From Instapundit. And it may be all they have, but it’s quite a lot.
But take heart: an Op/Ed in yesterday’s WSJ points out that smugness, a false sense of superiority and a compliant liberal press are all they have. The facts speak for themselves:
In 2012 [Corbyn] approved of a mural that grotesquely depicted Jewish bankers, and he did not reverse himself until earlier this year…In 2012 he appeared on Iranian television to celebrate the release of Palestinian terrorists by Israel in a painful prisoner exchange with Hamas. He referred to the returning convicts as “brothers.”
And most sickening of all:
In 2014 he laid a wreath at the graves of terrorists involved in the murder of Israeli athletes at the Munich Summer Olympics in 1972.
Meanwhile, this quote in the comments sums up what I also believe:
Comparing Corbyn’s overt anti-Semitism to Enoch Powell’s “Rivers of Blood” speech are only similar in that they are/were controversial. Powell was vilified for stating that if his country opens its borders to immigratnts whose values were incompatible with British values, Britain will cease to be Britain. He was, of course, correct, and there are now 1 million Muslims now living in metropolitan Londonistan. When Powell made that speech, how many British women and girls had to worry about acid attacks, FGM, forced marriages, honor killings or rape/grooming gangs?
As for Corbyn, what’s sick is that he’s not nearly as “controversial” as he should be. Why? Well, those 1 million Muslims in Londonistan agree with him. So do the millions of other Muslims in England, and the millions of other Btitish who’ve been barraged by Jew and Israel hatred from the BBC, the academy, the left and the media for the past 20 years.
And if you want truly macabre, this is near the norm in parts of the diaspora: