I was recently asked my thoughts on Ted's (hopefully short) retirement on MMM. Such is life, I had all sorts of technical problems that night, and my good wishes to Ted were not posted, nor my thoughts on MMM.
As most of we Madeleine 'diehards' know, there are political roots to this cover up, ones that whilst not quite on par with Chilcott, will be right up there, next peg down, when questions are eventually asked. How many 'New' Labour politicians are implicated? That is, how many, knowing that Madeleine was not missing, continued to assist the McCanns in their 'search'? And does advertising the 'Madeleine Search Fund' count? I think we are looking at another Inquiry here.
Bizarrely, I see the appointment of Theresa May as a good thing with regard to the Madeleine McCann cover up. I am kind of hoping she will remember The Sun's threat to put her on the front page every day unless she granted the McCanns' the review they requested. And I am pretty sure the Review granted was not the one prepared by Jim Gamble, then Head of Ceop, because the pair went on to have a falling out. Theresa May is not a friend of the police or the Police Federation. She has probably been the least popular Home Secretary they have ever had. It is quite possible that she may at some point, decide to pick up the file and ask what is going on here.
Theresa May reminds me of those old 'jolly hockeysticks' 'big' girls at school, who you just knew would get things done. Those wartime heroines who drove the ambulances, organised the workforce and distributed the food. I'm not knocking them, they are the backbone upon which society is built, and I am hoping that PM May's head on approach to decision making, may see closure for Madeleine and those being victimised in her name.
I don't write about Gerry and Kate McCann very much these days, because basically they are not putting out anything to rebut. My gripe has always been with the lies and false information, particularly when it is damaging to others. For Gerry and Kate, I cannot imagine a greater hell than living under their particular cloud, and I have no wish to add to it by going over and over the same old topics. This has never been about punishment and retribution. The truth will always come out, particularly in this new age of information. The public are not buying what the government approved newspapers are selling us, within seconds we can see beyond the headlines and everyone (perhaps even terminally dense Lorraine Kelly) knows the abduction story is a load of baloney.
I have to say, that for many years I have had to curb my inclination to write to a Labour MP (my Dad's advice always), because to be honest, I didn't know who I could trust. It was hard not to become paranoid after the death of Brenda Leyland, and I know that is a feeling experienced by many McCann commentators. For me, this Labour party 'coup' has sorted the wheat from the chaff, there is now a good chance that we may get an MP bold enough to ask the Prime Minister why we are spending so many millions on the Madeleine Review and Investigation and why there are no results.
Operation Grange have now spent over 4 years investigating this case. The failure of two police forces and several dodgy detective agencies to find any trace of an abductor, should be a clue that he doesn't exist. At some point, someone is going to have to say 'is there any possibility the parents might be lying?'. It's a bold move, but his non existence could prove problematic for decades.
Ps. Regarding Tony Bennett's ridiculous assertion that my interview with the Sun undermined their [CMoMM] work', I almost choked on my [green] tea, lol. What you do is not work Bennett, it is of no value to any living being. You are a vigilante Mr. Bennett (almost called you Mr. Pitchfork), you are a mean spirited, cruel and inhumane man with no other objective than to profit from the misery of others. You approach your 'work' (lol) from the moral highground as hypocrites always do. You don't drink, smoke or party and you go to church regularly, therefore you have earned your right to judge others. But here's a thing Mr. Bennett, that 'right' exists only in your own head, and perhaps the heads of a handful of screwballs who seem to think you are the new Messiah. In a previous age, you would be chained to a wall in Bedlam, with spectators paying to view.
Unfortunately, your 'work', (cracks me up every time) is so flawed by bias and prejudice, it is worthless, it is quite possibly, the most boring texts or series of videos anyone is ever likely to read or watch. I despair at the number of people who may have shown interest in justice for Madeleine, who have been driven away by your publicity seeking antics and dreary documentaries. Kind, decent people do not want to be associated with your sickening form of vigilantism, the 'hater' myth came directly from you Mr. Bennett. You labelled all of us.
I have no doubt your ridiculous 'cooey, look at me' stunts have hindered the process of this investigation for years, in fact I think you should be prosecuted for wasting police time, if not perverting the course of justice and misuse of FOI requests. Your lunatic theory that a man who looks exactly like Gerry is not Gerry, because an entire family are lying, is just plain bonkers and that doesn't even begin to take into account all the innocent people you are accusing of heinous crimes. Whilst I do of course welcome the advances in law and order and crime and punishment, part of me wishes they retained a bit of that Bedlam wall.
Many thanks for your comment Dee Coy, what started as a reply turned into a blog :) Kind wishes.
In possibly, one of the daftest policies I have ever heard from a leadership candidate, Owen Smith states that in his first week (if elected) he will set up a high level task force to root out misogyny. Seriously? This he deems to be his top priority? He doesn't say exactly where the rooting out of misogyny will begin or indeed where it will end - will it be solely dedicated to the Labour Party, or will there be a department or even a police agency so it can go national? Will the next man to call his wife a silly cow go straight to jail without passing Go? Will the same law apply to her if she replies 'up yours dickhead'.
The urgent need for this high level task force, begins of course with the 44 female Labour MPs who have written to him regarding alleged threats and abuse they have received. Nasty as that is, is it really a new labour leader's top priority? Never mind the freefall of Brexit, the thousands of job losses, the growing unrest, Owen Smith's first move will be to deal with the hurt feelings of the female members of the PLP.
How do you define misogyny? Will charges be on a scale of 1 to 10? Perhaps with the cute guy in the postroom getting a '1' for a sneaky wink, and the old letch in the boardroom getting a 10 for giving the promotion to his golf buddy? Some men don't like women, as I am sure some women don't like men. That's life. Some people go out of their way to be offended, especially if they are on the losing side of an argument. They have nothing of substance to defeat their opponent, so they make it personal. 'You are only saying that because I am female/ gay/ black/ white, fat, thin, Jewish etc', any social or ethnic minority will do. It is the lowest form of debate most commonly used in the playground, and by rubbish politicians.
Personally I would question the career choice of those shrinking violets. The HOC is historically a lively place where the object of the game is to disagree, forcefully. If these women are representative of feminism in the Labour Party, it becomes obvious why there has never been a female leader. These scarily sensitive women appear to have missed several cultural revolutions and VEEP. You can't put the words gentle and politics together. The issues you are dealing with are very serious indeed. Voting to build a bomb that can wipe out hundreds of thousands of lives is not a gentle subject.
Yes, there are old dinosaurs out there who will always be politically incorrect, but they are a dying breed, on the verge of becoming extinct. Social pressure is forcing their demise, special units to track them down is a couple of decades too late, there can't be many left. Promising to cleanse the Labour Party of misogynists as his first act in office seems a bizarre and somewhat dictatorial policy. Most wannabe tyrants wait until a few months in, before they start on the purges.
As a feminist, I cringe on behalf of those female MPs demanding special treatment. Where is the honour in winning any contest by claiming you were being picked on because you are woman? Angela Eagle went for the sympathy vote and look how that turned out. Real leaders do not complain about the criticism, or even the abuse they receive, it doesn't bother them because they put it in perspective. Jeremy has probably received more abuse and threats than all of them put together, but it hasn't stopped him getting on with the job he has been elected to do. He hasn't wept about it on the telly and he hasn't cancelled any meetings. Perhaps if these women had carried on with their jobs, they would have less time to fret over the people who don't like them.
As for Mr. Knight in Shining Armour, powerful women don't need a high level task force to seek out those who hurl gender based insults at them. The idea is laughable. Imagine Mo Molam telling the hard men of the Sinn Fein and the Ulster Loyalists to keep it all politically correct because she was a woman? With millions falling below the poverty line and jobs being lost every day, the public aren't crying out for kinder, gentler, politics, they want female representatives who won't crumble if someone makes a sexist remark.
As for Owen Smith's naïve promise to cleanse the party of misogynists, does he have any idea of the runaway train he is about to let loose? What about the racists and ageists? Basically anything ending in 'ist', and especially those that end in 'ista'.
