You guys are just using religion as a front for social and geopolitical reasons.”

    Did you even read our official statement? We give explicit Quranic
    justification. This is jihad, a holy crusade against pagans,
    blasphemers, and disbelievers.”

    “No, this is definitely not a Muslim thing. You guys are not true Muslims, and you defame a great religion by saying so.”

    Who are you to tell us we’re not true Muslims!? Islam is literally at
    the core of everything we do, and we have implemented the truest most
    literal and honest interpretation of its founding texts. It is our very
    reason for being.”

    “Nope. We created you. We installed a social
    and economic system that alienates and disenfranchises you, and that’s
    why you did this. We’re sorry.”

    “What? Why are you apologizing? We
    just slaughtered you mercilessly in the streets. We targeted unwitting
    civilians – disenfranchisement doesn’t even enter into it!”

    “Listen, it’s our fault. We don’t blame you for feeling unwelcome and lashing out.”

    stop taking credit for this! We worked really hard to pull this off,
    and we’re not going to let you take it away from us.”

    “No, we nourished your extremism. We accept full blame.”

    “OMG, how many people do we have to kill around here to finally get our message across?”


    I urge everyone to cut and paste this brilliant satire of the liberal left whenever they try to claim it’s nothing to do with islam.

    • sebastian2

      Excellent. It will probably be banned in universities and on the BBC.

    • Mach III

      What a load of drivel. An imagined conversation with ISIS – is an imagined conversation. Weak.

  • simonpjlduckett

    The flecks of spittle dot this demented apology for political analysis. His hatred for anybody who dares to oppose western policy is the only thing clear in this.

    • Old Fox

      Rubbish – the hatred emanates from you, not Mr Cohen. He specifically does not endorse every aspect of western policy; he simply objects to murder – as should the Labour party. Clearly you see things differently. For your sort the recent Parisian massacre is a “result”, rather than a crime, and a “result” of Western diplomacy rather than of genocidal Islamo-Nazism. What did the poor twenty something victims of this latest episode have to do with diplomacy, then? God knows, they might even have supported some of the deranged postures of the left, but still they were murdered as “representatives” of an all powerful, invulnerable West which lurks in the imaginations of the loony reds.

      • simonpjlduckett

        And you do the same as Cohen. Hysterical nonsense.

  • bladerunner998

    Corbyn isn’t anti-west, you clueless smearing piece of garbage. It doesn’t take a genius to work that out.

    The title is a complete unsupported assertion and smear tactic! You should be sued for defamation, libel and slander for publishing that title along with the smears of “dishonesty” at the bottom of this article and the other slanderous titles you churn out.

    How about reporting policies and actual politics rather than personally attacking the same man over and over and over again!? How about being “intelligent” for a change?

    • Old Fox

      I would urge you to take your own advice, but for the fact that it’s clearly impossible.

      • bladerunner998

        What are you even on about?

        • Mach III

          This ‘old fox’ is unintelligible. Belongs apart from others.

    • Sunshine Sux

      Mouth foaming hysteria, coupled with smearing character assassination (oh the irony) and demands of legal action Nazi-witchhunt-style – the left in a nutshell.

      • Old Fox

        Well said.

        • Mach III

          My little boy, educate yourself.

          • Sunshine Sux

            I know 45-year olds who believe the same exact things, they used to believe when they were 16. They suffer from arrested development.
            Not all elderly people are wise, just like not all people are smart.

          • Mach III

            It’s best to keep the mind fresh and hold no particular belief. That way one will have an unbiased opinion towards external stimuli.

          • JustSomeChap

            >My little boy

            What’s with the condescending language, the dismissal of anyone who dares to oppose you as inferior or intellectually stunted?

          • Mach III

            Tired on a Friday morning, reading drivel. Apologies 🙂

            In fairness, they didn’t oppose me or anything like that. I was just being a plain rude c*nt.

            And I actually was called some names too, which was bloody hilarious 🙂

          • JustSomeChap

            I understand. I was once trapped in a waiting room with nothing to read but the Morning Star.

          • Mach III

            Haha, so hear me out.

            Jeremy Corbyn is anti-war. Quite evidently. So this article says that he is not anti-war – that is a lie.

            That he is anti-west – that is a lie too. So far he has been quite evident in supporting the majority and the minority opposed to the elites. That to me is that he is pro-everyone – and everyone includes the West. – So the two points in the headline are lies or at best fantasy…

            He also has a plan to stop ISIS; and why is that not being spoken about in the media. Cutting their supplies, cutting their income source. Sanctions against those facilitating their deals. Why is that not spoken about or highlighted at all?

            Can you not see the role of the media skewing information?
            This is propaganda.

      • Mach III

        Have a look at logic, child. Have a look at fallacies. Have a look at a red-herring fallacy; poisoning of the fallacy.

        If all you have is fallacies against Corbyn, which is irrationality, then you have nothing negative on him, other than your made up ill-informed mind.

        It’s a pleasure to educate you. May you return to reality.

        • Sunshine Sux

          Have a look at what the left did to Europe, grandpa!
          Have a look at what the left did to any country.

          • Mach III

            Okay, you first investigate fallacies, then provide me with evidence, and I’ll read it kindly.

          • Sunshine Sux

            North Korea
            oh yeah, and the EU of course, the one that is currently imploding

  • plato

    This argument seems to be built on The Telegraph and Daily Mail versions of what Corbyn has said (about various topics) rather that what he has ACTUALLY said and meant. The seething contempt the right-wing media has for Corbyn is alarming and telling, as is its continued commitment to distorting his words and painting him as the anti-christ. Clearly he isn’t the ‘unelectable’ joke they continue to propagate him as otherwise why spend so much column space on him?

    • Old Fox

      A man who thinks we shouldn’t shoot to kill a terrorist in the midst of a shooting spree is simply despicable. End of. No distortion there. You are in the business of distortion and indeed of bigotry. Why does the fact that something is reported or opined in the Telegraph automatically disqualify it? “Plato”! You should have styled yourself Justinian – he who destroyed the Academy in a fit of totalitarian bigotry.

      • plato

        Bigoted against The Telegraph, haha that’s a new one. Also, that’s clearly not what he meant. He was referring to cases such as the gunning down of Charles de Menezes. It’s patently obvious he supports it in situations where it is necessary to prevent further killing but wanted to send out a word of caution for when it could and has been used too liberally. Look at the American news on pretty much any day of the year for examples of over-zealous deployment of shoot-to-kill policy. Corbyn angers the right because he makes it stare its own moral bankruptcy in the face.

        • dave

          “Also, that’s clearly not what he meant. He was referring to cases such as the gunning down of Charles de Menezes. It’s patently obvious…”

          Except that we don’t know any of those things because he refuses to answer clearly.

          • plato

            From BBC:

            Mr Corbyn told Labour’s National Executive Committee “any kind of shoot-to-kill policy” posed “clear dangers to us all” and said terrorism should not be used to undermine freedom and legal protection.

            He added: “But of course I support the use of whatever proportionate and strictly necessary force is required to save life in response to attacks of the kind we saw in Paris.”

