Turn on thread page Beta

Corbyn Briefed Communist Spies in Cold War watch

    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (the sun)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeBruyne18)
    If there was genuine evidence, perhaps. But there isn't and the article you linked provides none. Plus Corbyn was a backbench MP, not a member of the government purporting to act on behalf of the country, like one former Tory Minister...

    What secret information is Corbyn supposed to have been giving this guy?

    The article is all speculation.
    He warned them about British surveillance of their agents.

    It's a valid point that this information was rather general and was unlikely to be much use in reality but, still, it shows where his sympathies lay.

    Oh and by the way the evidence for this is in the article.

    Finally, I suspect the reason you think this is fine but Patel was terrible is because you think the USSR > Israel amirite?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    He warned them about British surveillance of their agents.

    It's a valid point that this information was rather general and was unlikely to be much use in reality but, still, it shows where his sympathies lay.

    Oh and by the way the evidence for this is in the article.

    Finally, I suspect the reason you think this is fine but Patel was terrible is because you think the USSR > Israel amirite?
    I've read the article through again and still, it provides no evidence for anything more than Corbyn having met a diplomat. There is no proof at all that he was briefing them, that's just speculation. When you consider the paper writing the article, it's not difficult to understand why they're making it up.

    As for Patel, well she was actually purporting to act on behalf of the UK government and holding undocumented meetings with and making promises to foreign governments. It has nothing to do with whether it was Israel or the USSR, the breach of her position would have been the same.

    You can't have government ministers holding secret meetings and making their own policy unbeknown to the civil service, Prime Minister and Cabinet.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Its the job of spies to get information from people and some will have cover jobs as diplomats, business people, performers etc.

    Diplomats will also have to inform their superiors if important information comes their way.

    All the Sun article says is Corbyn spoke to people from the Eastern Bloc some of whom may have been spies. If you check up on how many MPs spoke to the same people during the Cold War, you will find almost all MPs spoke to spies at some point in their career.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeBruyne18)
    I've read the article through again and still, it provides no evidence for anything more than Corbyn having met a diplomat. There is no proof at all that he was briefing them, that's just speculation. When you consider the paper writing the article, it's not difficult to understand why they're making it up.

    As for Patel, well she was actually purporting to act on behalf of the UK government and holding undocumented meetings with and making promises to foreign governments. It has nothing to do with whether it was Israel or the USSR, the breach of her position would have been the same.

    You can't have government ministers holding secret meetings and making their own policy unbeknown to the civil service, Prime Minister and Cabinet.
    They have the paper documents from the Czech files. I mean, that is literally evidence. What evidence do you have that they've fabricated it?

    You are so inconsistent it's funny. We have a Tory meeting with representatives of a friendly government. Yes, she probably exceeded her authority doing so and she was duly sanctioned, but the whole media hoo-hah was over the top in my opinion. Then we have a Labour leader meeting with representatives of an unfriendly government and the lefties are like "move along, nothing to see here!" Yes the situations aren't identical but your treatment of the two is apples and oranges.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    Its the job of spies to get information from people and some will have cover jobs as diplomats, business people, performers etc.

    Diplomats will also have to inform their superiors if important information comes their way.

    All the Sun article says is Corbyn spoke to people from the Eastern Bloc some of whom may have been spies. If you check up on how many MPs spoke to the same people during the Cold War, you will find almost all MPs spoke to spies at some point in their career.
    Really, most MPs have willingly met multiple times with people who have identified themselves as agents of an unfriendly regime, and then discussed national security policies?

    I find this a stretch.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    They have the paper documents from the Czech files. I mean, that is literally evidence. What evidence do you have that they've fabricated it?

    You are so inconsistent it's funny. We have a Tory meeting with representatives of a friendly government. Yes, she probably exceeded her authority doing so and she was duly sanctioned, but the whole media hoo-hah was over the top in my opinion. Then we have a Labour leader meeting with representatives of an unfriendly government and the lefties are like "move along, nothing to see here!" Yes the situations aren't identical but your treatment of the two is apples and oranges.
    The documents simply show that Corbyn held a meeting with a diplomat. Which is so far all that has been established.

    As for the Patel incident, well it shows that you are rather inconsistent yourself. The fact that Israel is a friendly nation is absolutely irrelevant. Government ministers can not go and hold undocumented meetings without any civil servants/government officials present and without informing the PM or Cabinet. There is no record of those meetings, and what was said in them. All meetings involving UK government ministers are and should be documented as matter of transparency and accountability.

    It was an absolute misuse and breach of her position of power. She was on a personal mission, purporting to act for the UK government. Whether or not Israel are a friendly nation is irrelevant.

    If Corbyn, as a minister started holding undocumented meetings with foreign government officials, without the approval of the PM/Cabinet and without informing the Civil Service, then yes of course I'd be angry and he should resign. As Patel did. That's not the case though.

    You are trying to argue that Corbyn holding a meeting as an MP with someone you don't like is the same or worse than a minister seriously misusing their position of power.