I fear the word misogynist will become as misused as the word the racist. A quick, illogical way in which to win an argument when all else fails. And, it must be said, a word that can be used by unscrupulous females to further their own aims. Courageous female politicians don't fear misogyny or strong language, either at the despatch box or the hustings - they face their opponents as equals, and on the subject of misogyny they usually have the better argument.
Today I have signed up to join Jeremy for Labour as a volunteer. Having just turned 59, I am no longer content to stand on the sidelines as history is being made - I want to be part of it. Many from my generation have waited for decades for a true socialist leader, and we know this opportunity for change may never come again in our lifetimes.
I will admit I didn't discover Jeremy Corbyn until last year's leadership election. I had left the Labour Party many years ago completely disillusioned, and indeed angry, with the party my Dad and I had loved and worked so hard for. In May 1997, we opened the champagne in the wee small hours when Michael Portillo lost his seat. We knew then that Labour had finally won. Unfortunately Tony Blair's vision of the future narrowed to just his own, as the old song goes, the working class can kiss my arse, I've got the foreman's job at last.
I was never able to forgive Tony Blair for taking the UK into the Iraq war and all the lives lost in the Middle East and in acts of terrorism since. I'm afraid the Blair government challenged everything I had previously believed in, and this was compounded by their assistance to the parents of Madeleine McCann whilst they were suspects in the Portuguese investigation. My research into the Madeleine case has uncovered much that I really wish I didn't know, but that is for another time.
It is bizarre watching so many labour grandees being paraded before the public as if they know all there is to know about winning elections, even though their middle of the road policies have lost the last two. They claim Jeremy Corbyn is unelectable whilst going to extraordinary lengths to keep him off the ballot paper and preventing his supporters from voting for him. These claims are even more absurd when set against a backdrop of images of hundreds of thousands turning out for Jeremy Corbyn rallies.
The 174 PLP MPs do not have the support of the Labour Party members or even the general public. And it is the members the plotters are at odds with. The public want change. They are not prepared to tolerate austerity any longer, particularly as it is the low waged, the unemployed and the disabled who are constantly being punished.
In the past few years we have become de-sensitised to the suffering of society's most vulnerable, they are a curiosity of parasites and scroungers paraded before us nightly as reality TV. This nasty narrative has grown up out of this new approach to benefit claimants. They are now seen as the 'undeserving poor', and that punishment and further deprivation is the only way in which to solve poverty. 'So you want to start a small business or apply for a job? If we reduce your benefits further it will keep that incentive going. If you turn up for that interview hungry and in rags it will increase your chances. Good luck'.
I think we are collectively waking up to the fact that for the past decade, no-one in Parliament is speaking up for the poor and the vulnerable. And I think many of us are a little ashamed. I read a great tweet today (@THemingford) 'Corbyn forced me to think about other people'. He is forcing this government and the right wing media to face up to the inhumanity of this constant state of austerity.
This dominant ideology that the poor are to blame for the state of the economy is a myth. How many kids must go without food, shoes and basic necessities in order to pay back the bankers losses and give tax perks to billionaires? Austerity is ideological, it solves nothing. There are only two ways to revive an economy, war or investment. Not so much war these days as the Department of Defence has far less employees. When you can wipe out an entire nation with just one bomb, it cuts down on the wages bill. That wise old fox John McDonnell, knows that investment will boost the economy and revive the country's morale. He is not just plucking vote winning tag lines out of thin air, he has done his homework.
To be honest I don't care very much what happens to the plotters and the 174 MPs who are ignoring the wishes of the Labour party members. In fact I would go so far as to say, I don't want a future where 174 labour MPs are going to block every change Jeremy Corbyn tries to introduce. I want to see Labour MPs who are just as committed to fighting poverty and injustice as the elected leader. The policies of the Labour party should not be based on the needs of its' millionaire donors, they should be based on the needs of the millions they are supposed to represent.
