https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xHz7qPr0ss
Jeremy Kek Corbyn wouldn't shoot terrorists if a Paris style attack were to take place in London, he says it's "dangerous" and "counter-productive".
It also emerged Mr Corbyn plans to attend a Christmas party for an anti-war campaign which blamed the Paris atrocities on western intervention in the Middle East.
Should be trialed for treason.
.
god he's such a limp wristed faggot
My God, I really hope he never gets in office. I seriously fear for my country if this cunt gets in.
>>56540323
>tfw this kek turned my grandparents from ritual labour voters into kippers
>>56540323
>>56540323
Luckily this piece of Marxist shit will not get voted into power.
HE CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT
...He won't actually get away with it, will he?
>>56540323
He's a fucking cunt. Any true white male should be ready to rip out the throat of any terrorist they see.
>>56540323
>doesn't want to shoot terrorists because it might be dangerous
how the fuck did this retard win leadership?
a 5 year old with fucking downs syndrome has better common sense than him
First burger posting! He's a faggot btw
>>56540323
So labour is dead right?
>>56540323
Please don't let people like this win. It hurts watching our father slowly kill himself.
>>56541688
Nah, he just replaced his party with the Greens rendering them both irrelevant.
>>56540323
>if people were getting killed in the streets I would force people out into the streets to stop it but not let them defend themselves or anybody else
What
>>56541859
He won't win.
Labour have lost control, seriously. It's quite amusing watching them self destruct.
>>56540323
I don't particularly know the man, but to play devils advocate:
A Quaker or a member of the Amish would also not take violence towards terrorists if their belief was strong enough. That does not make them treasonous, it makes them supremely principled.
You may not agree with that principle, and that is entirely fine, but it still stands. But seriously, just elect him out of office and quit bitching.
>>56541867
I think it's safe to say that Labour have completely lost the Scottish vote, I just can't believe that Corbyn is so desperate to crush what support it has left. I'm in disbelief that he's head of Labour in the first place after those Osama comments.
>>56542087
Lel
The SNP have also lost the Scottish vote by this point too.
I don't know who people here will vote for now.
Probably UKIP.
The Scottish people are very conservative, we're just very nationalistic and can hold a grudge for a long time too.
When the Labour party spawned in Scotland, it wasn't the kek party you have now.
Hell, the first Tory prime minister was Scottish.
>>56541842
Do you mean, "dead, right?"
>>56542086
That's because the Amish haven't yet faced a really credible threat. They are sheltered from the world.
You telling me that you wouldn't defend yourself or others by taking out a Muzrat armed with a machine gun? You'd just stand there and let him spray bullets everywhere because that's what this Marxist Corbyn is saying.
I'm sure if the Amish faced a real threat they'd pick up arms and shoot back.
>>56542309
>>56542086
Is he amish? Is he a Quaker?
>>56542432
Too bad Labour betrayed everyone after the war and during the Blair years.
>Enemy Corbyn
>Electable
Even by some sheer fucking cosmic event that allowed him to be voted in, the military would coup his shit up ASAP, they've already said they would.
>>56542432
>>56542376
Oh no, I'd be shooting back. I was just saying there are people who are pacifist to the point of allowing themselves to die and that there is a certain respectability to that because people that willing to devote themselves to non-violence are rare.
I mean, this guy is very probably a limp-wristed fagwit.
>>56541946
They're quite literally suicidal. It's an impervious bubble of fantasy at this point. Anyone who would say such a thing with a straight face is very nearly insane.
>>56542527
>>56542560
Sadly yes.
This is the party the older generation vote for when they vote Labour.
Not the bastardisation that it became.
One that wanted work for the poor, not bennies.
>>56540323
Except that's not what he said. Why bother posting a clip and then paraphrasing it badly?
Oh right, because you're not actually defending anything you've said, you just want to cause /pol/ to lose their shit.
Good job, OP. Your faggot-fu is strong.
