Concern within the Labour Party that Jeremy Corbyn is doing well

I have no problem with Corbyn saying he had conversations with Hezbollah or Hamas or the IRA , talks are better than bombs , listening is better than bombs , The man is a pacifist. I doubt he exchanges Christmas cards or has cosy dinners with them. I have friends in the true sense of the word who are Tories , because they are friends it doesn't mean I share their values

I agree Luckygirl and Gracesgran Surely most people go into politics (whether they be local councillors or MP's) for the right reasons. To make things better. The problem lies when one persons idea of "better" is anothers idea of so much worse.

We are all different on these forums. We come from different parts of the country and very different walks of life. What we do have in common though, is the fact that we all want what's best for future generations, our children and grandchildren. The problems only arise when we have different opionions on how to achieve this.

Have you heard that Burnham has said he will work with Corbyn if Burnham is elected leader?

A big difference is that some people are concerned with how to do better for all children and grandchildren, not just their own. We want the poor and disenfranchised to benefit, not to make them poorer.

"friends who are Tories"? and you admit to that on a public forum Anniebach.

I'm not sure that JC is the man for the job though durhamjen

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3191679/Jeremy-Corbyn-caught-video-calling-Muslim-hate-preacher-honoured-citizen-inviting-tea-terrace-House-Commons.html

Every grandchild matters and the poorest and disenfranchised in this country are children and young people , they too are grandchildren

Yes Jen, I heard Andy say he would work with Corbyn, what I expect from a party member

Yes gillybob , a public confession I have Tory friends

"Our grandchildren" is a generic "our" referring to the children of the nation. I can't imagine anyone on the forum, or elsewhere, who wants their own children and grandchildren to be taking bread, or opportunities, out of the mouths of any other child.

What a very low opinion you do have of anyone whose political orientation is not identical to your own, DJ

I have friends who are Tories, too, gillybob. Is that a crime, too?

That's an incredibly long anti-Corbyn rant from the DM. I am sure they could, and probably have, dig up an equal amount of dirt against the other three, and definitely against whoever wins from now on. That's why we need Tom Watson as deputy.

I do not think many people who have a vote read the DM, for exactly that reason.

Jeremy Corbyn has been consistent in his approach to international conflicts. He believes in political rather than military solutions and that it is necessary to engage all parties to a conflict because there is no point just talking to only those people with whom you might have some sympathy or with whom you share certain interests.

On his website he states "I have always campaigned against neo-colonial wars that are fought for resources on the pretence of fighting for human rights." I think a substantial number of the British people probably agree with that. He has campaigned for those people who have been displaced by powerful states/governments, such as the Palestinians and the Chagos islanders.

When Corbyn was campaigning against the apartheid regime, Thatcher was denouncing the ANC as a "typical terrorist organisation" and refusing to impose sanctions on South Africa, preferring instead "constructive engagement" - which, in effect, meant doing virtually nothing other than labelling people fighting for equality as "terrorists". However, she was completely opposed to any sort of "constructive engagement" so far as the Irish issue was concerned. While people like Corbyn were calling for talks between all parties, she was absolutely opposed.

After Saddam Hussein invaded Iran in 1980, the British government was selling arms to both sides even though the UK was a signatory to a UN Security Council resolution calling on all members to refrain from any act which may lead to further escalation of the conflict. A secret letter from a junior minister to Margaret Thatcher sent in 1981 said "contracts worth over £150milion have been concluded [with Iraq] in the last six months."

There is so much hypocrisy regarding the use of the term "terrorist". It is generally used to describe groups who are opposed to a recognised government and who use terror, sometimes indiscriminately, to try and achieve their aims. It is not used to describe governments - even those governments that have, as in the case Chile, been unlawfully and violently installed by means of military coup (assisted by the US) or Saudi government which is a royal dictatorship. The fact that past and present governments - e.g. in South Africa, Saudi, Chile, etc. - use terror to subjugate and control their people - or certain of their people - does not apparently earn them the title of "terrorists".

I had not read the Independent article about Corbyn being unelectable but I had heard reports. Better not to be elected than to become a pale and unprincipled imitation of those you purport to disagree with.

Unlike some posters, I have little respect for Gordon Brown's intervention in the "Corbyn problem". At least Blair had the honesty to name Corbyn rather than to drop massive hints. And I thought his pacing up and down the stage looked ridiculous.

Really, Elegran? What do you think the Tories are doing, taking food from the mouths of children. Why do you think there are so many foodbanks, or is that just a figment of the Left's imagination?

There were food banks in the UK during Labour's years in power too, as you well know.

An interesting post, Eloethan. It reminds us of exactly how long Corbyn has been in parliament, and how consistent he is.
I heard on the radio this morning that he has rebelled against the Labour vote in Parliament 400 times. They forgot to add he'd been there for 32 years.

Elegran, this government and therefore their supporters are taking opportunities from poorer children, fact.

Good old Ken Livingstone.

www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2015/08/17/ken-livingstone-it-s-the-labour-right-not-jeremy-corbyn-who

And you wonder why the Labour Party dislike him?He is exactly what used to be called The Loony Left, and it would be better for all concerned if he quietly sat on the back benches for another 32 years.

Elegran, you can't win, all remarks are twisted around in a very Orwellian fashion.

Oh sure, just as I am sure they deliberately engineered a world-wide economic depression so that they could achieve that. Probably have a recipe for roast poor child at the back of their manifesto too, and a note of the best wine to drink with it.

Do you remember the poster who was on here very briefly and told us all that questioning the literal truth of the least mention of anything in the Bible was playing into Satan's hands, and he now had gleeful possession of our souls? Following it up with specific mention of several respectable Christian denomination, which were also inspired by Satan to catch our souls? But that was a wind-up.

A quick Google showed me the increase in the need for food banks :

The latest figures from the Trussell Trust show a 19% year-on-year increase in food bank use, demonstrating that hunger and poverty continue to affect large numbers of people, including rising numbers of low-paid workers.

The trust’s 445 food banks distributed enough emergency food to feed almost 1.1 million people for three days in 2014-15 – up from 913,000 the previous year.

Back in 2009-10, before the Liberal Democrat-Conservative coalition took power, 41,000 people were given three days’ food by the 56 food banks established at that time by the then little-known charity.
www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/22/food-bank-users-uk-low-paid-workers-poverty

The Labour Party do not dislike Corbyn. They are voting for him in droves. Where do you get your ideas from, roses?

Regarding Corbyn believing in holding talks etc, I so remember at a women's Labour Party meeting Mo Mowlam talking of the criticism being showered on her for her approach to the IRA, her visit to the Maze to meet and talk with murderers , she believed talking was the way to peace , how right she was

There are talks to achieve peace.

And talks where you might share some of the same objectives as the people you are talking to.

Two very different types of talks.

Perhaps I should have said, the shadow cabinet and a lot of MP's and a lot of ordinary, shall we say, Labour voters.

x post.