The 174 may have been a very big, intimidating gang when the chicken coup began, but when selection and reselection begins, they will each have to win back the support of their constituency parties as individuals. 'Will you go out and do a leaflet drop on my behalf', might well be met with, 'why did you try to split the Labour Party when we needed you most?'. That's the thing about General Elections, there is no way of subverting the votes by bringing in NEC type rules. You can't price the voters out or bar them for any previous political views they may have held. For the 174, natural justice will prevail. My hope is that they are up against candidates who not only share Jeremy's vision for justice and equality, but are prepared to vote for it. Let the electorate decide.
Despite seeing Andrea Leadsom fall flat on her face with her naïve (or sly) appeal to all the voting parents to choose her over the childfree Theresa May, Owen Smith has chosen the hustings to tell us how normal he is. Compared to whom Owen? The gay and childfree Angela Eagle or to the stadium packing Jeremy Corbyn?
For a party that advocates diversity and acceptance - is 'normal' really such a great selling point? For me, Owen looks more like Mr. Average, or Mr. Bland, he may come from the Valleys, but he is missing the fiery passion of his eloquent forefathers. I can see his appeal among middle management, the upwardly mobile and the Blairites, but he's just another composite of 'qualities' the spin doctors believe the public want to see in a leader - but without the charisma. Not only does he believe austerity is right, he appears to be in the wrong political party.
What the Labour spinmeisters are failing to take into account, is the fact that society has taken quite a few evolutionary leaps since the politics of Tony Blair held appeal. The Blair dream of 'we're all middle class now' has crashed and burned. The rich have become considerably richer, the working classes have been marginalised and a new underclass has been created who vote UKIP. Why? because Mr. Bland in his neat suit leaves them cold.
Angela Eagle I'm afraid, sets me off on a feminist rant. During my wild and carefree youth, I liked to play pool and drink beer. I also liked men who played pool and drank beer, but that's a whole other story. When I discovered pool, I couldn't stop practising until I could beat the 'best', male or female. If ever three words were sent to infuriate me, they are '.... for a girl'. I was born a feminist. With a brother not quite one year older, I spent my childhood screaming 'it's not fair'. When I overheard my dad and brother plotting to get up in the wee small hours to watch the Cassius Clay fight, without waking me because I was 'a blooming pest', I was determined to show them what a blooming pest I could be! I wasn't never going to let being a girl stop me from doing the same as my brother.
I have spent my entire life seeking out female role models, women who don't want, or expect, allowances because they are female. If Angela can't compete with her colleagues on an equal footing, then how would she cope on the world stage? And why is she asking for kinder, gentler politics as if discussing whether to carpet bomb a Syrian village or slash benefits can be done over a nice cup of tea and slice of cake. It's this namby pamby approach to politics that has brought thousands out onto the streets marching for change.
We now have two candidates to challenge Jeremy Corbyn's leadership. The 'normal' Owen Smith, and the gay woman, neither one of them is representative of the vast majority of the Labour voters. If normal equates to man, woman, 2.4 children and middle income, he has clearly not taken a look at any demographics lately. Many households are not 'normal' Mr. Smith, the fastest growing demographic is people who live alone - are we not normal? What about mixed race families? same sex parent families, extended families, the list could go on.
If Angela Eagle thinks the problems this country faces can be solved with kinder, gentler politics, then she is not a leader. If she wins, God forbid, will she face Theresa May at PMQs having signed a pledge not to say anything horrid? Seriously? If PM May says, lets throw another 100k people below the poverty line, what will be her reply? Okily, dokily? Does she honestly believe that all those past Union and Labour party victories were won with gentle voices?
Angela is basing her campaign on being a victim, she is blaming her own failure to arouse any interest in her leadership bid, on Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters. She can't understand why the masses aren't falling into line behind her, screaming 'we want more mediocrity'. She doesn't have that 'X' factor, so she is going for sympathy, she's the kid who throws herself on the floor when her more popular mate is getting all the attention, she doesn't have anything of interest to say, but she can show them her bruises.
It is almost as if she were paving a way to introduce some form of policing on the www. Many of the Labour Right are keen to introduce legislation that will curb the freedom of the internet and their favourite word is 'trolls'. She has all the criteria for being a target. Female tick, gay tick, especially twitchy tick.
These claims of criminal damage and thuggery among Jeremy Corbyn supporters are a myth (the brick was thrown into the stairwell of shared building). And on a scale of damage to her campaign which would be more effective for an activist: a) brick through a window followed by an ankle bracelet b) driving yourself mental by trying to get through to people on the phone to abuse (ditto ankle bracelet) or c) a tweet with the potential to reach hundreds of thousands? Take your time.
Jeremy is a man of peace! The Right are mistaking passion and justified anger, for anti social behaviour. Deliberately of course, they have to convince the wider public, that Jeremy's supporters are 'rabble'. Yet anyone can see with a quick scan of the Jeremy hashtags on twitter, that we are representative of a huge cross section of society. The idea that Labour has been infiltrated by 500k militant lefties lurking among us has quite rightly been ridiculed for the nonsense it is. We are ordinary people, who have been inspired by Jeremy's caring approach to politics. We don't want to see an underclass, denied all the opportunities we enjoyed. We had proper school dinners, free milk (some of us) and regular health checks. We had access to higher education and universities, and most didn't have to pay for it. Our good start, means many of us now will live longer than future generations. (How the Fffff did that happen?).
Angela is totally misguided in her attempts to garner both the gay and female vote. I apply the same criteria to being gay, as I do to 'because I'm a woman'. Basically, so what? Don't use your gender and sexuality as a shield, it shows a weakness that I don't want to see in a leader. The gay card is even worse. Many of the women, who's votes she needs, are struggling to feed their kids and keep a roof over their heads, she needs to fight on their behalf too.
I have struggled all my life to find feminist role models, literature is HIS-story, most of the heroes were male, while women played the supporting roles. Now we have the beautiful and bold Jennifer Lawrence and the kick ass Jessica Jones. I don't want to listen to a carefully coiffered 'Politician Barbie' reeling off PLP approved handouts in the House of Commons, in a soft voice. I want to see passion and belief and a determination for a change. I don't want to see the leader of the Labour party meekly accepting austerity and the nuclear bombs of the opposition in order to make politics kinder and more gentle for herself.
Angela Eagle should stop making the campaign about 'rabble' and swerving the policies. And she is not even doing it convincingly. Theresa May, and trust me I'm no fan, hasn't spent the past couple of weeks whining about people saying nasty stuff about her on the internet and she's now Prime Minister. Angela should take note, Ms May's not talking about gentler politics, she's just upped the ante.
My blog has been a little neglected of late because my head has been caught up in the political upheaval that has been caused by the Brexit vote and the evil machinations of those intent on destroying the Labour party I once loved. I am agog that 174 Labour MPs have, without the backing or the approval of their constituents, decided to oust the most popular leader the Labour, or indeed any UK political party, has had in decades.
But do you know what, I no longer care that the Labour party will split, in fact the sooner the right wing hawks cross the floor and join the party closest to their own beliefs, the sooner Jeremy Corbyn's plans to assist those in most desperate need can be put into practice.
I was kicked out of the Labour Party in 2003 when I organised an anti war meeting in my town. Or at least my envelope dropping and polling station services were no longer required. I have tried desperately hard to support them since that time, but the faith was gone. If it hadn't been the war, it would have been the case of missing Madeleine McCann, I no longer suspected the newspapers lied to us, I knew it. I have no doubt the fall of Labour's Right wing will see the truth emerge. Methinks, the Chilcott Report merely skimmed the surface of what was going on behind Whitehall doors during the Blair and Brown's time in office.
I watched Jeremy Corbyn's interview on the Marr Show this morning, and was in awe at how cool, calm and confident he was in everything he said - replying to every biased, accusatory question with the kind of dignity that can only be distant memory for those colleagues who abandoned their own constituents and the country in order to pursue their own goals.
Then I watched Angela Eagle being interviewed by Robert Peston. He gave her an easy ride, but even so, she still presented as the unwitting volunteer who was too slow to take a step back. I can't say I have ever listened to Angela Eagle before, but the whiney voice grated, rather than soothed. Ditto her references to her Little Dorrit childhood, people are losing their jobs and their homes now, families are queuing at food banks, spare us. After hearing Jeremy Corbyn's awesome speech at the Durham Miners Gala, it's as if she has suddenly remembered the suffering of society's most vulnerable - unfortunately, she is about 10 months too late.