>>56540323
For some reason whenever I see him giving a speech I laugh. Not even for his politics, something just odd about him desu senpai
>>56540323
His opinion is like
"Just let them do it till they get bored, they'll stop at some point. Maybe to use to toilet or to sleep. Then we can peacefully arrest them :)"
>>56542725
Maybe you're imagining him trying to negotiate with Putin.
>>56542666
Dianne Abbot pls.
Don't you have a ceiling to be staring at?
>>56542632
Those people should not hold office. There is nothing absolutely moral about extreme non-violence.
>>56542833
Fuck off, Gideon. You should be doing your homework for Wednesday.
>>56542086
Being principled isn't good if your principles are shit
Even his own party doesn't want anything to do with him, only a matter of time before they turn on him.
Ukip odds on taking Oldham have shortened dramatically in the last fortnight.
>>56540323
Is it possible that Corbyn is actually a right wing plant, just there to make Labour completely unelectable?
>>56542868
Just to be clear, what level of violence is required to hold office? Is there an upper limit, or is it best to vote in the real psychopaths, just to be on the safe side?
>>56542943
Gonna cut ur bennies m8.
An actual meme, fuck this guy and all the faggots that will vote for him.
>>56543282
It would be the first good tactical maneuver from the Right in 50 years.
>>56543282
>>56540323
>Saving fellow countrymen, given the exclusive opportunity, is counter-productive
Castrate these faggots, all of them
>>56543388
Obviously the maximum and minimum is whatever the electorate will tolerate.
I'd suggest that the electorate won't tolerate complete abject surrender.
Nice kek-try, brits
>>56540323
Are there any non-suicidal socialists out there?
>>56543570
Did he say that? I must have missed it. Care to give me a timestamp?
>>56543608
Don't forget to vote for Bernie or Hilary anon.
>>56543388
>>56543651
Fuck off Corbyn.
>>56543651
It's called a summary and review of what the anon has observed.
Would you care to take a bunch of aspirin and slice your radial, ulnar and carotid arteries open?
>>56543596
>I'd suggest that the electorate won't tolerate complete abject surrender.
And I'd agree with you. You know what, so would Corbyn.
>Rejecting Trident, literally £31 bn worth of meme-tier weaponry isn't abject surrender.
>Saying you're not comfortable with a generalised shoot-to-kill policy isn't abject surrender.
>>56543388
Well a general test would be hard to come by, maybe even impossible. That said I like to think that we could all agree that if some enrage Muslims started shooting people on the streets then an appropriate response, indeed the only response, is to let those that have the guns use them.
He completely obfuscated the point. He constantly shifted the argument to "prevention". Given his affiliation with Stop the War, and general pacifist tendencies I'm taking that as an admission that he wouldn't issue a kill order.
>>56542943
>le Gideon maymay
I think that this:
>theguardian.com
Is more your speed.
>>56543531
Best £3 you ever spent?
To be honest, Corbyn seems like a nice chap. The kind of man who would own a local cafe go about his life in a quiet and unassuming matter.
He's significantly more likeable than countless other snivelling, scheming leftist shits. At least he's honest about his batshit, unelectable opinions.
>>56543861
That was (and still is) his position on the IRA and Argentina.
>>56543882
>le Gideon maymay
In response to
>le Diane Abbot maymay
I'm answering your more substantive point at the moment, but that just pissed me off.
To be fair to him he didn't say he wouldn't shoot them. He said he wouldn't shoot to kill. Which admittedly is almost just as insane.
>This is what some Europeans actually believe
>This is what other Europeans have to deal with
>>56543861
>>Saying you're not comfortable with a generalised shoot-to-kill policy isn't abject surrender.
If terrorists are killing people it literally is. Are you an Australian on vacation?
>>56543608
>lol britkeks
>country is ruled by a nigger
BLACKED
L
A
C
K
E
D
>Will Britbongs ever learn?
>>56544151
I can't believe the labour PR team haven't sorted him out by now.
He just walks into the media's traps time and time again. He's the easiest target they've had since Nick Griffin
>>56541481
It's happening to a lot of white working class, Charlie.
This is why I joined labour to vote him as leader.
