Thursday, 3 December 2015

Sticks and Stones...and Bombs

I find it quite interesting how much attention the media, specifically the BBC, have given the reports today that a series of Labour MP's who voted in favour of airstrikes in Syria last night have received abusive messages primarily on social media.

Interesting because it's clear they want to make a much bigger deal about a few anonymous PC warriors calling these people 'war mongers' with 'blood on their hands' than they have done about David Cameron, the Prime Minister, calling anyone who would vote against his proposal, 'terrorist sympathisers' 

Why are they doing this?

Because the underhand Blairite agenda is to make allegations against Jeremy Corbyn and his leadership in an effort to topple him, and the biased BBC are happy to perpetuate the myth that these abusive tweets are coming from within the party and specifically Momentum which BBC news today rather murkily referred to as a ''Pro-Corbyn organisation''. What does that even mean? Surely the entire Labour Party should be pro it's leader? Well, clearly it's not and that's because there are elements within who refuse to acknowledge the democratic process and will of the electorate who voted Corbyn into power with a majority. 

They don't want to listen to the people, but through their manipulation of the media, it is clear they want the people to listen to them. 

For what it's worth Momentum (and yes, I am a member) is a campaign to promote real progressive change in politics at a grass roots level. I see no reason why anyone who really, truly wishes for this would want to slander the names of Labour MP's who make a difference every single day to their constituents but whose opinions on the current crisis in Syria radically differ from theirs. I don't believe these MP's are 'war mongers' (though I do have to point out that the rather unsettling whooping and applauding within the House once the vote came in would give people cause to wonder about their motivations in that respect) and I certainly would not, were I a social media user, take to their Twitter page to call them that any more than I would believe anyone who voted against was a terrorist sympathiser. We all have different reasons and beliefs for taking the stance we have done this week. Who knows, maybe some MP's were cowed into voting yes because they didn't want to be branded a terrorist sympathiser by the government?

At every step of the way Jeremy Corbyn has made it utterly plain that his kind of politics is straight and honest, and that it is both extremely civil and respectful. This is the exact opposite in fact of his own rivals within the party, who are keen to draw a spurious link between him and those people who have attacked MP's who voted yes online. This element within the party believe in a kind of politics that is not straight, that is not honest, and they are not civil and they are not respectful. They are selfish, power hungry, set in their ways individuals who have lost sight of socialism and, on seeing that Corbyn's Labour party is no place for them, they intend to forcibly make it a place for themselves once more.

And all the while, Cameron and the Tories remain off the hook.


  1. I'd say you're being rather more charitable towards those who voted to bomb Syria than I'm capable of being. "Warmongers" is exactly what a large number of them are in my opinion, particularly the ones that bayed and cheered after that nauseating speech from Benn Jr. As his dad, a man whose boots he's not fit to lick, once put it: "Every member of parliament tonight who votes for the government motion will be consciously and deliberately accepting the responsibility for the deaths of innocent people."

    As regards the obsessive media influence on a handful of random nutters abusing pro-war MPs (to whom all I can say is "Boo hoo hoo, you're capable of voting for actions that will cause the deaths of innocent people but incapable of handling a few nasty Twitter comments?"), we saw exactly the same thing in the independence referendum and continue to see it to this day. If some pro-independence person sends a nasty tweet to JK Rowling, it's front page news and "the ugly side of the independence movement", "Sturgeon must condemn", etc., and yet when it comes to the litany of death threats directed at Sturgeon and Salmond, or the abuse from prominent members of the Labour and Tory parties towards independence supporters, all you hear is crickets. So yes, as I've said before, the tactics currently being used against Corbyn are exactly the same ones that were honed to a fine art in Scotland over the last few years. It's no wonder trust in the BBC and the rest of the mainstream media is at an all time low.

    1. Don't get me wrong, I think a good deal of them in any party are nothing other than absolute bloodthirsty warmongers with an eye on their legacy and Britain's position at the top table, but I do believe others genuinely think this is the only course of action now available to us. I don't agree of course, but I do understand and respect their right to think otherwise.

      I dunno mebbe I'm going soft in my old age? A friend actually pointed out how considerably less caustic I am these days, and she cited a line we both love from an Everything But The Girl song which goes 'self assured and abusing guests, that's the way I like you best' which seemed to sum my past history up rather well!

      As for Hilary, I've always said he's nowhere near the man his father was and have said elsewhere that Tony would obviously be vehemently against his POV right now, but they only share blood, they don't share opinions and beliefs, that's not so unusual overall. With that in mind, and knowing his stance on things previously, I wasn't in the least bit surprised with his speech. What does irk me is how right wingers within his party (as well as some Tories) are trying to claim him, inciting Tony's memory and suggesting he's a chip off the old block, when clearly he's anything but!

    2. Oh, don't you dare go soft on me! I don't think I could take that.

      And fair point, children are in no way guaranteed to follow in their parents' footsteps opinions-wise (indeed, the exact opposite is often true in my experience), but I suspect comparisons between Benn Sr. and Benn Jr. were always going to be unavoidable, particularly given the parallels between the Iraq vote Tony was speaking at and last week's Syria vote.