          • plato

            Is that a clear enough answer for you?

          • Mark Whitehead

            this shoot to kill row is just another attempt to smear Corbyn by misrepresenting what he said. He was trying to defend the current legal requirements surrounding the use of lethal force, in answer to the gung-ho mood that was developing. There are those on this site who think that makes them a “friend of the terrorists”. They are either deliberately twisting logic for their own malicious ends.

          • E.I.Cronin

            Err… this excerpt is unclear to me. Shoot-to-kill, according to Corbyn, is a ‘clear danger’ to everyone and it’s use against Jihadis is being used to ‘undermine freedom and legal protection’. Does the rest of the interview clarify what ‘proportionate’ and ‘strictly necessary force’ is? Cohen’s description of Corbyn seems apt. Having friends in the force I’ve heard how officers have split seconds in which to make decisions with terrifying consequences. Despite rigorous training, horrible misjudgements and accidents occur under extreme pressure. Disabling an attacker with a semi-automatic leaves room for dreadful violence. Shoot-to-kill saves lives and preserves our endangered freedoms.

          • Mach III

            Where in God’s grace do you get the idea of shooting to disable an attacker, are you taking the piss? Corbyn’s words are, necessary force required to save life in response to attacks. That means what ever force is necessary. What ever force is necessary – nothing at all about shooting to maim. Put your fantasies to bed my dear child.

          • E.I.Cronin

            His initial comment was shoot-to-kill was a ‘quite dangerous’ and ‘counterproductive’ response to a terror attack and he only clarified his position after being hammered by his own MP’s and the Tories. If he rejects shoot-to-kill what else are officers going to do but shoot to disable… sing the Red Flag?

            I asked Plato to clarify what the rest of the article revealed but haven’t received a reply yet.

          • plato

            What Mach III said. We can’t hold hold Corbyn to account for the people who deliberately misrepresent him and also those who deliberately misinterpret him.

          • Mach III

            Listen here sweetie, give him a platform for him to explain this, to educate these clear facts, then he can educate. At the moment he is busy putting it to David Cameron, to prevent more violence, war, tragedy.

            He’s a busy man, have a look at how David Cameron has to be told to answer the questions of Corbyn.

          • Rintintin

            He has been given every opportunity, sweetie.

          • Mach III

            How about, the spectator, the daily mail, the express, the what ever news stations give him a podium to discuss all of these ideas.

            His philosophies are synonymous with Zen Masters. He has incredible wisdom, so give him the platform to share his knowledge..

            Instead, look at what is happening… All the newspapers mock him, and are out to get him.

            The only platform he has to share his ideas is Facebook, and you can see on there, it’s an overwhelming success.

            The mass media is incredibly afraid of him stopping wars, that’s why they will not give him the chance, love.

          • Rintintin

            Good luck.

          • Mach III

            No luck needed. Here’s the logic, you put forward the position that he has had every opportunity; well, clearly he hasn’t had this opportunity – especially if luck is required. Just logic.

      • Mach III

        Old Fox, you foolish child! He did not say that, so that is clear distortion. “End of” – “My mind is made up, don’t confuse me with facts.” – silly boy. Wake up.

      • Peter

        Corbyn never said he did not believe in the right to kill a terrorist in a killing spree. Show me any evidence that he ever said such a thing or such a hypothetical situation was put before him.

        He said this:-

        “I’m not happy with the shoot-to-kill policy in general” but then added the caveat:-

        “I think you have to have security that prevents people firing off weapons where you can, there are various degrees for doing things as we know”.

        Everything seems perfectly sensible to any normal person, after all there have been many terrible mistakes using “shoot to kill” so he is right to be cautious. What he said was perfectly nuanced unlike the deranged warmongers who just don’t seem to have learnt from the disastrous interventions by the West.

    • William_Brown

      The term you seek is “target rich”.

  • Mamata Das

    Trouble with Corbyn is that many voters hold liberals to a higher standard of ethics and general likeability than they do the far-right. That is why comparing this new Corbyn-Labour against evil UKIP will not work.

    To a lot of people who aren’t invested party hacks, Corbyn’s drivel passing itself off as liberalism is an insult to their intelligence. I still feel that Corbyn should not be judged on his past but is there any attempt on his part to behave like a mature left-liberal leader and not a protesting student hippe?

  • James Lawrence

    Absolutely true. Corbyn is an authentic International Marxist. The downtrodden jihadist is a much a friend to him as the policeman trying to stop him is an enemy

  • Steven Barr

    Are you seriously denying that the undermining of the Assad government and the funding of so called “moderate” rebels by Britain, France and the US, coupled with the overthrow a decade earlier of a secular leader who could keep Iraq together has not contributed to the rise of ISIL?

    • rtj1211

      He probably is. There is some concept of ‘what the West is’ which includes: ‘nothing we do ever has consequences but anything the Muslims do always has consequences’.

      It would be more accurate to say that nothing the West does has major impacts on the West (although they are not above a few false flag terrorist atrocities to kill a few hundred Westerners from time to time), but it usually has huge repercussions on innocent Muslims, be that in Iraq, Syria, iran or wherever.

      The nutcase Brezinski was totally sanguine about creating ‘stirred up Muslims’ as acceptable collateral damage for CIA actions in the late 1970s. That nutter is the primary driver behind the emergence of ISIL and should be removed from any further role in any government until the nutcase meets his maker. The old Soviets who invaded Afghanistan weren’t much better either. But at least the Russians learned their lessons where silly attritional wars in Muslim lands was concerned. It took the West another 30 years…….and I’m not sure they have truly learned it yet.

      Every war in the Middle East is about pipeline maps and access to minerals and petroleum/gas.

      I would like to know where in the pantheon of Western values is the statement: ‘we will kill all over the world to gain control of the worlds’ raw material resources’.

      I’d love Nick Cohen to go around the country preaching that as his religious faith. He’d be unemployable within 6 weeks at the most…..

  • Michaelinlondon1234

    The only solution is an all out nuclear war as Nick Cohen has been saying all along.
    As the department of health has been saying no one kills enough people.
    We all agree…. kill more…..

  • Peter

    What a load of rubbish! It’s not wrong to point out that the rise of Nazism was due to the Great Depression and the Treaty of Versailles but that does not excuse what the Nazis did. Similar it’s not wrong to point out that the bombing of Cambodia led to the rise of the Khamer Rouge and that the invasion and occupation of Iraq which has destroyed Iraq and now destabilised Syria leading to the creation of ISIS. What Cohen does not want to admit is if people had listened to people like Corbyn over 10 years ago and not invaded Iraq hundreds of thousands of people would not have been killed and ISIS would NEVER have come to existence! Similar the tired criticism of Hamas, Hezbollah from people him is no different from those who claimed the ANC was a terrorist organisation was a “terrorist” organisation, and as for the Ira well the government negotiated with them.

    • Mach III

      Spot on, when has Corbyn ever advocated war? Yet this article says that he is not anti-war; but anti-west…

      What a load of propaganda drivel.

      Come on people. Watch the politicians and form your own opinions rather than reading what these writers have to say, because they are paid by Billionaires to do so to fit their agendas.