>>56544260
He's a laughing stock here. Plus he's anti Britain.
You need to watch out for you Communist Grandpa, Mr Sanders, my friend.
He's actually popular within the demokeks legion.
Corbyn hates the west, wants to ruin it. This man has no love for anything but a slow descent into madness and apathy. Such a man is a pathetic individual; he loves only the shallow things, and focuses on negatives only. To him, there is no truth but the voice of the opposite, an opposite that, in his mind, is only ever correct and moral.
Fuck Corbyn. Men like this have no role to play except to be convenient, easily handled retards for countries to play games with. Any nation with a Corbyn is a nation very much so cursed indeed.
>>56544339
Cheeky desu senpai
>>56543882
>He completely obfuscated the point.
No, he didn't. He said in response to the first question:
>Of course you bring people onto the street to ensure there is safety within our society
Asked again about a shoot to kill policy he said:
>I'm not happy with a shoot to kill policy in general
>in general
He doesn't want the sort of nonsense that routinely happens in the land of the happy-clappy-burger, or repeats of the shooting of de Menezes. Trying to link that response to his previous one about an actual terrorist incident is naive at best, but since this is a guido video, clearly maliciously dishonest.
>>56544186
Two different questions m8. The first was about a terrorist incident, the second about a more generalised shoot-to-kill policy.
>>56544533
Go to bed, Jeremy
>>56540323
lol, Nigel will be leader of the opposition soon if they don't get rid of him.
>>56544901
Ignore the title of the video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9qbaQk5ruI
Starkey is a pretty good historian which makes me think he's probably fairly good at making predictions of these kinds of things.
2020 baby.
>>56544901
Not sure you've quite grasped the niceties of the parliamentary system there.
Farage brings sick bants:
http://news.sky.com/story/1558515/farage-jeremy-corbyn-is-a-gift-to-ukip
>>56544991
I fucking love Starkey, he's always bang on the money.
>>56544991
You do realise he was saying this before 2015 about the 2015 general election.
>>56544533
>No, he didn't. He said in response to the first question:
Okay, would he give a shoot-to-kill order if there was Paris like attack? You're inferring that he would from what has to be one of the least committal phrases I've seen old Jez use.
>Trying to link that response to his previous one
The second question was clearly asking for clarification of the first.
Anyone else getting comfy for brexit?
>>56540323
ITT Sensationalism and missing the point.
Corbyn explicitly states he's not happy with a shoot to kill principle in general. He's implying that it's a poor idea to fill the streets with military with the go ahead to shoot to kill because things are likely to go wrong. I dislike him as much as the next right winger but this is just pathetic.
>>56542527
Eh
I think they have always been more or less the same
>>56545542
If you think SO19, in a live operation, needs authorisation from the PM to kill someone, then you should probably do some more research.
You don't send armed police to a terrorist attack and hope they'll shoot them in the leg. Or give them a really nasty chinese burn. In that situation, killing is part of the deal.
What Corbyn has been arguing against is a more general extension of that to a shoot first and ask questions later policy. It has been variously labelled shoot-to-kill, but should more technically be called shoot-on-sight.
I'm perfectly happy with terrorists getting killed when they are being terrorists. I'm not so comfortable with people being randomly shot on the street, just to be on the safe side.
>>56544458
>he's a laughing stock here
I met a british, brown student on exchange at my university. We got talking about British politics and he mentioned how much he loved Corbyn, and I said I thought Nigel Farage was great.
It was amazing to watch him squirm.
>>56546343
>talking to a nigger
>ever
>>56546436
He was a paki actually
>>56545486
Yes and he was right about them, UKIP did storm ahead.
2020 is where it's at now.
>>56546070
In the time it took you to shit that post out I googled it, looks like he's changed his mind and decided that shoot-to-kill when terrorists are on the street is fine.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12000003/Jeremy-Corbyn-savaged-by-Labour-MPs-over-shoot-to-kill-opposition.html
>>56540323
I honestly have never despised a person in brittish politics more than I do him, I hope he and all of his voters choke to death on battery acid
