At last. When I heard last night that Jeremy Corbyn plans to make a speech linking British foreign policy with attacks such as the recent one in Manchester, I felt like cheering. Someone had finally suggested that the motive for the crime might be worth looking at. At last.
It has always been easier to talk about these ISIS terrorists as madmen with no motivation other than hatred of the West and all it stands for. In other words, there’s no reasoning with these people – and besides, wouldn’t it be a sickening betrayal of those who died to even think about talking to these people?
All of which sounds familiar. The British authorities during the Troubles always maintained the line that the IRA were mindless psychopaths, motivated by nothing but blind hatred. Most of us who are capable of rubbing a few thoughts together knew that was a lie.
Likewise we’ve had several days pass since the Manchester attack and all that we’ve heard is how evil the person was who detonated the bomb. While that is true, it is a very stupid government which laments a crime and then refuses to acknowledge one major motivation for the crime.
Of course the Daily Mail and its backers will denounce Crobyn’s speech today as another example of how Corbyn is soft on terrorism. Wrong, Daily Mail. Wrong and you know it. Corbyn is rational on terrorism, which is a first step towards addressing the problem.
Final thought: hands up if you can remember inside five seconds just why Theresa May and her government had gone from strong and stable to weak and wobbly immediately prior to the Manchester attack? Anybody? I overshot the five-second challenge myself last night. The outcry was because Theresa May and her party had backtracked on their manifesto pledge regarding social care of the elderly, because the Tory candidates were getting such aggro on the doorsteps over it. May and her minions must have been deeply relieved that the Manchester attack arrived on cue to obliterate that story of mean-minded Tory vacillation.
The polls in Britain have narrowed. This could be a tighter race than the Daily Mail would like.
women wearing lipstick is motivation enough for them to commit crime ffs.
your only kidding yourself.
Nobody denies their outdated view of women but Britain only made things worse by interfering in the middle east. Do you think they actually helped matters?
no it would hardly help matters..but bombing has nothing to do with hatred of western values.not only their stoneage views on women but the way they have ruined towns and cities across the uk and europe and that includes ireland.nobody voted for this it was forced on countries by the eu.we already have seen what one set of planters has done in ireland.theres no room at the inn.
Jude
“May and her minions must have been deeply relieved that the Manchester attack arrived on cue “.
Whatever we think of the tories I think that is unwarranted.
I don’t like their policies but I suspect like everyone else they felt nothing but horror at this event.
But the Manchester Monday Madness did have the effect of deflecting voters’ attention from the Tories threatening to steal children’s school dinners, pensioners homes, and even their winter fuel allowance!
Sherdy
It may have done but to portray them as being deeply relieved that it happened is without insulting and daft.
It is a cheap trick and is of a piece with all the frequent manplaying and belittling that goes on here.
Why, for example, bother to argue the points made by someone like Ruth Dudley Edwards when it is easier just to dismiss her as a west brit?
Why try to talk to unionists about a united Ireland when it is simpler to label them hillbillies and pat yourself on the back?
And on it goes.
There is little point in demanding respect from ones political opponents if one cannot even accept that they may have the most basic human feelings about a tragedy. lke this.
Have you seen thishttps://www.google.co.uk/amp/evolvepolitics.com/sky-news-hack-filmed-saying-manchester-attack-plays-well-theresa-may-corbyn-terrorist-sympathiser/amp/
Malachy
And…?
I’m sure most people would have the ‘most basic human feelings’ about this tragedy, but some politicians can be somewhat lacking in such emotions, preferring to think of any political advantage which can be gained from tragedy!
Sherdy
So you agree with Jude that Theresa May is so lacking in compassion or basic human feeling that she was deeply relieved when this attack happened?
That is quite a thing to say about someone.
But the Manchester Monday Madness did have the effect of deflecting voters’ attention from the Tories threatening to steal children’s school dinners, pensioners homes, and even their winter fuel allowance!
“I don’t like their policies but I suspect like everyone else they felt nothing but horror at this event.”
You clearly don’t know or understand the Tories if you honestly think that Gio. Funny how there is no horror for thousands of innocent people bombed by British/American planes every couple of months…..needless to say I was sickened by the Manchester attack but I’m also sickened by the hypocrisy of people who bomb thousands of people routinely and think they are morally superior to others, especially if their tories.
