Jeremy Corbyn 'wreath laying' attacked by Israeli PM please log in to view this image Media playback is unsupported on your device Corbyn asked about Tunisia wreath-laying criticism Israel's PM has criticised Jeremy Corbyn over his presence at a ceremony said to have honoured the perpetrators of the 1972 Munich terror attack. Benjamin Netanyahu said Mr Corbyn deserved "unequivocal condemnation" for laying a wreath on the grave of one of those behind the atrocity. Mr Corbyn said Mr Netanyahu's claims about his "actions... are false". The Labour leader said he had attended the event in Tunis in 2014 as part of a wider event about the search for peace. Mr Netanyahu made the comments after the Daily Mail said Mr Corbyn was pictured with a wreath near memorials of the group behind the attack. He also accused Mr Corbyn of comparing Israel to the Nazis - but a Labour statement reiterated a previous denial of that claim. please log in to view this image In response to the newspaper story, the Labour leader said that while at a conference, he had attended a memorial for victims of the bombing of Palestine Liberation Organisation headquarters by Israel in 1985. 'Cycle of violence' He was also asked about a second wreath-laying, reportedly remembering people killed by Israeli intelligence agency Mossad. The questions were in response to a Daily Mail front page featuring photographs it said showed the Labour leader near memorials to members of the militant Black September group behind the 1972 attack. Eleven members of the Israeli Olympic team were taken hostage by the Palestinian group at the 1972 summer games in Munich. The hostages and a West German police officer were killed by the group, with five of the eight hostage-takers killed by German police during a failed rescue attempt. Asked who this wreath had been for, if they were not terrorists, Mr Corbyn replied simply that a wreath "was indeed laid". But he added: "I was present when it was laid. I don't think I was actually involved in it. "I was there because I wanted to see a fitting memorial to everyone who has died in every terrorist incident everywhere because we have to end it. "You cannot pursue peace by a cycle of violence. The only way you pursue peace is a cycle of dialogue." please log in to view this image Image copyright Palestinian embassy in Tunis/Facebook Image caption Jeremy Corbyn was pictured at a wreath-laying ceremony in 2014 The Daily Mail has also published a video of Mr Corbyn from an event in 2013. In the video, Mr Corbyn said Palestinians had experienced "conditions in the West Bank, under occupation, of the very sort that will be recognisable by many people in Europe who suffered occupation during the Second World War". A Labour statement said Mr Corbyn had not compared Israel to the Nazis "but the conditions of civilian populations in besieged cities in wartime". Referring to the accusation of wreath-laying, Jewish Labour MP Luciana Berger said: "Being 'present' is the same as being involved. "When I attend a memorial, my presence alone, whether I lay a wreath or not, demonstrates my association and support. "There can also never be a 'fitting memorial' for terrorists. Where is the apology?" 'Put to bed' Home Secretary Sajid Javid had earlier suggested that Mr Corbyn should resign over the issue. On Sunday Labour's press team said: "The Munich widows are being misled. Jeremy did not honour those responsible for the Munich killings." In a tweet, Labour said he and other Parliamentarians had been honouring victims of the 1985 Israeli bombings. It comes amid a wider row about anti-Semitism in the Labour party. Critics, including Jewish leaders and some Labour MPs, say a new code of conduct adopted by the party is not as comprehensive about anti-Semitism as the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's (IHRA) guidelines. Labour says it has included the international definition word-for-word in the code, although critics say the Labour code leaves out examples of how criticism of Israel can be anti-Semitic. please log in to view this image Labour MP Margaret Hodge said the only way Mr Corbyn can "put this issue to bed" was to adopt the internationally agreed definition in full.
I have wondered but when I remembered that you've fallen out with so many on this Board who don't agree with you coupled with the fact that I manage to exchange points of view which differ with everybody except you three put my mind at rest. Time for another insult or are you all going to learn to get on with others who are different in their view of the world? I'm not going anywhere.
I think you may be taking this internet board a bit too seriously. I have many "actual" friends that I disagree with on a whole range of topics. Anyway, whatever. I'll leave the last word to you, as you're always right. I won't bother to respond (probably).
Col, you really aren’t in a position to accuse anyone of that given the number of times you’ve got in a tizz and stormed off on this board.