      • sammy gravano

        I have formed my own opinion.

        Corbyn is a scruffy pig-thick friend of terrorists.

        • Mach III

          The prison of delusion… How restrictive…

          • sammy gravano

            Ah a leftie epigram – how pretentious.

          • Mach III

            Lol, is your reply not the pretentious epigram?

            You say Corbyn is a friend of terrorists.

            Do you know, factually, the Saudi regime are responsible for supplying ISIS and other militia that in turn join ISIS; with arms, drugs, and funding?

            Yet it is Cameron, and not Corbyn that is friends with these despicable people.

            It is Corbyn that was against the Saudi regime executing a teenage activist by beheading and crucifixion; It was Corbyn that opposed the Saudi leader joining the United Nations Human Rights Council in secret.

            The Saudi’s are the ones that terrorize, Cameron is best of mates with them.

          • sammy gravano

            Who mentioned Cameron?

            The leftie defence to everything –

            ‘ Oooooh look at Cameron’

            Or Osborne.

            Or the Daily Mail.

        • Mark Whitehead

          and you are doing a brilliant impression of a total imbecile!

    • sammy gravano

      ‘the tired criticism of Hamas, Hezbollah’


      Love it. You couldn’t make these people up.

      The idiot left – the gift that always gives.

  • Mongo

    Islamic State
    so-called Islamic State

    I wish people would agree on a consistent name

    • Hippograd

      Buddhist Brigade. Anglican Army. Zoroastrian Front. Something to reflect the way it completely inverts the very deepest values of Islam (the Religion of Peace, Tolerance and Philogyny).

    • sammy gravano

      I wish people would agree on a consistent name

      ‘Corbynistas’ should about cover it.

    • Epidermoid

      As long as Islam features in it somewhere to properly indicate its roots.

  • Richard

    Corbyn brings to mind the quote from George Orwell: It is a strange fact, but it is unquestionably true that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of standing to attention during God save the King than of stealing from a poor box.

  • Richard de Lacy

    An entertaining little spat between two unpatriotic wimps, Corbyn and Cohen, but one part is almost interesting:

    “He defended the Russian invasion of Ukraine by saying the West had provoked the Kremlin.”

    In reality, Corbyn erred on the side of the West: “Russia has gone way beyond its legal powers to use bases in the Crimea. Sending unidentified forces into another country is clearly a violation of that country’s sovereignty,” The Russians would certainly argue against this (insert Mandy Rice-Davis quote here), but “clearly” and “far beyond” put Corbyn on the anti-Russian side in the debate.

    If you can bear reading Corbyn’s touchy-feely slop, it’s here http://www.stopwar.org.uk/index.php/news/the-history-lurking-behind-the-crisis-in-ukraine-by-jeremy-corbyn-mp
    …and you can see he does the opposite of defending the above – he cites the West’s double standards (Drone strikes, Nato expansion, support for Nick Cohen’s beloved neo-nazis in Ukraine, etc.),

    You cannot defend an action by claiming double standards, as this rests on both sides being in the wrong.

    Can any of Cohen’s fellow libtards explain the need to tell lies?

    Can you at least understand why patriotic conservatives (this used to be a conservative publication, by the way) despise all of you?
    We don’t care which libtard liar is slightly more or less barking than the other – we ask why, if you believe your views are the right ones, can you not tell the truth in an argument?

  • Mark Whitehead

    A frequent trope of the hysterical anti-Corbyns in this thread, starting with Cohen himself, is: “trying to understand what has happened so that we can reduce the chances
    of it happening again = being ‘a friend of the terrorists”. Double
    speak? Attempt to stifle discussion? Attempt to denigrate your opponents
    by false association? Ignorant right-wing bullying verging on the fascist? Or just plain malice?

    • sammy gravano

      Yeah we saw all that ignorant right-wing bullying at the Tory conference.

      All these right-wingers standing outside shouting sc^m, spitting,and hilariously throwing little balls.

      I’ll take no lessons from you, sunshine.

      • Mark Whitehead

        OK sunshine. I wasn’t asking you to. Have a nice day!

  • Hippograd

    Corbyn, along with too much of ‘progressive opinion’, has a mistrust bordering on hatred for western powers.

    Which is why he’s such a fervent supporter of the surest means of destroying the West: mass immigration from the Third World. What we need is some of the realism found among Nick’s fellow progressives and anti-racists on the sunny shores of the Mediterranean:

    A day after opposition leader Isaac Herzog called on the government to take in Syrian refugees, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu went South to launch construction of the next section of a multibillion shekel security fence along the border with Jordan aimed at preventing infiltration from the east.

    Since returning to power in 2009, Netanyahu oversaw the construction of a similar fence from Kerem Shalom to Eilat along the Sinai border, as well as an enhanced security fence on the Golan Heights.

    “We are beginning today the construction of a security fence on our eastern border, as a continuation of the security fence that we built on the border with Egypt, and which will join up in the end with the security fence that we built on the Golan Heights,” he said, accompanied by Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon and Transportation and Intelligence Minister Israel Katz.

    Netanyahu said the world today is witnessing what happens when countries lose control of their borders. He said the combination of brutal terrorism, which is spreading along Israel’s borders, as well as illegal migrant workers makes it imperative for Israel to have control over all of its borders.

    Weach out and hug the world, People!

  • Mark Whitehead

    What the right wingers on this site are trying to do is suppress any thoughtful discussion of this topic by invoking a conspiracy by their opponents to undermine the security of the state, encourage hatred of anyone who questions the official view and invoke fear of what might happen if their opponents’ views ever gain currency. Ring any bells?

    • Mach III

      Let’s drown them with logic.

      This is great in a way because it brings all the right wingers to one central location. So let’s open dialogue with them.

      In the 17th Century, there was a time called Sicle Des Lumieres – or Age of Enlightenment – Age of Reason.

      This period in history, there was a revolution where they wished to move away from religions and doctrines and establish a system based on reason. This period brought in quite a few geniuses and quite cool things like the Encyclopedia.

      So why did we drop the reasoning?

      Why are people so eager to label others as lefts or rights. Just stop that nonsense and discuss things.

      • GUBU


        We could begin by discussing the fact that the Englightenment was an 18th Century phenomenon.

        Once we get dates right, we can move on to whether or not Robespierre’s attempts to apply the philosophy of Jean Jacques Rousseau were really quite as cool, in the eyes of all those who lost their heads as a result, as Denis Diderot’s Encyclopédie.

        • Mach III

          Well middle of the 17th as well… not?

          Sorry, I don’t know too much about the history of all of it – which I’m having a look at now.

          I just like the idea of reasoning over blind belief.

          • GUBU


            You can point to Descartes, Locke, Newton (whose scientific ideas sat alongside some decidedly unorthodox religious views, incidentally) as precursors of or influences on later events, but what you referred to as ‘the Age of Enlightenment’ is generally considered to be a later phenonmenon.

            I like the idea of reasoning as well, but there is plenty of evidence that those who claim to be guided by reason – particularly those who believed that Man could be perfected – have been only too capable of great inhumanity to those who got in their way of their grandiose schemes.

            As for blind belief, you might contemplate the possibility that ‘right wingers’ are not necessarily as stupid as you evidently assume they are.

          • Mach III

            Thanks for the information.

            Indeed, you seem well educated. I wouldn’t use my assertion as thinking right wingers are stupid, I’d say more, educated fools. An educated fool would be someone with a good education, yet logically, and applying their knowledge they lack – an example would be the Republican candidate in the USA – Dr. Ben Carson. Who is an acclaimed neurosurgeon, yet will make claims that people should rush towards loose gunmen.

            I mean, a chap on here called Old Fox made me burst out laughing with his use of the diction in insulting me (or more accurately, his interpretation of me through online communication.) – quite evidently, not stupid.

            Though, do you take note of the slander and comical discriminatory language used, and skewed reporting by the right winged press? The way that big points that Corbyn has are nonchalantly dismissed as if, why was he elucidating those points in the first place?

            Do you think that Jeremy Corbyn is one of those that ‘believe man could be perfected and in turn causing great inhumanity’ as you describe?

          • GUBU

            People misrepresenting the views of others, and using derogatory language in making personalised attacks on their opponents?

            I know what you mean. I have, after all, had the misfortune to see Jeremy Hardy’s stand up routine (note, no reference to comical).

            As for Comrade Corbyn – no, I certainly don’t see a guillotine being erected in Leicester Square, and tumbrils rolling down through Picadilly, in the unlikely event that he became Prime Minister. That would take a level of organization and leadership that he has so far shown himself incapable of.

            I could, however, conceive of Diane Abbott merrily knitting at the foot of the scaffold as the heads rolled into the basket below – much like writing Christmas cards at stormy meetings of the Parliamentary Labour Party, I would imagine.

          • vildechaye

            Orwell thought left-wingers could be greater fools. Hence his statement that [paraphrased] some ideas are so stupid only an intellectual could support them. Apparently there are a lot of intellectuals defending Jerremy Corbyn’s idiocy these days.

          • Mark Whitehead

            not necessarily, but there’s a pretty high chance, judging by some of the comments in this discussion!

      • Kjafc

        “Let’s drown them with logic”

        I am afraid you don’t have enough logic to form a puddle, no matter how wet the left is.

    • Kjafc

      Give me a right wing person any day over a self obsessed, loud mouth, protesting demonstrator leftie who reaches for words like ‘sweety’ when someone says something they do not like. The left seem to live in a parrelel universe, a misrepresentation of teh world we live in. The left think you should give cuddles to the ‘bad guy’ and shower him with love. The left has already been responsible for removing discipline from society.

      Islam is not a religion of peace. Amputations, beheadings, stonings etc.The Shias and the Sunnis fight amongst themselves, that has nothing to do with the West it is to do with a dispute over the death of the fictional Mohammed. These people do not have any tolerance for those of a different belief, instead they wish death on them.

      Yet the left claim to be the ones that care, yet refuse to reconcile this Islam. The fake obsession with equality, womens rights etc all magically disappears and it becomes the ‘wicked west’.. Sharia law anyone?

      The left are nothing but hypocrites.

      • pobjoy

        There are those on the left who see Islam as a tool of the right. It should also be recalled that the left’s view of ‘removing discipline from society’ was that it was removal of the best defence of the working classes.

        Labels are not always reliable.

        • Kjafc

          Labels are not always reliable, absolutely.

          However, when I look at what happened at Rotherham council the only conclusion I can reach is that for the left, their own ideas of what is just come before common sense. A blind eye turned to the systematic sexual abuse of our children by an Asian gang in Rotherham, because the local Labour Council feared upsetting the Asian community! Can you understand that bizarre logic? The left wing council decided allowing the continue abuse of children was more favourable than informing on the Asian gang. This is part of the left wing culture of self loathing, political correctness. It appears that for many, what happened in Paris should not be laid at the feet of a backward, death cult but at each and every one of us instead. The evil West. No doubt, welcoming back British Jihadis from Syria will be the latest left wing cause. I admit that I do not understand the left and their warped sense of what is right.

          • pobjoy

            Labels are not always reliable, absolutely.

            Rotherham council

            So was that controlled by left-wingers, or by right wingers?

            It should also be recalled that the left’s view of ‘removing discipline
            from society’ was that it was removal of the best defence of the working classes.

          • Kjafc

            It was a Labour run council and the left wing councillors were removed when the truth came out. It was found that the children had been let down the left wing councils over zealous commitment to political correctness.

            I apologise for not understanding your point about the removal of discipline and the working class.

          • pobjoy

            It was a Labour run council

            But was it controlled by left-wingers, or by right wingers?

          • Kjafc

            Rotherham Metropolitan
            Borough Council was a Labour run council.The report highlighted many errors including a misguided obsession with political correctness. The council was more concerend about offending the local Pakstan community than protecting the vulnerable. This lead to years of further abuse and rape which was actually a racist crime. The victims were all white, the offenders chose their victims for that reason. A race crime.

            Would never have happened under anything other than a politically correct left wing council. This is the problem with this ideology, it often casts the offender as the innocent victim and the victim as the offended. Pretty typical of how the left works and an example of double standards. Had the perpertrators been white and the victims black or asian, the left would have been marching on Downing Street, instead of making excuses.

            Even a well known left wing organisation found it impossiible to defend the institutional political correctness of Rotherham Council: http://leftfootforward.org/2014/08/the-left-must-reject-the-relativism-at-the-heart-of-the-rotherham-scandal/

            The left for me is a hypocritical ideology.

            We now see this with regard to the attrocities carried out by this medieval organisation of terror, an organisation that beheads, amputates and stones female adulterers to death. A sexist, racist (all supposedly things the left detest under their PC rules) death cult yet the extreme elements of the left turn a blind eye and prefer to blame somebody else for their actions.

            If it wasnt so sad it would be funny.

          • pobjoy

            Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council was a Labour run council.

            But was it controlled by left-wingers, or by right-wingers?

          • Bogdan

            Therre are no right-wingers in the Labour Party. It is a coalition of leftists of all persuasions. At present the Impossibilists are in control, however.

          • pobjoy

            Therre are no right-wingers in the Labour Party.

            If the poster insists that Rotherham councillors were not used to deploy people in Rotherham to carry out crimes that would harm the working classes, a situation that he can hardly prove to be true, then suspicion falls on his own right wing cause.

          • P_S_W

            I take it by right-wingers, you mean all those closet Tories that are currently inhabiting the Labour Party.

          • pobjoy

            There has always been a grey policy area in the Labour Party and the unions that supported it, because there has to be a balance in a social democratic party between the interests of labour and capital, because they depend on each other. But, having said that, there have had members, and leaders, of both party and unions who have gone beyond that grey area, and in effect have worked for the interests of employers against working people, and this has been the case since WW2 at least. This is the reason for the common dissatisfaction with Blairism, and the current stand-off between Corbynites and some other Labour MPs, brought about by the long-awaited democratisation of the party. Surely, there can be no Speccie readers unaware of this! So it is amazing to read here that ‘Therre are no right-wingers in the Labour Party’. It’s a crass lie, surely.

