Titanic99 10 #1 Posted October 7, 2015 I've just been watching Camerons speech today in which he refers to Corbyn as "Terrorist sympathising" and it got me wondering whether MP's are allowed to sue each other if comments like that are untrue or if they have some sort of priveledges which prevents this. I'm also curious to know the basis of this statement as it's a pretty odious statement about someone if untrue. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
poppet2 13 #2 Posted October 7, 2015 If it was said in the house, yes it would come under parliamentary privilege. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_privilege Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
IanG 10 #3 Posted October 7, 2015 Do you think he would have said it if so, given all his advisers etc ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Titanic99 10 #4 Posted October 7, 2015 That's just plain daft, so he can say what he wants and the recipient of the attack can do nothing about it. Oh what a wonderful democracy we have! ---------- Post added 07-10-2015 at 16:49 ---------- Do you think he would have said it if so, given all his advisers etc ? I don't know, it's very harsh if not true and from reviewing some of his speeches on the net I cannot see any evidence that he's a "terrorst sympathiser". Happy to be proved wrong though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
willman 10 #5 Posted October 7, 2015 Just search for MR COrbyns friends - these include Sinn Fein, Hezbollah, he's had excursions paid for by banned terroist groups and proudly supports Hammas. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11749043/Andrew-Gilligan-Jeremy-Corbyn-friend-to-Hamas-Iran-and-extremists.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
IanG 10 #6 Posted October 7, 2015 That's just plain daft, so he can say what he wants and the recipient of the attack can do nothing about it. Oh what a wonderful democracy we have! ---------- Post added 07-10-2015 at 16:49 ---------- I don't know, it's very harsh if not true and from reviewing some of his speeches on the net I cannot see any evidence that he's a "terrorst sympathiser". Happy to be proved wrong though. I'm no fan of Cameron but imagine he can back it up or he wouldn't have said such a thing, he's no idiot....well kind of;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Titanic99 10 #7 Posted October 7, 2015 Just search for MR COrbyns friends - these include Sinn Fein, Hezbollah, he's had excursions paid for by banned terroist groups and proudly supports Hammas. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11749043/Andrew-Gilligan-Jeremy-Corbyn-friend-to-Hamas-Iran-and-extremists.html It's an interesting article but most people would interpret the phrase "terrorist sympathiser" as someone who supported the killing and maiming of innocent people and there's nowhere that indicates he does. I suggest it's perfectly reasonable to want the same outcome as these groups but not to support the killing of innocent people to achieve this. I hope he gets the opportunity to clarify this issue with the public. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
blake 10 #8 Posted October 7, 2015 to call Corbyn 'terrorist sympathising', at least in the past if not right now at this very moment, is probably not untrue at al. If it is untrue, then why hasn't Corbyn sued the numerous newspapers who have printed that he is 'terrorist sympathising', for libel? I wonder if anybody would be able to sue Corbyn and Mcdonnell for claiming that they are 'peace campaigners' ? When nobody has ever seen either of them on a platform with Israelis, or Ulster Unionists, but just Hamas, Hizbullah, Sinn Fein and the IRA? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
the_bloke 17 #9 Posted October 7, 2015 It's an interesting article but most people would interpret the phrase "terrorist sympathiser" as someone who supported the killing and maiming of innocent people and there's nowhere that indicates he does. I suggest it's perfectly reasonable to want the same outcome as these groups but not to support the killing of innocent people to achieve this. I hope he gets the opportunity to clarify this issue with the public. He's a man that would gladly discuss with and promote the ideas of organisations and people that have deeply racist, homophobic, violent and extremist ideas in the guise of 'international co-operation'. He's either genuinely an idiot and believes everything that comes out of the mouth of anyone in opposition to the Government, or is extremely good at only seeing what he wants to see. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Blackbeard 10 #10 Posted October 7, 2015 One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
drummonds 10 #11 Posted October 7, 2015 I've just been watching Camerons speech today in which he refers to Corbyn as "Terrorist sympathising" and it got me wondering whether MP's are allowed to sue each other if comments like that are untrue or if they have some sort of priveledges which prevents this. I'm also curious to know the basis of this statement as it's a pretty odious statement about someone if untrue. it isn't slander if it is true. so it is fine to call the yorkshire ripper a murderer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Titanic99 10 #12 Posted October 7, 2015 Interestingly the United Nations General Assembly uses the following definition: “Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the public” From looking at Jeremy Corbyn he doesn’t strike me as someone who would sympathise with this viewpoint, and if there is any justice left in our democracy he should be able to demand an apology from Cameron. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...