Apparently there's something called "dark ads". If I've understood it correctly, it's the use of social media to send targeted ads to specific people that have been selected by harvesting the data we give away for free about ourselves. What it means in political campaigns is this... Different people will get sent ads about different things but no-one gets to see all the ads or all the electoral promises. So, Dave might be told that voting for Fred will mean more money for car manufacturers (and social media data knows that Dave works in the car industry) whereas Joe will be told a vote for Fred will mean more money for stopping car use in cities (because social media data knows that Joe voted Green last time and is concerned about pollution). So, both people will vote for Fred, despite the fact that maybe Joe would vote elsewhere if he realised that Fred wants to spend more on car making and Dave would maybe vote elsewhere if he knew Fred was promising to stop car use in cities. That worries me. Who wants a situation where we all vote for Fred but none of us agrees on what issues we voted for - just who - and then we argue amongst ourselves about what a vote for Fred really was?
Perhaps the solution is for us to firstly encourage people to limit their use of social media to an absolute minimum, and go for walks instead, which would surely be good for their mental and physical health as well as reducing their exposure to this kind of manipulation, and secondly for us to educate social media users into continual suspicion of forwarded messages they receive (I believe this is the way that they are spread) and always use more than one source when forming an opinion (which should be a basic part of education anyway, with or without social media). Yeah, long shot I know. I’m a bit naive when it comes to social media, not on Twitter or Facebook and never have been, really only use this site which has a very small number of users and where we all know our online personas very well and LinkedIn which I use very rarely and simply to link with people, never read the stuff which is posted on it. Reluctantly joined WhatsApp recently as a way to communicate with a small group on a particular subject so have the grand total of one conversation on it. I understand WhatsApp is a huge problem in India, where there is a plague of forwarding commercial and political messages.
But finally Corbyn is starting his ‘dialogue’ with more than one side of a conflict in his endless quest for world peace. OK it’s just a twitter spat with the horrible Netanyahu, but it’s dialogue!
A common harvesting mechanism (on Facebook, certainly) is those polls or games where you answer questions about yourself or what you think. You think you're anonymously contributing to a survey, but the software knows exactly who you are and what your answers were.
I think I will continue to operate in relative isolation and naivety. How desperate must the people who put these tricks together be? What a way to spend your life. It’s like those scammers who phone you up asking about your ‘Windows PC’. I’m presuming that they would be doing something else if they could and must be in a bad place to be the lowest cog in a criminal machine, but I do now respond not with my previous foul mouthed invective but with a polite question about what they tell their families about their job, and if this is what they dreamed of when they were growing up. Which is much crueller. Similarly people who spend their lives trying to trick others into doing something which isn’t necessarily good for them need to take a long look in the mirror.
Do you know what mate, having given this a little thought I reckon you're 100% right. I used to take this place far too seriously and did indeed, once or twice, "flounce out of the room" like the thespian I am. However, I like to think that I now can recognise those, like yourself who mainly want to be sarcastic or wind others up, which, whilst a little sad is absolutely fair enough on a message board such as this. Life is simply too short to give a **** about such things.
Westminster in lockdown after a car crashes/is driven into the barriers outside Parliament. Sounds like there are injuries, man arrested. If it’s terrorism, doing it during summer recess may give an indication of the intelligence involved.
I'm on a training course in another part of London today. Given that's the time I usually leave Westminster Station I am never going to moan about training again! Thoughts are with injured.
BREAKING NEWS: Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn has rushed down to Westminster with a wreath to lay where the brave terrorist perished in his car. When told by armed police that the terrorist was not dead, Corby said: "I'm delighted that this well-meaning freedom fighter has survived and want to condemn all those members of the public on their way to work, who obstructed him in his peace mission to destroy the Houses of Parliament." When asked about the wreath, Corbyn said he did not bring it with him. It had nothing to do with him. When shown CCTV, he then admitted it was his but said "he didn't think" he was going to lay it where the terrorist fell. # Unfit for public office
Quite an astute observation from Frankie Boyle I saw earlier. This Corbyn story was probably being saved for the next election. As Boris is in a spot of bother, the timing is convenient.