            But this hidden influence has gone beyond policy, to practical matters, such as unnecessary strikes, that have been believed to have been the work of employers seeking excuses to change legislation in their own favour. Certainly, the appalling abuse of working class children by people associated with Islam in Rotherham is no part of left wing theory or policy, though it is of course associated with another cult long used by right wing governments, that of the Vatican.

          • Kjafc

            Ha ha. PC obsessed left wingers, as documented but which should be pretty obvious. I see the usual tactic of denial is being employed.

          • Kjafc

            “But was it controlled by left-wingers, or by right-wingers?”

            Behave. I think it was the only totally Labour dominated council in the UK, which probably did not help. The Casey report found: “The Council’s culture is unhealthy: bullying, sexism, suppression and misplaced ‘political correctness’.”

            The hypocritical left at work – repsonsible for huge numbers of children being raped by an Asian grooming gang.

      • Mark Whitehead

        Kjafc – I am happy to have a discussion with you when you stop saying clearly ridiculous things like “The left think you should give cuddles to the ‘bad guy’ and shower him with love”. You seem to be filled with anger that provokes you into making outlandish, hate-filled statements. Let me know when you are prepared to have a grown-up conversation.

        • Kjafc

          Mark, the comment was clearly to provoke a reaction, however the sentiment remains. It appears to me that many on the left side of the fence act as apologists to those who commit bad behaviour. I remember a comment from a police office who said:: “When a criminal creates an offence against another person, there will be 3 left wing do gooders running to help the villain and nobody helping the victim of the assault”.

          This sums it up to me. People like Corbyn can pretend they are pacifists but in fact they are not. Their left wing idealism means they end up defending the indefensible, we saw that with the IRA. Please do not tell me he was helping to secure peace, he was not. He was against the peace treaty and the articles he supported in the Labour Briefing where not those of a pacifist – they were those of an apologist for terrorism apparently happy with the events that happened in Brighton.

          I would not want to make that a sweeping generalisation however it is a valid accusation to say that the majority on the left are so warped with a sense of political correctness, that they end up defending the devil because he happens to be in a monority.

  • Mark Whitehead

    Some common tactics used by people to stifle discussion:

    1 Abuse. Obviously. If you can’t drum up a decent argument, just abuse your opponent.

    2 False association. Make out that your opponent is linked with undesirable types. If your opponent holds a view that happens to be shared, say, by Putin, then call them a Putin apologist.

    3 Attribute base motives. If someone says they don’t agree with a vague “shoot to kill” policy, for example, make out that they would rather stand by while a terrorist carries out a massacre than take decisive action to stop them, by killing the terrorist if necessary.

    4 Accuse them of being unpatriotic/traitorous. If your opponent questions the official government view of something, say they are undermining their county and encouraging the enemy.

    5 Suggest your opponent is suffering some kind of personal problem or illness. This was used, disgracefully, by Ken Livingstone recently. But it’s quite a common trick.

    6 Misrpresentation. Characterise your opponents view inaccurately as a deliberate attempt to undermine what they are actually saying.

    There are more of these techniques but thought I would point out some of the more common ones.
    We can see some of these in Cohen’s piece and in many of the comments following it.

    They are all attempts to shut up an opponent by means other than sensible discussion, and I think they should be avoided.

    • vildechaye

      Cohen backed up all of his assertions and represented Corbyn’s views and actions accurately. Sorry the plain truth is so hard to take. Your response is mendacious.

      • afriendtothecourt

        He just distorted and misquoted. he attacks the caricature of Corbyn he’s helped to create,

        • vildechaye

          He didn’t misquote, ergo he didn’t distort. I think all the
          distortion — and it’s kind calling it that — is coming from folks like you.

          • afriendtothecourt

            He persistently assigns views and opinions to Corbyn which he doesn’t have. I’d call that misquoting.

          • vildechaye

            That’s twice now you’ve said he misrepresents Corbyn without
            providing a single example, whereas Cohen directly quotes Corbyn. Given the choice between you Cohen, there’s no question who to believe.

    • sammy gravano

      Mark Whitehead • 6 hours ago
      Some common tactics used by people to stifle discussion:
      1 Abuse. Obviously. If you can’t drum up a decent argument, just abuse your opponent.

      Mark Whitehead sammy gravano • 6 hours ago
      and you are doing a brilliant impression of a total imbecile!


      Nothing further.

      There’s hypocrisy, rank hypocrisy, and lefties.

      • smoke me a kipper

        Or proving the truth of his own post by using those very techniques. And of course those of a right wing political persuasion would never sink so low

        • sammy gravano

          I was just smoking a socialist, slaughtering a Trot etc etc.

  • The far left, which has become just the left, is not really left. It’s something else completely, and this is becoming clearer by the day.

    Its Russia affiliation is a kind of litmus test. 30 years ago, there was some logic in that, as the old USSR stood for a leftwing ideology. You could agree with that or not, but it was in intention a liberating, secular and materialist ideology that was rooted in the enlightenment. It looked like a historical coincidence back then that this progressive power was facing another power, the USA, that was rooted in the same set of values but did not follow them through, and so remained stuck in capitalist oligarchy. Being sincerely leftwing could logically lead to being pro-Soviet.

    But you can’t say that about the homophobic and nationalistic regime that Russia is now. It’s consciously and openly a rightwing authoritarian regime., One may respect it for that, but one may not pretend that we are looking at a progressive power. So what does Russia have to attract Western ‘progressives’? The one thing that it does have is that it’s a credible challenge to their own countries. It can field an army, a navy and an air force to counter the West’s global reach. It can murder agents in London and bomb militias in Syria – whether the USA or the UK approve or not.

    So as it turns out, the core of being leftist in the West is not supporting the distribution of resources, equality of opportunity or aiding the disadvantaged. It is, rather, the weakening of one’s own country. This weakening can come from the deployment of hostile aircraft carriers, or from the importation of unfiltered population; it can come from encouraging crime and riot, and it can come from criminalizing whatever military technology those countries deploy. But the core remains the same: oppress your fellow citizens by empowering those who can threaten them.

    Why is this done? To dominate. To perpetuate the rule of a clerical oligarchy that reproduces itself through media, academia and NGO. The more guilty one’s fellow citizens feel, the more they are cowed by the military might of an external power or the proximity of rogue and alien elements in one’s near environment, the more confused the citizens are by the use of fuzzy talk about ‘privilege’ none of them have, the more they are at the mercy of the elite.

    None of this is new. This system of blending obscure language (Latin) with the installment of guilt and the sale of mercy, the affiliation with an outside power based in Rome, and the constant sneering at ordinary people’s anxieties and sensitivities is precisely the methods by which the old Church and its affiliate aristocracy had maintained their rule over Western Europe for hundreds of years. It is a reactionary return to this system that is spearheaded by what is currently called the left.

    • pobjoy

      the old USSR stood for a leftwing ideology

      The USSR was an exercise in state capitalism, whereby a whole bloc competed with the rest of capital, globally, with an attempt to force modernisation of a feudal economy. The claim to be socialist was mere window-dressing to fool the population into compliance.

      it was in intention a liberating, secular and materialist ideology that was rooted in the enlightenment

      It was materialist, but no more than Western countries were, and remain. It was not liberating, because it required a police state, complete with spies and informers.

      So what does Russia have to attract Western ‘progressives’?

      Nothing. It is still well behind the West in capitalist production, and its opportunities are for investors, not ‘progressives’. Russia needs help, not criticism. Though its biggest problem is arguably that appalling Orthodoxy, that shares the same instincts that brought it into existence under the police state that was Rome. It was Rome’s coercive instincts that inspired Islam, too.

      • Cromulent

        An exercise in state capitalism? Gosh its difficult to get true socialists running things ain’t it?

        • pobjoy

          It depends on how one defines socialism. Any socialist today must work within a capitalist society (unless in some isolated Amazonian tribe). The best that a socialist can do is moderate capitalism in order to create the best possible conditions for the working class (which is what Labour Parties aim to do). It is very arguable that Russia could have stayed a medieval economy, and not suffered the terrors of Stalin in ‘modernising’. Global socialism can come about only if and when capitalism grinds to a halt.

          • Cromulent

            I would have loved to be a fly on the wall watching you explain to Lenin that what he was engaged in was state capitalism.

            Or Stalin. Or Kruschev. Or Brezhnev. Or Andropov. Or Chernenko.

            Gorby probably would have let you live. In a prison camp of course.

            If only *you* had led the Revolution you could have made it rain true socialist unicorns and candy.

          • pobjoy

            I would have loved to be a fly on the wall watching you explain to Lenin that what he was engaged in was state capitalism.

            He would have smiled, and said, “Of course. But don’t you dare tell my Russians.”

            To which I would have replied, “I’m not that silly.”

          • Cromulent

            Show me a single piece of writing from Soviet leaders admitting this.

            And no, Lenin would not have engaged in light banter with you nor confessed his sin against socialism.

          • pobjoy

            Show me a single piece of writing from Soviet leaders admitting this.

            If they had admitted it, they would soon have been ‘disposed of’!

            And no, Lenin would not have engaged in light banter with you nor confessed his sin against socialism.

            Of course he would have, in private, man to man, when the ‘children’ were in bed. There have been (usually humorous) hints of this in 20th century literature.

          • Cromulent

            So in other words you have no proof. The guys that built Patrice Lumumba U were secretly state capitalists? You’re dreaming.

          • pobjoy

            So in other words you have no proof.

            In other words, you cannot prove me wrong, and you will be sorry.

            You have proof, if you can answer this question with both honesty and information. Would Marx have recognised the Soviet Union as communist?

          • Cromulent

            I have proof. There is no end to the materials produced by the USSR calling themselves Communist. Its all over the place. Fellow travelers all over the world call them Communist.

            You make an assertion to the contrary but offer no proof.

          • pobjoy

            Argumentum ad populum demonstrates only malignity and desperation. Capitalisation rubs it in!

            You make an assertion to the contrary

            And you panic, because you can’t deny that it is true, because you know that it is true. You know when your parasitic existence is under threat.

          • Jeffrey Vernon

            This is in fact one of Lenin’s best known statements; it is for this reason that the SWP always described the Soviet Union (which they did not support) as state capitalist. From ‘Immediate Tasks of the Soviet Government’ in April 1918: ‘Reality tells us that state capitalism would be a step forward. If in a small space of time we could achieve state capitalism in Russia, that would be a victory…state capitalism would be our salvation; if we had it in Russia, the transition to full socialism would he easy, would be within our grasp, because state capitalism is something centralised, calculated, controlled and socialised, and that is exactly what we lack.’

          • Spamfish
          • smoke me a kipper

            Capitalism and socialism are part of the same system. Different sides of the same coin. Rather like Protestants and Catholics they believe in the same God, but worship in marginally different ways. One favours economic spoils falling to the providers of capital, the other to the providers of labour.

          • pobjoy

            Wallow in squalor.

          • zoid

            you posted that three times…..it wasn’t that good!

        • hobspawn

          Yes, all failures are capitalist, all successes socialist, by definition. The tragedy of the 20th century is that for some reason the history is being written by the repulsive defeated left.

          • smoke me a kipper

            Capitalism and socialism are part of the same system. Different sides of the same coin. Rather like Protestants and Catholics they believe in the same God, but worship in marginally different ways. One favours economic spoils falling to the providers of capital, the other to the providers of labour.

    • trobrianders

      I always found the explanation far simpler. Self-hatred is the most direct method of sharing in absolutely none of the responsibility for everything that is done to serve you. When everything that comes to you comes by the grace of those you profess to hate you oblige yourself to turn into a total degenerate of the Left.

  • smoke me a kipper

    It is true that everything that happens is a consequence of what has ocurred before. However that does not mean we should not defend ourselves and attack the enemy. There will again be unintended consequences some of which will jump up and smack us in the face. This it was ever so.

  • smoke me a kipper

    Capitalism and socialism are part of the same system. Different sides of the same coin. Rather like Protestants and Catholics they believe in the same God, but worship in marginally different ways. One favours economic spoils falling to the providers of capital, the other to the providers of labour

    • monsieur_charlie

      Wrong! They both favour economic spoils going their way.

  • WTF

    More like some dinosaur from communist Russia still living in the 1960’s !

  • Plinplam

    Jeremy Corbyn is the kind of person that would have been handling out Stop the War pamphlets among the London blitz survivors in 1940 asking for their understanding of the n(something here)-socialists, just to stand on a street corner handing out Open the Second Front pamphlets in the second half of 1941.

  • ClausewitzTheMunificent

    Nice hack job Mr. Cohen, you must be so proud. This time I see you managed to mention President Putin, the IRA and “Islamic State” all in one sentence – is that worthy of a bonus? We, the humble proles, accept thy wisdom, and offer up to you all our property to wage a lovely old war against everyone and everything on the planet. No more civil infrastructure, consumer goods or food, everything for the military industrial front! (if only Britain still had the means, eh?) Let’s wipe out the Slavs, the Muzzies and the Irish, hurrah! And the Chinks as well while we’re at it, getting rather uppity, rather.

    One last thing Nick, are you volunteering for the slaughter, or will you be staying home to lead from behind? I doubt that would save you if “Western” governments were to heed your recomendations and start a hot war with Russia, but at least you wouldn’t get your hands dirty, I suppose.

    I don’t agree with Corbyn on many things, but to ignore the American and British and French roots of the Paris shootings is ludicrous. One does not aid and abet Islamic terrorists for decades and use them as proxies in dirty wars of mass-murder then forgo all responsibility when they become an embarassment and turn on the hand that fed them. Equally one does not simply destroy other societies without impunity, or have you never heard of blowback?

    • Goinlike Billio

      The Americans helped the Mujahideen get rid of the Russian invaders.They then turned on their benefactors and killed 3000 americans in the US. As you say the Americans are to blame.