Ryan
They may or may not care about deaths caused by their policies.
It is extremely arrogant to assume you know their private thoughts.
Do they care about their families and friends?
You seem to know?
This is just hyperbole on Jude’s part and it adds nothing to the discussion.
Dublin and Monaghan 1974. Do you seriously think British spooks are incapable of using civilians when it suits their aims? I would gladly flick the switch to remove every ISIS mutter from the face of the earth, but that is not possible, unfortunately.
I think the bit at the end is not a good idea, I don’t think that needs to be quite so in your face. Just asking why they were in trouble, reminding us and bringing in how important this election is on so many fronts, would be preferable.
Its not just foreign policy though is it? Why was Sweden, Belgium and Germany (several times) attacked. Some may carry out a terror attack as some sort of revenge but most seem to be carried out by complete crack pots who are just looking to max the kill count.
All 3 countries have current or past involvement in the Middle East and other Islamic countries.
Well about as involved as Ireland so I guess Dublin is a legitimate target on that logic
I noticed that at last nigh’ts Question Time in Salford nobody had the courage to tackle the issue on terrorism squarely. They concentrated on political correct platitudes. Remember, terrorism is fueled by hate. These people hate our democratic system because which at times is hypocritical. When something goes wrong we go into anti-Muslim mode and abuse people. These people have feelings and some who are vulnerable are taken advantage of just as the elderly are being taken advantage of by Theresa May. Some have relatives in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya and see how the bombs are affecting their lives. This is one and not the only cause of radicalisation. To accept that our foreign policy may affect radicalisation is fair in that the general and necessary debate. Hate on both sides escalates the problem. As long as the media continues to spew anti- Muslim news such as UKIP’s desire to ban the hijab and so on is actually an affront to the self esteem of the people who concerned. a sober, frank debate is now open. Let us continue to debate. Another problem is this social media, it does not provide safety to those who are wooed by the propaganda machine. Remember, 9/11 happened when the USA to over from the Russians in Afghanistan. They were now fighting the people the same mujahedeen they had trained. Doctors, common men were allowed and supported by Cameron to go and fight in Libya. Libya was broken. Look at the thousands that are crossing the Mediterranean.
your way of the mark about the media spewing anti muslim news.in fact they are doing exactly the opposite,social media is the only way to get the stories out whats happening on the streets.when you are invited into a country you have to live by the laws of that country,something muslims dont seem to accept going by the jail figures.ukip have every right to call for a ban on bukas ect they are doing what their voters asked for,all this lets have a debate nonsense is over the majority have voted for change.nonsense being spouted by corbyn,lets sit down with tea and biscuits will be of cold comfort to the families of the children slaughtered in manchester by somebody whose family were brought into the country as supposed refugees.
Who invited Britain and co. Into Libya?
whats libya got to do with it.
these are attacks on western values.
Corbyn really is a breath of fresh air. Despite the mass media hostility towards him he continues to chip away at a Tory lead with his coherent policies in domestic and foreign policy matters. Mrs Strong and Stable is beginning to worry now with good reason. Corbyn’s message is getting through.
Brave of Jeremy Corbyn to make that statement in light of what has just happened in Manchester. No matter how badly you are being persecuted, killing innocent people is wrong. I do hope both Sinn Fein, and the Labour party do well in the election.
I was listening the other day to Jude and poor old Ruth Dudley Edwards on Nolan. The attempts by Ruth and some callers to compare the IRA to ISIS really was silly. Michelle O’Neill really was in a position of doomed if she does and doomed if she doesn’t. If she didn’t condemn the Manchester attack = Unionist outrage. If she did? = Unionist outrage.
First of all, ISIS is a religious organisation, its driven by a faith based ideology. The IRA was the complete opposite. The Orange Order, the UVF, UDA, RUC, etc on the other hand were greatly influenced by Protestantism (or their own particular brand). Who is more alike to Isis?
The IRA killed many civilians and innocent people, there’s no doubt about that and all of it was wrong.if I was around during the troubles I would be a peace supporter and oppose all violence. But the British Army killed civilians/innocent people too and to this day are openly obstructing Justice. The UVF/UDA (often with help from the British State) openly murdered on the basis of religion. If you were Catholic or even a Protestant who was married to a Catholic, you were a legitimate target. No questions asked. Many UVF/UDA members were Orange Order members, again a religious organisation. ISIS works the same way, if you’re not a muslim (or their kind of muslim), you’re a legitimate target. Catholics and “Rotten Prods” were legitimate targets to Unionism.
