This is a good thing. Corbyn is bad news.

Found this comment on an Independent article. Interesting read.

Care to rebuke Meta Kun?

The Conservatives released a silly video on Monday, titled "Labour: a threat to our national security". In this video, it is alleged that the new, democratically elected (with over 250,000 votes) leader of the Labour Party has four dangerous beliefs that make him a "threat to British national security". First, that "Bin Laden's death was a 'tragedy'". Second, "terrorists are 'friends'". Third, "wants to surrender our nuclear weapons". And lastly, "wants to dismantle our Armed Forces". The video calls these "The Facts". Here are the real facts.

Thinks Osama Bin Laden's death was a tragedy: The clip showing this cuts off at the right time, and is otherwise self-explanatory. Corbyn says that Bin Laden's death was a tragedy, in comparison to putting him on trial. This was also noted by many other leaders at the time, including the former leader of the Liberal Democrats Paddy Ashdown. Also, as a democracy operating under the rule of law, and certainly by international law standards, we should always strive to uphold the right to a fair trial - for everyone. This serves two purposes: First, useful information and evidence comes to light from important sources. Second, we practice the Enlightenment values that we preach.

Feels Hezbollah and Hamas are "friends": Again, context. Corbyn has subsequently repeatedly clarified that his terminology of "friends" was simply in diplomatic reference to the peace process parties. He has adamantly stated that he does not agree with the actions of Hamas nor Hezbollah. Tony Blair has already met with Hamas to negotiate peace deals twice. The former head of British intelligence MI5, Lady Eliza Manningham-Buller, has also said that talks with these organisations are "necessary". It is not odd to want to bridge gaps between both sides of a conflict in order to instil peace, without further conflict. Step one is diplomatic terminology.

Wants to give up nuclear weapons: Britain has signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and is legally bound under international law to take steps to give up our nuclear weapons. Following international law, as a member of the Security Council, would set precedent and pressure for an eventual global nuclear disarmament. This obviously takes time, but is unanimously agreed to be a positive development. Hence, an international treaty to that effect. Furthermore, the modern threat of terrorism that Britain faces has no solution, nor deterrent, in nuclear weaponry - because it is a worldwide phenomenon with no realistically tangible target.

Wants to "dismantle our Armed Forces": This is inaccurate. It is no secret that Corbyn sincerely believes in alternative resolutions to war and death. And a more constructive global role for Britain than bombing campaigns. He certainly does want to alter NATO's 2% defence spending commitment. However, to imply he wants to completely demilitarise Britain is nonsensical. It is in fact the Conservative Party that have inflicted some of the most substantial cuts on our security budgets. The police force is set to lose 22,000 jobs under new spending cuts. Thousands of army officials have already been made redundant, and according to the Telegraph, more cuts are set to take place. This accusation in particular is purely hypocritical, hyperbolic, and misleading.

In conclusion, I am sure that even within these clarifications there is plenty for Conservative Party members and supporters to disagree with. And by all means, disagree. In a democracy, that is how ideas thrive and develop. However, misrepresenting, decontextualising, and misquoting Corbyn and the Labour Party as Bin Laden-sympathising, terrorist-loving, army-hating creatures of sort, is counterproductive and dishonest. It only serves to damage political discourse and poison the public mood. This is ultimately not good for the country, or anyone in it.