      • bluewaffle

        Actually if you read Robert Gates (head of cia at the time) autobiography you’d know the cia went in to Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviets to arm jihadists and draw the Soviets into an unwinnable war or “give them their Vietnam”

        • Goinlike Billio

          Whether it was the 9/11 attack or the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait these were the first blows struck.The Americans reacted extremely unwisely but nevertheless he who strikes first is responsible.

      • Jackthesmilingblack

        Still buying into the Authorised Version?

      • ClausewitzTheMunificent

        The Americans helped fund the Islamist fanatics in Afghanistan, then helped them repel the Soviet invasion in support of the central government (Brzezinski’s grand plan) The truth is even more skewed than you think!

    • Fulgentian

      “have you never heard of blowback?”
      Have you never read the article which you’re commenting on?

  • gerronwithit

    With Corbyn at its head Labour is as deadly as Ebola and should be avoided by all right thinking, but not singularly right wing people. How on Earth could any sensible politician, never mind leader of the opposition, introduce an unelected monster like Livingstone into shadow committee meetings on defence?

  • whatever name

    Corbyn and his Stop The War are Kremlin TANKIES. They oppose western military interventions but support Russian interventions. His mate, their vice president is a member of the STALIN SOCIETY, who say how justified were the Soviet genocides.
    The links of Corbyn to the Stalin Society will bring him down – and possibly Labour too. The journos should get researching the links.

    • Michaelinlondon1234

      2 trillion on the Iraq war spent by the USA.
      Who got the money.
      US military.
      US federal government….many departments to do with security.
      US military suppliers.
      US senators.
      Some local pro US military education establishments.
      US generals with really nice bonuses.
      A small amount left over for repairing the destruction caused. Which really did not happen.
      Even the maimed and mangled US soldiers get a raw deal.
      I hope the Californian water wars or STD’s wipe out the USA.
      Millions of Iraqis displaced, maimed or murdered.
      Stalin and Lenin both visited the UK and they were far more honest than you are.
      I hope someone does regime change on you.

      • non-con

        You forgot to mention billionaire Bliar

      • trobrianders

        Why do you want to see a return to paranoid totalitarian government, gulags and the like? Do you really want to suffer under the yoke of the new communism or are you planning on being one of the torturers?

        • Michaelinlondon1234

          Not really interested in the way you are trying to twist what I said.

          • trobrianders

            You’re talking about the honesty of Stalin. How much twisting have you left me?

  • Jamal Sheik

    If I had a gun I would have killed this son of a smelly BITVH Corbyn right now.

    • Michaelinlondon1234

      I am sure you can find someone you hate locally to kill. since you like the idea of killing people.
      Or better yet do a saddam on yourself.

      • trobrianders

        I’m pretty sure he wants to kill his enemy, not himself, unlike lefties who it appears do wish their nation to commit suicide.

        • Michaelinlondon1234

          What a choice at the last election…Ed milliband or Cameron….That was Left of Israel or right of Israel…..
          It is time for UK politicians who represent the UK not Israel or the USA.

          • trobrianders

            Vote for the jihadis then. You’re clearly besotted with them.

          • Michaelinlondon1234

            We had 2 world wars and it stripped the UK of generations of wealth…
            If you really want to kill people use nukes. Just stop with the lies.
            Why is any one left alive in Afghanistan? Today 5000 a day are leaving the country with a lot heading towards Europe. Even Winston did a better job of of killing Afghans though half hearted. We have the tools today to kill every one…Use them. I have no problem with scorched earth policies especially if they are dirty radioactive so no one can use the land.

          • trobrianders

            You want to flood Europe with Muslims and it’s easy to see why. You could not join your comrades in trying to overthrow free society to set up your dictatorship of the proletariat because you were too cowardly. Instead you decided you could convince a majority to vote for it. Well that totally failed. So now you want to destroy it from within by importing a medieval cult.

          • Michaelinlondon1234

            If we kill every one in the middle east… end of problem. So use nukes.
            You obviously will not have any problem with that.
            What free society? You are not talking about the UK I know. Run by a group of sadistic narcissists who want a police state..
            Free society was when we had universities and higher education funded by the state out of the taxes we pay. Not dropping bombs on people around the world.

          • trobrianders

            Ignorant fool. Free society is not a matter of opinion it is a matter of law and it’s simple to test. I’m sorry you are lost in your own dystopian nightmare in which you are the perpetual loser but I suspect you cling to your loser identity.

          • Michaelinlondon1234

            Not the case. It is now a kill or be kill society as far as a lot of UK citizens are concerned. Tories and Labour got rid of most semblances of ethics in Laws in the UK years ago. As some one once said..Eat the rich.

          • trobrianders

            Total delusion.

          • Michaelinlondon1234

            You really do not know what is happening at street level in the UK?

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Make that, the U.S. stripped the UK of the wealth of generations.

          • Michaelinlondon1234

            We made the decisions that lead to us participating in the whole situation.
            We have the children of the same groups from WW1 wars in between and WW2 participating in the debate today. And look where it has taken us.
            Cameron and Fallon think they can kill any one, any where, for what ever reason they dream up.

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Still can’t spell “Miliband”?

          • EUSSR 4 All!

            Still being a Teesside British expat halfwit?! You are what happens when Guardian/BBC-reading PC unemployed halfwit in your early 30s in the Smog was suddenly given an international investment banking job in the Northern half of the Far East!

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Anyone seen Looney?
            He’s right behind you!

  • Did it Happen

    This is what happens when you fail to kow-tow to Israel. Let it be a lesson to all British politicians. You grovel in the presence of Netanyahu – or Nick Cohen hatchet jobs you.

    • Adrian_Parkes

      Can’t you thick, Jew- hating types ever come up with something original?

      • Did it Happen

        Bit like you you mean?

    • Brian V Hunt

      You are a fool. Corbyn has been clear enough about his views. He is a Marxist-Leninist and has been since a teenage.

  • trobrianders

    Imagine a UK that did everything Corbyn wished it to do. Even Corbyn himself would not dare to go there. His self-hatred is only tolerable if it is unrealisable. This accidental leader is currently going through a delicious existential crisis which we should all be relishing.

  • davidshort10

    I do not think the writer has succeeded in making his point, not by a long chalk. His assertions of Corbyn’s beliefs are just that, and they are repetitiive.

    • trobrianders

      What are Corbyn’s beliefs then? You dare not name them.

      • davidshort10

        Why don’t you ask him? I cannot tell you, any more than Cohen can.

        • trobrianders

          Total cop out

          • davidshort10

            Ask your Mummy to bring you up a nice cup of cocoa.

          • Kjafc

            “ask your mummy to bring you a nice cup of cocoa” Why is it those of you who support Corbyn make childish sarcastic comments like this? Pathetic.

        • HelenLondon

          Well surely it’s easy to work out what they are from those people and institutions he supports plus the statements and speeches he makes. No different from finding out the views of other politicians. How about looking at his voting record too.

          • PaD

            Well said!

    • John Morrison

      What a sloppy, bigoted piece of journalism! This is of no worth whatsoever, just a string of Nick Cohen’s opinions, which frankly, appear narrow and totally biased.
      The press in Britain, ranging from the Sun through the Mail, the Telegraph and (what obviously used to be) the quality end are all slowly writing their own obituary. People look online for news and opinion now, news sources have proliferated, while the press in the UK have retreated from reason and objectivity, as this so-called article reveals. Ironically what the Right once said of the mining industry is now true of the print press.