ISIS likes to cut off the head of their enemies (again, basically anyone non-Muslim) and even film it. In the 1970’s the Shankill Butchers, a gang of UVF/Loyalists, went round kidnapping Catholic civilians and brutally torturing them to death. A few of the victims were practically beheaded. Indeed in the Shankill Butchers book, one UVF member asked for permission from Senior Loyalists to behead Catholics and “stick their heads on poles”. The Senior Loyalists refused permission, not because it was morally disgusting but because it would be bad for their image…..Gusty Spence said he and other Loyalists knew who the Shankill Butchers were and refused to stop them. The RUC has long be suspected of collusion with the gang, they even searched the Black Taxi used to kidnap victims and it was later crushed. The daughter of one of the victims (whose father was beheaded) said “this would never have been allowed to happen to Protestants”.
So when it comes to comparisons, Unionism is a lot closer to ISIS than Republicanism ever was, with its firebrand preachers (Paisley, etc) predicting days of carnage and ruin for non-believers in Protestantism, to lunatic young people who were so full of hatred they grabbed a gun just to “stiff a taig”. Ask the murderers of Bernadette Martin, young James Morgan, Michael McGoldrick and the 3 Quinn Children. Or the people who planted the no warning bombs in Dublin/Monaghan. Political ideology wasn’t their cause, it was sectarian hatred fuelled by a perverse form of Religion, just like ISIS…..
PS: Poor Ruth’s memory must be going. She said the “security forces” killed very very few people here. Yes, 300 Catholic civilians was a very low number Ruth, not counting those killed through collusion and not touching on the injured, which Ruth was at great pains to highlight when it came to the IRA’s bomb in Manchester in 1996 which killed no one and a warning was given….I’m sure ISIS was impressed by that one….
Ryan
The most obvious reason the comparison has been made is simple
Isis bombed civilians in Manchester.
The IRA bombed civilians in Manchester.
Funny you overlooked that.
As for Michelle O’Neill, she was indeed in an impossible position.
But she put herself in that position by her choosing to commemorate the IRA.
A complete hypocrite. Just like the tories in fact.
Gio, all bombs in cities and towns can be described as bombing civilians. The Germans bombed civilians by your description but I didn’t hear anyone criticising Merkel for hypocrisy after she condemned the attack.
Cal
Weak stuff I’m afraid.
Terrorists bomb Manchester and you think no-one is going to be reminded of the IRA?
Seriously?
All bombs terrorise, Gio.
“The IRA bombed civilians in Manchester.”
Nonsense and lies. Please try harder.
wolfie
And the rewriting of history goes on.
I must have dreamed those IRA bombs in Manchester.
Or maybe it was a Jewish conspiracy.
Please back up your claims with proof Gio there’s a good chap. After all you regularly ask of others for proof. Practice what you preach or remain a liar.
“And the rewriting of history goes on”
It must have been a stink bomb or something the IRA planted Gio, since civilian casualties were, err, zero. Not to mention the IRA gave the same civilians a 60 minute warning, yes 60 minutes……yep, the rewriting of history goes on alright.
“I must have dreamed those IRA bombs in Manchester.”
‘Bombs’? More lies.
I can recall the IRA detonating a large bomb in Manchester after giving ample warnings for the Brit authorities to evacuate the area of civilians etc. The IRA wanted to raise the costs of the British war machine in Ireland by targeting business commerce etc within britland. This made sound military sense, after all we all know the Brit rulers love their money and hate having to waste it on their peasants. Added to that the IRA calculated that forcing the Brit rulers to evacuate town centres,air ports etc would exasperate the British public so much that they would in turn demand their rulers to get the fxxx out of dodge I.e leave Ireland. Again sound military sense.(even conventional armies the world over, Britain cough cough, use violence to bend the will of peoples). But sure you know all this anyway Gio but true to form you won’t admit so as you are a liar.
