The Student Room Group

Corbyn Briefed Communist Spies in Cold War

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5581166/jeremy-corbyn-communist-spy-cold-war-briefings/

Labour have denied that he supplied 'privileged' information, which is a rather specific turn of phrase.

What's surprising is that it isn't surprising. Eagerly awaiting young trots telling me that we've heard it all before and that the British people don't care whether their leaders consistently support this country's enemies or not. Yawn. Your man is a scumbag.

Scroll to see replies

I’m sure Jezza opppses the violence done on both sides and was acting as a peace envoy.

If it hadn’t have been for his stringent efforts I’m sure the earth would be an irradiated husk by now 😂
Reply 2
Obviously a silly story, no one would identify themselves as a spy. The whole point of being a spy is no one knows you are a spy. It would be stupid for any communist spy to tell Corbyn they were a spy in case he was a double agent or an informer for MI5.
Original post by Rinsed
I think the point is that his counter-claim, that he was going around meeting a Czech 'diplomat' without expecting them to report their meetings back upstairs, is extraordinarily naive even to the extent which it's believable.


3/10 trolling.

It's an absolutely ridiculous smear and it's no surprise to see the source 'reporting it'. Let's be honest here, not even you believe the drivel written in the article Nor do you care. Instead of debating or discussing points, your side seems intent on just labeling anyone they disagree with as a 'terrorist sympathiser/traitor/trot' etc. Throw enough sh*t at the wall and hope some sticks. Some things don't change.

This is SJW type stuff from you.

My favorite line in the article is that 'Corbyn was described as having negative views about the policies of the Conservative government...'

A Labour party figure negative about the Tories? Hold the front page...
(edited 6 years ago)
Reply 4
Not gunna lie the sun is about as reputable as that guy down my street who thinks the government are enlarging his genitals using beams from his tv
If this is true we have to question his motives.

Is it peace? Well possibly, but at the same time we have to remember he was in no position to peruse peace. He was a backbench opposition Mp who was basically unknown outside Islington.
Original post by Rinsed
I always enjoy the fingers-in-the-ears play from idiots whenever a verifiable news story comes from a source they don't like.

The fact is that Corbyn's team have basically confirmed the story. They claim he was meeting a 'diplomat' with no idea at all he might be reporting their meetings. But then the best case scenario is that he was exceptionally foolish.


Exactly, a spy isn’t exactly going to say that they’re a spy are they? With the possible exception of James Bond.

The sun may have a reputation for sensationilism. But not outright lying surely? There’s a difference.
So 32 years ago Jeremy Corbyn met a Czech diplomat who was possible a spy. And that's the best they can come up with?
No fraudulent expenses claims? No secret donations from Russian oligarchs? No running down the NHS while owning shares in private healthcare providers?

The ultimate irony is that a 'shock' story about foreign agents trying to influence British politicians should appear in a newspaper owned by Rupert Murdoch, a foreigner who has spent the last 30 years trying to influence British politicians.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Rinsed
Not even Corbyn's team are denying the story outright, they're just claiming he had no idea what was going on around him.

I'm sorry you don't like it when people report that Corbyn supported the USSR/IRA/Hezbollah/Iran/Venezuelan government but the stories are absolutely not all based on lies as your side always tries to claim. There is a good deal of fact backing this up and it mystifies me that you lot can stick your collective heads in the sand so.


Of course they have denied it.

It's just the usual Murdoch smear, the best way to deal with them is not to acknowledge them and give their lies any degree of credibility by taking them seriously.

Indeed the article you linked posts not one bit of evidence to back up that Corbyn was giving our secrets to or meeting with a known spy.

You don't really care about this at all, nor do you believe it. It's akin to SJW pretending to take offence at everything. This outrage culture on both sides is really quite tiresome.
Original post by DeBruyne18
Of course they have denied it.

It's just the usual Murdoch smear, the best way to deal with them is not to acknowledge them and give their lies any degree of credibility by taking them seriously.

Indeed the article you linked posts not one bit of evidence to back up that Corbyn was giving our secrets to or meeting with a known spy.

You don't really care about this at all, nor do you believe it. It's akin to SJW pretending to take offence at everything. This outrage culture on both sides is really quite tiresome.


Never any words from them on Saudi Arabia, Saddam's Iraq, Pol Pot, the Mujaheddin/Al Qaeda/ISIS, Unionist paramilitaries,etc. ... are there :laugh:

Maybe Corbyn is responsible for those too!?
Original post by Rinsed
Oh, but here's a news site defending Corbyn:

https://www.rt.com/uk/418870-war-spies-corbyn-meeting/


RT 😂😂. What next? The canary?
Original post by Rinsed
Oh, I'm quite sure the Canary are busy penning an article which claims Corbyn was single-handedly negotiating a peace-agreement with the Soviets.


And Laura Kuenssburg was trying to destroy it via the facist BBC??
Bah, they put the feelers out and found he had nothing of interest to contribute. Like his crew, he was always out of the loop on everything and there are good reasons for that. Not even the commies were interested in him, that's the story.
(edited 6 years ago)
Reply 14
Original post by Rinsed
I always enjoy the fingers-in-the-ears play from idiots whenever a verifiable news story comes from a source they don't like.

The fact is that Corbyn's team have basically confirmed the story. They claim he was meeting a 'diplomat' with no idea at all he might be reporting their meetings. But then the best case scenario is that he was exceptionally foolish.


You mistake my remark about the reliability of the sun for "fingers-in-the-ears play" because I don't actually care if corbyn briefed communist spies in the cold war. The thread caught my eye because it looked interesting then I saw the sun and figured I'd have a joke at the expense of the credibility of the sun. So no this wasn't me going oh well I'm going to ignore all the evidence to say it was because i like corbyn and then support that with a weak argument with a shot at the sun. I will repeat this I do not care if corbyn briefed communist spies or did not brief commmunist spies
Original post by Rinsed
They have denied he gave this 'diplomat' any 'privileged' information.

That is far from a full-throated denial of the story.

So Corbyn met with diplomat 30 years ago and there ain't a shred of evidence to suggest he met with a spy or rather someone who believed to be a spy whom he gave secret information to?


Slow news day? Honestly you don't even believe this yourself.
Reply 17
Original post by DeBruyne18
You really are using the Mail and Express as examples of reputable sources?
Really?


Aye gotta agree although with me it is a bit of a lose lose situation because I don't trust any news outlets
Reply 18
Original post by Rinsed
I'm surprised by your honesty.


I'm glad to hear :smile:
Original post by DeBruyne18
You really are using the Mail and Express as examples of reputable sources?
Really?


Ignore the evening standard then.

Quick Reply