      • HelenLondon

        Who was ever objective? The BBC? (!) It is an opinion piece, the opinions of which you don’t like.

      • PaD

        Theres always the Morning Star for some ‘pravda’.
        Nick Cohen knows the frame of mind of his detractors.

        • John Morrison

          Yes I’m sure he does. I don’t need Pravda, this is enough in terms of biased journalism.

  • I doubt if you read these comments, but on the off-chance that you do I have a question for you:

    You told us some weeks ago that you are no longer a leftist, so what are you? I mean, have you gone full Reg Prentice and decided that the Tories are the game birds for you, or will you slot yourself into the Liberal-Democrat half way house? You might decide that UKIP need a boost or you could even join what’s left of the BNP – they once tried to brand themselves as “Labour that your granddad voted for,” so are they in your sights?

    I think people should be told, if only because this permanent whine about how awful Corbyn is has become tiresome.

    • PaD

      Why does he need to STAND for anything? You lot know all about STANDING. ITS ALL YOU F. .G DO.
      Nick Cohen like Peter Hitchens KNOWS your feeble minds..theyve been there and grew up..and got out to f. k.

      • Feel better after that? Good, now go and wipe the monitor clean.

        • PaD

          Just read some of your other posts..and l8ke them..mostly.
          Im assuming youd describe Seumas Milne as an apparatchik.
          In which case youve redeemed yourself..

    • Ron Carr

      And the media’s attacks are having the opposite effect.

      • I know – even people who voted for Liz Kendall are now rallying behind Corbyn.

        If you lived in Scotland then you would know that attacks like this are counter-productive. During the referendum campaign, those of us who were in the Yes camp had everything up to the kitchen sink thrown at us. All it did was make us more determined to give the old two-fingered salute to the lot of ’em on voting day. Then rally behind the SNP in May this year…

        Where you are now is where we were. So Grit your teeth and don’t back down. It will get better when you start to turn the corner as the PLP realises that they had better start working with you rather than against you.

  • Annephi

    I like the way he assumes anyone who opposes Western intervention in the Middle-East is either on the far Left or a Little Englander.

  • pobinr

    And being pro EU he’s also anti his country

    • Ron Carr

      He’s anti-EU actually.
      If you did some research, you would know that instead of thinking the way the media wants you to think.

      • trobrianders

        He’s pro-La La Land

  • curiosofsigns

    Conspiracy theories riddle Corbyn’s “far left”. Yet who is it talking here about shady committees, doublespeak and secret Corbyn-led agendas to overthrow the government. Ken Livingstone’s mayoral candidacy was a far left coup was it? This man occupies a strange strange world.

  • Brian V Hunt

    Jeremy Corbyn is still mourning the deaths of ‘progressives’ and mass murders Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim Il-Sung, Mao Zedong and Enver Halil Hoxha.

  • Corbyn is symptomatic. There were always people like him around. What is new and alarming is the fact that he was allowed to take control of a large party in a veteran democracy. He was supported in his bid by a huge nationwide constituency. This goes to show where democracies as a whole might head: towards the abandonment of duty to their own citizens, not for bigger end (though one is always professed), but as in itself a marker of truth and justice. Siding with your side (not uncritically justifying it, just siding with it in an existential war) is reviled for the sake of reviling, and this reviling act is now the left. Therefore, the West is always wrong; whoever attacks it is always right; therefore similarly: the West is never the people getting killed in Paris or Boston; instead, its a global conspiracy, a history of shame, a legacy to be embarrassed by.

    This comes at the end of a long process. As they identified their democracy with liberalism and liberalism with lack of any collective values or identity, Western countries left their citizens these options: live relatively comfortable but empty ‘bourgeoisie’ lives (the majority); join an antinomian, criminal cult (like ISIS, but nor exclusively); drop outside respectability (Powell, UKIP); or find meaning in guilt. This last one – cherishing one’s emptiness and lack of attachment as a kind of truth, absence of loyalty to one’s fellows as a mark of loyalty to a greater cause of the global oppressed, constant self-flagellation and the endless search for the ‘alternative’ lifestyle – has come to define the left. Not the extreme left, just the left. Try to suggest to a leftie that fair distribution should be made compatible with patriotism or the duty to defend one’s country: they’d call you a fascist. They deny the possibility. This denial, the either/or mentality have become identified with the entire camp. Corbyn in the result.

    For a more eloquent presentation of the above, see


  • DemSoc93

    “He defended the Russian invasion of Ukraine by saying the West had provoked the Kremlin.”

    It was not a defence but an explanation, you can disagree with that explanation but don’t misrepresent it.

    “Like many on the far left (and right), they are pro-Assad.”

    Proof? I am genuinely unaware of this.

    “Indeed he is ‘not happy’ with police shooting to kill terrorists murdering British citizens on British streets.”

    Must be brill for you Nick, to be white enough that officers will never accidentally shoot you to death on the suspicion of being a terrorist.

    I’m also glad that you seem to have some kind of psychic link with the leader of the opposition. I think it’s inaccurate to call his view Manichean. You write a lot about the parlous state of the left but if you’re a genuine democratic socialist a la Orwell, join in, send these (and they are some of them, mainly on Twitter) neo-Stalinists packing. Don’t just gripe from the pages of high-minded, or worse, Tory magazines. You aren’t helping the left with bitter, vitriolic, visceral reactions to positions you (in many of the cases) *think* Corbyn holds. There are problems with some of his views, Peter Tatchell has noted this in a much more constructive, less hysterical and more genuinely left-wing way. If you’re on the right now, Nick, just say.

    • tomclarke

      I know this is from a couple of months ago but all the same, I agree completely. Since the build-up to the Iraq war, Nick Cohen has singled out what he describes as the unreconstructed left for the vilest of slurs and criticisms. It’s just bizarre.

  • I could not agree more with this article. This entire article shredded Labour and Corbyn. It shows how self-loathing and self-deprecating they want us to be. I couldn’t stop nodding when reading. Totally and savagely obliterating this so called ‘revolutionary leader’ and his party.

  • William P. Homans

    Heck, at least there is an honorable Left in Europe to provide some other point of view besides the terrorized fear from the Center and the cynical bloodthirstiness from the Right. In America the neocons call the tune, the Republicans play it, and the Democrats dance to it.

    I agree that Corbyn is an unfortunate choice of leader. I hope for a better radical to supplant him, not an incrementalist trimmer.

    I also think this author is right: if the Left in Europe really said what they thought, the world would be horrified, and fear for its life– though not from the leftists, but from those they point to. In the US, dissenters are still tolerated, but actual whistle-blowers go to prison.

  • Apple

    I’m sure Corbyn has as much of an anti-Britain stance as the right wing leadership are money grabbing, power hungry elitists. There is no denying that ISIS is a little bit a creation of western meddling and I see no conflict in raising this as an issue while also condemning the attacks in Paris. This is just black-whiting of politics.