The Labour Party will split, I can't see any other way out of this impasse. Whilst Jeremy Corbyn is willing to talk to his colleagues, they won't enter into any talks that involve Jeremy remaining as leader. They went into the chicken coup as a fait accompli, deciding they, not the members, should choose the Labour leader. What they have done is not only undemocratic, I'm not even sure it is legal.
It seems to be that there is a sinister ideology that dominates the right wing of the labour party, and it is one that has grown out of the Blair Rich years, when hobnobbing with the bosses and the super rich took precedence over standing up for the rights of the workers and the vulnerable. Blair and his cronies believed they could schmooze Big Business in order to make a fairer society for all. With a reported £60m personal fortune, it is certainly a lot fairer for himself and his peers, but not so much for the rest of us.
Angela Eagle may suddenly have remembered she needed to empathise with the poor this morning, she conveniently forgot that she and all her duplicitous colleagues abstained from the vote on ESA. I just don't understand her motivation and I cannot comprehend the desperate need of herself and her co-conspirators to remove Jeremy Corbyn from the leadership. No-one has yet offered a coherent explanation. As for her sympathy for Tony Blair, seriously? The real leader was comforting the bereaved families, she would have done better if she had done the same.
I got the impression from her interview, that they may have found a 'legal' way to 'fix' the ballot paper, that is, insist he has to have 50 PLP nominations. Even though it is underhand, unscrupulous and spits in the face of the labour electorate, I wouldn't at this stage, put anything past them. What they fail to take into consideration is, that wherever Jeremy Corbyn goes, all those hundreds of thousands of new party members will go with him. Even if they win, which they won't, their power will be fleeting. The whole world will know that they have stolen the party from its' members, and their future credibility will be zero. That they will get custody of the rich party donors sadly, should be taken as a given.
I feel we are witnessing the revolution the Establishment have feared. Social media has given the people real power. They are no longer reliant on the one sided reporting of a biased MSM, they can look further than the front pages of the tabloids, and they can see quite clearly that Jeremy Corbyn is not the monster the media portray. He is a calm rational man who cares deeply about fairness and humanity.
Sadly, there is no doubt this revolution will turn ugly, very few people like Jeremy Corbyn turn up in our lifetimes and when they do they become targets. They are a threat to those in power, because they have that 'X' factor they lack, and nothing they do can beat them. It's why they now have to fix the election. I don't want to turn Jeremy into a Messiah, though it's spooky his initials are JC, but he is deserving of my highest accolade, he is a thoroughly good egg.
This revolution will be fought on social media, it is now an integral part of rolling news. They will pretend the newspapers are relevant, but tabloid headlines can no longer dictate the results of General Elections. Newspapers now have genuine competition, in fact dear old Maggie T would say it is a free market. We don't have to trust in Aunty Beeb anymore, other networks are available. The MSM can keep telling us how unpopular Jeremy Corbyn is, but our news updates tell a completely different story. We are seeing ordinary people coming out in their hundreds of thousands to support Jeremy Corbyn and anti austerity. Just as the Scottish labour voters turned away from 'New' Labour, so too have the UK voters. New Labour have lost two General Elections running, both to Cameron and Osborne! How useless do you have to be to lose twice to a small pack of Bullingdon Boys who have wreaked havoc across the UK and left many of your own constituents hungry and homeless?
Those 174 MPs have serious decisions to make. If they think Jeremy Corbyn is too far to the Left, why don't they stay on and challenge him in debate? Surely the only way to curb any excess is with a moderate option and a vote? If they take him off the ballot, they are acknowledging that they cannot beat him, but it might be a snidey way in which to seize the Labour Party and all its' assets from under him. In 'electing' their own leader, they will get the Labour Party headquarters, etc, along with the 'Labour Party' name. Whether their 'leader' will ever be accepted by the membership won't really matter. At the moment, possession is 9/10 of the Law. They need him out by fair play or foul.