    Edit:

    Also you say Patel only 'probably' exceeded her authority? Really? And you accuse others of being inconsistent....
    If holding undocumented meetings with and making promises to foreign governments unbeknown to the PM, Cabinet and civil service is only 'probably' exceeding authority then I don't really know what you think someone 'definitely' exceeding their authority is.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeBruyne18)
    The documents simply show that Corbyn held a meeting with a diplomat. Which is so far all that has been established.

    As for the Patel incident, well it shows that you are rather inconsistent yourself. The fact that Israel is a friendly nation is absolutely irrelevant. Government ministers can not go and hold undocumented meetings without any civil servants/government officials present and without informing the PM or Cabinet. There is no record of those meetings, and what was said in them. All meetings involving UK government ministers are and should be documented as matter of transparency and accountability.

    It was an absolute misuse and breach of her position of power. She was on a personal mission, purporting to act for the UK government. Whether or not Israel are a friendly nation is irrelevant.

    If Corbyn, as a minister started holding undocumented meetings with foreign government officials, without the approval of the PM/Cabinet and without informing the Civil Service, then yes of course I'd be angry and he should resign. As Patel did. That's not the case though.

    You are trying to argue that Corbyn holding a meeting as an MP with someone you don't like is the same or worse than a minister seriously misusing their position of power.


    Edit:

    Also you say Patel only 'probably' exceeded her authority? Really? And you accuse others of being inconsistent....
    If holding undocumented meetings with and making promises to foreign governments unbeknown to the PM, Cabinet and civil service is only 'probably' exceeding authority then I don't really know what you think someone 'definitely' exceeding their authority is.
    OK so look at this. In a seismic fit of whataboutery, you have spent two sentences addressing the Corbyn issue and then five paragraphs ranting about a Tory ex-Minister who is tangentially relevant and actually was, as it happens, sacked. It's not just the inconsistency, it's that you're so desperate to move the conversation off your boi Jezza.

    But since you ask, yes, giving succour to this country's enemies is absolutely worse than holding a meeting with a friendly counterpart without informing your superiors. The latter is a breach of protocol, the former flirts with treason.

    And I don't know what your reading, but it has been established that he met at least three times with a representative of the Czech government. It is also established that the representative reported that Corbyn was favourably disposed towards the USSR and gave information about security that was too general to be useful. This is not accidentally gave information to someone who was undercover, this is information directly given to a self-identified agent of a totalitarian regime which he presumably thought might be helpful to their cause.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    Really, most MPs have willingly met multiple times with people who have identified themselves as agents of an unfriendly regime, and then discussed national security policies?

    I find this a stretch.
    Don't be naive, representatives of governments of all stripes meet British MPs and ministers all the time. How do you think problems like Iran's nuclear programme get sorted?

    Corbyn was a back bench MP with no access to government secrets, telling Eastern bloc agents they are being watched by the British Government is like telling them the sun is hot, its bleeding obvious.

    I very much doubt any spy will identify themselves as such unless they had a plan to use that information to further their mission.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    OK so look at this. In a seismic fit of whataboutery, you have spent two sentences addressing the Corbyn issue and then five paragraphs ranting about a Tory ex-Minister who is tangentially relevant and actually was, as it happens, sacked. It's not just the inconsistency, it's that you're so desperate to move the conversation off your boi Jezza.

    But since you ask, yes, giving succour to this country's enemies is absolutely worse than holding a meeting with a friendly counterpart without informing your superiors. The latter is a breach of protocol, the former flirts with treason.

    And I don't know what your reading, but it has been established that he met at least three times with a representative of the Czech government. It is also established that the representative reported that Corbyn was favourably disposed towards the USSR and gave information about security that was too general to be useful. This is not accidentally gave information to someone who was undercover, this is information directly given to a self-identified agent of a totalitarian regime which he presumably thought might be helpful to their cause.
    Again, you seriously downplay what Patel did just because she happens to be on your side. You make it sound like she just committed a technicality. She was holding secret meetings and making promises to other countries while purporting to act for the UK. That is not an accident and it's a serious misuse of her position.

    Again the article on Corbyn states he met a diplomat. That's about it. It's also rather funny that you've picked up on the fact that Corbyn, a Labour MP, had negative views towards the policies of Reagan's and Thatcher's governments as if that's some startling piece of information. A Labour MP opposed to the Tories and Republicans? Well I never...

    So far, all that has been established is that Corbyn met a diplomat. And that he didn't like the Tories.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    Don't be naive, representatives of governments of all stripes meet British MPs and ministers all the time. How do you think problems like Iran's nuclear programme get sorted?

    Corbyn was a back bench MP with no access to government secrets, telling Eastern bloc agents they are being watched by the British Government is like telling them the sun is hot, its bleeding obvious.

    I very much doubt any spy will identify themselves as such unless they had a plan to use that information to further their mission.
    I agree with the second paragraph, this was a man with no access to secrets because no one would have ever trusted him with anything sensitive. Everyone knew his character, he would have divulged to the Russkies as soon as anyone asked, and this is one of the reasons he remains utterly unsuited to power.

