Corbyn's Response To May's Statement.

[Deskdiary]

An utterly fatuous response from COB?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43380217

[Gromit]

It seems fatuous to me to be accepting hundreds of thousands of pounds from Putin’s buddies at the same time as calling him a murderer.

At best the Conservatives are naive, at worst, they are collaborating with the enemy.

[ichkeria]

Far be it for me to defend the Tories, but the accepting of money occurred well prior to the statement by Mrs May yesterday.
And you cannot change the past.
A lot of people are having to rapidly reassess their rather naive impressions of the Kremlin and its influence. But meanwhile, tough words,, hopefully followed by tough actions, have to be taken.
Someone mischievously suggested that Corbyn was cross because donors would rather pay to play tennis with Boris than share beans on toast with Diane Abbott. Which I thought was cruel, but funny.

[Gromit]

ichkeria

They accepted Russian money after Putin had Alexander Litvinenko murdered.
In a couple of years this current attack will be forgotten too.
It is well documented that dirty money from Russian criminals is laudered through the London property market, and it is also documented that some of the Tory donations came from Russians with property business in London. Even if all is above board, it looks bad.

[Gromit]

// The glut of funds flowing into the UK can be viewed as a sign of confidence in its economy and confirmation that it is one of the most attractive countries in the world in which to live. But, while much of the foreign money inflating property bubbles and private-school fees will have come from legitimate sources, there are grounds to suspect that some has been acquired through the proceeds of corruption.

Gulnara Karimova – the daughter of the late, former Uzbek dictator Islam Karimov, described in leaked US embassy cables as the “single most hated person” in Uzbekistan – is believed to have owned several flats in Belgravia worth millions of pounds. Karimova, who is alleged to have pocketed hundred of millions in bribes for allowing telecoms firms access to the Uzbek market, has been linked to the properties through a company in the British Virgin Islands.
Still, the fact that the corrupt seek to launder money through the UK property market, and in particular London, should be no surprise, experts agree. The capital boasts a vast army of seasoned PR professionals who are skilled in “reputation laundering” – helping dubious individuals enhance their social standing by ensuring that they are invited to the important parties and fundraisers, and that they donate to the right charities, thinktanks and art galleries. //

[ichkeria]

Gromit I agree with all the above.
But like I say, you cannot change the past.
Just learn from one's mistakes and move on.

[Hazi-Hammenuhoth]

Totally irrelevant to the original post Gromit. Corbyn should have kept his powder dry, but has fluffed it yet again, leaving him looking petty and out of hos depth.

[Hazi-Hammenuhoth]

If Corbyn had an ounce of nous he would have kept his trap shut when it comes to political donations. And as for timing, he totally blew it. It was like someone standing up during a funeral and shouting 'He owed me a fiver!'. Totally inept at best.

[Kromovaracun]

I just don't see what's "crass" about it. At the very least, the sheer levels of Russian money keeping the City afloat and funding election campaigns ensure that little or nothing will be done. The UK's version of the Magnitsky laws are already remarkably watered down and that was long after Litvinenko.

I could perhaps see the "united front" thing if we were at war. But we aren't, and nobody expects to be over this (because we would lose decisively). So whom exactly does this question disrespect? What does it violate?

The "timing" objection looks completely insubstantial to me. If this was an objectionable thing to say (and I still don't see how it was), it would not get less objectionable in two weeks.

And it's already known that Corbyn's backbenchers disagree with him on almost everything. They lost their chance to depose him, though, so I'm not that moved by it.

[Kromovaracun]

//If Corbyn had an ounce of nous he would have kept his trap shut when it comes to political donations//

Why? Party donations are the dark heart of UK politics. They explain a vast amount of policy that otherwise looks insensible. I wish people would discuss it more often.

[gulliver1]

Anyone on here believe that the the Cons are going to hand money back to Russian doners ? eh, they just can not keep their grubby little hands of other peoples money, they can not help it, they were born into it . Thats why they are known as the Con Party

[dannyk13]

This says it all about the man:--
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5497777/Jeremy-Corbyn-condemned-long-history-Moscow-support.html

[ichkeria]

Kromo all I can say in response is that this was a statement about the chemical weapon attack in an English town. It wasn’t a ‘normal’ debate. Someone commented that it was like shouting ‘he owed me a fiver’ at a funeral. For me that sums it up

[Kromovaracun]

Fair enough. I just don't see the similarity myself.

[ichkeria]

Let’s agree to differ :-)

[sevenOP]

The Commons groupthink abhors resistance. The backstabbers are only too willing to conform.

Didn't know you were privy to the parts of the Litvinenko trail that were held in secret Gromit, please share with us.

[ichkeria]

Here's your troll Gromit. Not poor old jahulaye

[sevenOP]

Never get tired using that feeble excuse comrade?