All those Labour MPs who claim a Left wing candidate like Jeremy Corbyn could not win a General Election in these times, have obviously not studied history or the works of Karl Marx.
This war against the 'undeserving' poor was never going to be without consequences. Bizarrely, withdrawing benefits from the disabled, kicking families out of desirable areas and depriving their kids of shoes hasn't fixed the abysmal state of the UK's economy. It has in fact created greater numbers of poor, as more and more sink beneath the poverty line.
Outside the plush corridors of Westminster, years of austerity have torn families and communities apart, we are not all in this together. The only place people see their MPs is on the telly, telling them to hang on in there. I doubt any one of those 174 'socialists' will fight a leadership battle on an anti austerity ticket. They will all vote for more of the same, that is, more benefit cuts, stricter ATOS assessments and an occasional 'oil' war in the middle East.
Jeremy Corbyn is the only Leader who will fight for society's poorest, with Shadow Chancellor John O'Connor by his side, he knows that squeezing the masses to breaking point will never replace the billions lost by the greedy bankers - the war against the poor is ideological. How many kids have to go without school dinners to make up for the taxes not paid by Sir Phillip Green for example?
The people trust Jeremy Corbyn because they know he won't sell off the NHS under any circumstances. He won't take them into foreign wars that bring personal fortunes to all those who say yes and he probably won't be attending any Murdoch weddings. And, must be said, he won't take us into war with Mexico if Trump wins the Whitehouse. More importantly, he will put the people first, and he will reverse all those cruel government cuts that have left our High streets and our pockets, skint and in despair.
It's not that Jeremy can't win an election, it's because he can, and probably with an overwhelming majority. Those who claim he is not a good leader or speaker, really need to challenge their own perception of what makes a good leader. Ten thousand turning up in Parliament Square within hours of the aptly named chicken coup, should be a good indicator. Jeremy has inspired hundreds of thousands of Labour voters up and down the country. He packs out stadiums - when he speaks, there is standing room only. The people are sick of the highly polished corporate yuppies who speak in soundbites and inspire no-one.
Jeremy is as real as it gets, and the public love him for it. He is the polar opposite of the composite automaton the spin doctors think the public want. They are still going with 'it worked for Blair, Clinton, Obama, Milliband (not so much)', so it's bound to work again. But while the smart suits were a winning formula in 1997 (a backlash against donkey jackets), they are rapidly losing appeal in 2016. They have been overtaken by passion, honesty and straight talking, who'd have thunk it.
Those who have turned on Jeremy Corbyn should perhaps spend today, (No Bullying Day) reading up on the Bourbons and even our own King Charles I, to see what happens when a small unpopular minority try to inflict their will on the masses. The people have been squeezed to breaking point, and no-one, not even their members of parliament are listening. Jeremy is.
Due to years of austerity, the time is ripe for revolution, there will be either a swing to the extreme right, or a swing towards the extreme left. The 174 now find themselves standing on a tightrope in the middle. They have probably already lost most of their own voters - who can now trust them? and they are being led by an increasingly more sweaty Tom Watson, who's fiendish plan to break his leader with hourly resignations brought thousands to the streets, to support, err, Jeremy. Having used up all his Ace cards he is now in danger of drowning in his own perspiration as he watches his dreams flush down the pan.
Tony Blair's agenda to woo the rich and influential has failed the grass roots of the Labour party. All his billionaire chums didn't suddenly become humanitarians and philanthropists ploughing cash into good causes and letting up on their employees once in a while, they found new and more creative ways in which to increase their millions and screw their workers.
For most of the chicken coup rebels, a Labour party under Jeremy Corbyn, may seem a bleak prospect, especially the champagne socialists who are lining up lucrative consultancies, directorships, and TV presenter jobs for the future. Hobnobbing with the rich and famous is a parliamentary perk, and far more appealing than speaking to a village hall full of food bank organisers. This huge reshuffle that they have brought on themselves, will sort the wheat from the chaff.
I hope the Unions stand firm today against the evil machinations of the sweaty Tom. I am still in awe of Len McCluskey's performance on Marr, so the best advice I can offer Mr. Watson is, stand on a bathmat.