P.s The IRA had to suffer the embarrassment of listening to manchunians thanking their bomb for transforming their town centre I.e the London regime were forced to spend lots of loot rebuilding Manchester town centre. For years the regime refused similar requests from mancs.
wolfie
See my reply to Ryan.
What part of ‘the IRA bombed civilians in Manchester’ is in question?
Gio, you can’t back up your lies then? That’s the standard with liars. Truly pathetic. P.s please don’t report me for calling you names.
wolfie
I see no point in ‘reporting you’ since nothing is likely to come of it.
What is the lie I am supposed to back up?
This might help.
“Funny you overlooked that”
Last time I looked Gio the IRA didn’t bomb civilians in Manchester, no one actually died and they gave a warning before hand. I would agree with the IRA/ISIS comparison if the IRA donated a bomb without warning and to specifically murder civilians, just like what ISIS did. But as we both know they didn’t do that. Just because the place happened to be Manchester doesn’t mean its fair to compare the IRA to ISIS, both groups differ on so many things that its utterly ridiculous to compare them.
From Michelle’s perspective she isn’t a hypocrite. She believes the IRA’s campaign was legitimate and ISIS is not. Germany bombed London during WW2, does that mean it is now hypocritical for the Germans to condemn any bombings that ISIS may commit in London? Was it hypocritical for Germany to condemn the ISIS attacks in France? after all, they invaded France and killed FAR more French than ISIS will ever do. Its just ridiculous logic Gio and nothing more than an attempt to score political points on the back of an atrocity.
Ryan
This is basic stuff.
The Germans who bombed London did so over 70 years ago. Nothing to do with Merkel. Has she said they were justified? Does she commemorate the bombing of London?
I did not say anyone died in the IRA bomb. I said they bombed civilians in Manchester.
It is a pity it has to be spelled out for you and wolfetone.
Michelle O’Neill commemorates the organisation which bombed civilians in Manchester and elsewhere and then condemns this recent bomb.
She clearly is a hypocrite (like many politicians unfortunately).
“She clearly is a hypocrite (like many politicians unfortunately).”
As are you ironically…….as well as a liar. Pathetic.
wolfie
I wonder how many times you can call me a liar before Jude actually notices.
Let’s see.
Fundamental islam has been responsible for the deaths of thousands but I would say fundamental ‘Christianity’ has been worse. Bush, Obama, Clinton, Blair, Major etc are all God fearing Christians. The British state is a Protestant state. Onward Christian soldiers and all that. Here is a revolutionary idea, stop bombing middle eastern countries at the behest of the Saudis and or Israel. See what happens.
see what happens……nothing will change,the problem is already here.are the child grooming gangs,child brides,arranged marriages,genital mutilation,burka wearing,no go areas,heroin selling,ect,ect,anything to do with wars ? the problems need sorted from the inside out,not the other way about.
Gio,the IRA gave an hours warning in Manchester ,unlike ISIS,the yanks or your beloved Brits do when they bomb the crap out of some third world country..
michael
Indeed as Stewart Lee says in the clip I posted they were ‘gentleman bombers’!
Isis bomb civilians in Manchester.
Inevitably it is going to bring back memories of the IRA bombing civilians in Manchester.
It is pretty obvious.
OF course the Brits never bombed anybody and if they did ,perhaps you could furnish us all with the details of the one hour warning they issued beforehand?
michael
I have made no claim for anything the Britiish have or have not done.
Exactly,the actions of the Brits do not seem to concern you at all but 20 year old IRA activities do.
michael
Instead of speculating on what might or might not concern me why not stick to the point.
A bomb in a civilian area in Manchester.
Why would anyone be reminded of the IRA?
What about the bombs planted by the loyalists, who were aided by…..the British?
AJ
What about them?
Did they bomb Manchester?
The comparison is obvious and I am sure the people of Manchester were not talking about loyalist bombs in the aftermath.
If it was a bomb in Dublin then of course people would be talking about the loyalist bombing.
The average person in Britain has no knowledge of Irish politics or history. When Cornyn refuses to follow the status quo opinion he is abused and condemned by people like May. I guarantee she and her military have been responsible for numerous killings, probably in Afghanistan or Syria or Iraq or Libya. I would not be shocked if it turns out they were behind bombs in their own country. Nothing should surprise us over here. Kingsmill massacre? Mc Gurk’s bar? Dublin and Monaghan?