    But putting his uselessness to one side, he certainly showed a willingness to abet a totalitarian regime.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeBruyne18)
    Again, you seriously downplay what Patel did just because she happens to be on your side. You make it sound like she just committed a technicality. She was holding secret meetings and making promises to other countries while purporting to act for the UK. That is not an accident and it's a serious misuse of her position.

    Again the article on Corbyn states he met a diplomat. That's about it. It's also rather funny that you've picked up on the fact that Corbyn, a Labour MP, had negative views towards the policies of Reagan's and Thatcher's governments as if that's some startling piece of information. A labour MP opposed to the Tories and Republicans? Well I never...

    So far, all that has been established is that Corbyn met a diplomat. And that he didn't like the Tories.
    I haven't really downplayed though, have I? I said I thought the response was broadly correct. I just see it as interesting that you think one is a clear-cut, disgraceful case of international subterfuge of and one is hunky-dory.

    You are selectively reading the article. It quite clearly says that he was well disposed towards the USSR and that he warned the 'diplomat' of British surveillance of communist agents. Now, you can counter that this was not wildly surprising, but you can't just ignore it.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    I haven't really downplayed though, have I? I said I thought the response was broadly correct. I just see it as interesting that you think one is a clear-cut, disgraceful case of international subterfuge of and one is hunky-dory.

    You are selectively reading the article. It quite clearly says that he was well disposed towards the USSR and that he warned the 'diplomat' of British surveillance of communist agents. Now, you can counter that this was not wildly surprising, but you can't just ignore it.
    How would he have known the guy was a spy? If he was a spy which hasn't been established. And how is telling someone that grass is green, briefing our enemies?

    It's just a whole lot of nothing this story.

    It's tiresome and it's no surprise to see the source of this is the Sun. I still don't get what's meant to be surprising about him not liking the policies of the Tory government or Reagan.

    It reminds me of one when the papers made a huge fuss about when Corbyn gave a speech saying that our foreign policy had created ungoverned spaces which were being exploited by extremists, yet then it turned out several leading Tory figures including Boris Johnson had pretty much said exactly the same thing.

    Or when Corbyn didn't bow at a great enough angle...
    It's all about throwing as much mud at the wall until some of it sticks.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeBruyne18)
    How would he have known the guy was a spy? If he was a spy which hasn't been established. And how is telling someone that grass is green, briefing our enemies?

    It's just a whole lot of nothing this story.
    He was a diplomat from a Soviet-affiliated regime. He reported his meetings with Corbyn to his superiors and it is these documents which have now come to light. He was later expelled from Britain by Margaret Thatcher.

    Calling him a spy is entirely reasonable.

    It's tiresome and it's no surprise to see the source of this is the Sun. I still don't get what's meant to be surprising about him not liking the policies of the Tory government or Reagan.

    It reminds me of one when the papers made a huge fuss about when Corbyn gave a speech saying that our foreign policy had created ungoverned spaces which were being exploited by extremists, yet then it turned out several leading Tory figures including Boris Johnson had pretty much said exactly the same thing.

    Or when Corbyn didn't bow at a great enough angle...
    It's all about throwing as much mud at the wall until some of it sticks.
    No, the source of this is Czech documents. The scoop is from the Sun, but it has since been picked up by pretty much every news outlet. It's a story, whether you like it or not.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    Given the insistence from the Corbyn fans that this is fake news I look forwards to the Sun and all the other people running it being sued for defamation.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Given the insistence from the Corbyn fans that this is fake news I look forwards to the Sun and all the other people running it being sued for defamation.
    More likely that appear will be ordered to print an apology/correction than defamation.

    Are you really suggesting that the majority of times that a paper prints lies, that they are successfully sued for defamation?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rinsed)
    He was a diplomat from a Soviet-affiliated regime. He reported his meetings with Corbyn to his superiors and it is these documents which have now come to light. He was later expelled from Britain by Margaret Thatcher.

    Calling him a spy is entirely reasonable.



    No, the source of this is Czech documents. The scoop is from the Sun, but it has since been picked up by pretty much every news outlet. It's a story, whether you like it or not.
    The fact that he was later expelled doesn't prove he was a spy and there's no evidence that Corbyn knew he was a spy.

    The other papers are reporting on the Sun reporting it.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    That's because he's commie trash
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeBruyne18)
    The fact that he was later expelled doesn't prove he was a spy and there's no evidence that Corbyn knew he was a spy.

    The other papers are reporting on the Sun reporting it.
    The man is walking around London trying to recruit intelligence assets for the communists. The boundary of who is and isn't a spy is often blurred but in this case he was literally a spy.

    But let's not get bogged down in semantics, he is certainly someone an MP should have been wary of meeting multiple times and passing information to.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeBruyne18)
    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...
    I do wonder how long the left can shout "smear" at everything before they start wondering if there's maybe something a bit dodgy about Jeremy.

    In all honesty, I think many of the far left in this country are morally flexible enough that they don't really care whether he did back the IRA, sided with the Soviet Union or would have sold Britain down the river. Many of them seem to consider these views at the very least reasonably acceptable.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 24, 2018
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.