Whatever your political leanings, using the leader of a political party of your own country for target practice is distasteful at best and very sinister at worst.

Been confirmed legit by the MOD

Check out @AliBunkallSKY’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/AliBunkallSKY/statu ... 98528?s=09" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ClaretAndJew wrote:Whatever your political leanings, using the leader of a political party of your own country for target practice is distasteful at best and very sinister at worst.

Been confirmed legit by the MOD

Check out @AliBunkallSKY’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/AliBunkallSKY/statu ... 98528?s=09" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Distasteful, maybe. But the guy hates our armed forces, and he hates our defence industry so it's no surprise really.

. When they are NOT killing people for oil heroin and other resources,

these soldiers love to unwind by shooting at pictures of the only credible opposition leader in decades."

Credible opposition leader

To be fair these people aren't employed to use their brain so not really a surprise

On closer inspection, his picture hasn't actually been shot has it, just splatter I'd say?

Reading that twitter thread they use that loft for practising their protection of VIP duties.

Usual mockrage on there though.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:On closer inspection, his picture hasn't actually been shot has it, just splatter I'd say?

Reading that twitter thread they use that loft for practising their protection of VIP duties.

Usual mockrage on there though.

Er, no

The army serve the state. Corbyn could well be the next PM.

Is he a dick? Yes

Does that mean its ok for paratroopers to use a pic of him for target practice?

Is it ****!

Give your head a wobble ffs

EDIT - people on here were defending soldiers being pictured with selfies with Tommy Robinson. This is the same.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Er, no

The army serve the state. Corbyn could well be the next PM.

Is he a dick? Yes

Does that mean its ok for paratroopers to use a pic of him for target practice?

Is it ****!

Give your head a wobble ffs

EDIT - people on here were defending soldiers being pictured with selfies with Tommy Robinson. This is the same.

Exactly, why settle for a picture

However you look at it, Soldiers of the British Army using a picture of the Leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition and Potential PM of Her Majesty’s Government as target practice is not a good sign for our Democracy.

Devils_Advocate wrote:To be fair these people aren't employed to use their brain so not really a surprise

After a quote like that I would say your not employed for the very same reason and thats no surprise either. A ridiculous comment.

He's winding you up.

You do see that don't you?

Lord Beamish wrote:However you look at it, Soldiers of the British Army using a picture of the Leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition and Potential PM of Her Majesty’s Government as target practice is not a good sign for our Democracy.

Our democracy? Oh the irony!!!

Lancasterclaret wrote:He's winding you up.

You do see that don't you?

Is he? I dont think so.

I haven’t looked at the link but i guess it was a bit of fun for the Paras (although in very bad taste) that should never have been posted anywhere. Whilst the Paras are most definitely employed to use there Brain as well as there Brawn it would seem that in this instance they forgot to engage the brain element.

JarrowClaret wrote:I haven’t looked at the link but i guess it was a bit of fun for the Paras (although in very bad taste) that should never have been posted anywhere. Whilst the Paras are most definitely employed to use there Brain as well as there Brawn it would seem that in this instance they forgot to engage the brain element.

This.

I hope they just get a bollocking, but the timing of this is **** poor.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Er, no

The army serve the state. Corbyn could well be the next PM.

Is he a dick? Yes

Does that mean its ok for paratroopers to use a pic of him for target practice?

Is it ****!

Give your head a wobble ffs

EDIT - people on here were defending soldiers being pictured with selfies with Tommy Robinson. This is the same.

Agree with all of this.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Er, no

The army serve the state. Corbyn could well be the next PM.

Is he a dick? Yes

Does that mean its ok for paratroopers to use a pic of him for target practice?

Is it ****!

Give your head a wobble ffs

EDIT - people on here were defending soldiers being pictured with selfies with Tommy Robinson. This is the same.

Have you watched the video?
There is more than one target in the loft space and Corbyns doesn't appear to have been hit directly.

Wobble your own head.

Oh look, multiple targets, splatter on Corbyns image but doesn't look like a direct hit.

Oh no, let's get angry about it

You are missing the point.

Not for the first time.

Look, I know **** all about cars. So I don't talk about them.

What I do know about is history, and politics and **** like that.

The British Army is pretty unique in that its served without rebelling against the state in its entire history.

Whats that got to do with this I hear you cry?

Simple, the British Armed Forces have served the Queen and the government regardless of who they are and what they stand for, without fail.

Once you start doing this, even if I'm 100% its a bit of fun, then cracks start to appear in that.

Just like the selfies with Tommy Robinson, you can't let these things become normalised.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:

Screenshot_20190403-102636.png

Screenshot_20190403-102651.png

Screenshot_20190403-102702.png

Oh look, multiple targets, splatter on Corbyns image but doesn't look like a direct hit.

Oh no, let's get angry about it

Why is there a target of Jeremy Corbyn there in the first place?

Snowflakes are getting furious about a paint gun, why?

Lancasterclaret wrote:Why is there a target of Jeremy Corbyn there in the first place?

If you're practicing close quarters protection would you, or would you not, use an image of a VIP?

Would you be less pissy if it was May?

AndyClaret wrote:Snowflakes are getting furious about a paint gun, why?

HOUSE!

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:If you're practicing close quarters protection would you, or would you not, use an image of a VIP?

Would you be less pissy if it was May?

It shouldn't be any politician, even farage.

You know that "completely missing the point" bit?

Thats the bit you are struggling with.

But no bother, you are not alone with this one.

How are we supposed to repel the invasion of the EU Army with shooting like that?

Lancasterclaret wrote:It shouldn't be any politician, even farage.

You know that "completely missing the point" bit?

Thats the bit you are struggling with.

But no bother, you are not alone with this one.

They're more likely to be protecting British politicians, just at a guess.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Er, no

The army serve the state. Corbyn could well be the next PM.

The Armed Forces swear allegience to the Queen, not the government. If this was a picture of the Queen, not the leader of the opposition, then it would be worthy of outrage as it is - it's simply distasteful.

They should've used Piers Morgan as payback for what he did to the troops whilst he was editor of the Mirror.

The other spaces could have been filled by James Corden, Gemma Collins (in fact the whole cast of Towie)

deanothedino wrote:The Armed Forces swear allegience to the Queen, not the government. If this was a picture of the Queen, not the leader of the opposition, then it would be worthy of outrage as it is - it's simply distasteful.

It's not Liz making decisions on where they go and what they do though is it. Like it or not, it could be Jezza (however unlikely).

NottsClaret wrote:It's not Liz making decisions on where they go and what they do though is it. Like it or not, it could be Jezza (however unlikely).

Indeed it could be, but many of them won't like several of the people in their chain of command and they still do as they say.

As it is though, Corbyn is far more likely to make them redundant than he is to send them to war.

Stayingup wrote:Is he? I dont think so.

Oh, the irony!

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:If you're practicing close quarters protection would you, or would you not, use an image of a VIP?

Would you be less pissy if it was May?

Right, so you argument based on video on a phone, is that this is what it was?

Okay, I see that but you are reading a lot more into that than I'm comfortable with.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Right, so you argument based on video on a phone, is that this is what it was?

Okay, I see that but you are reading a lot more into that than I'm comfortable with.

I had a scroll through the comments section , I've watched the video and spoken to someone who's been a protection officer in the past.

Would you prefer it if I jumped straight to mock rage instead?

You've done all that? Whilst working and in this time scale?

I'm impressed.

Lets see what the official line is then eh?

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Credible opposition leader

Ha ha. His nurse needs to give him a slap!

https://twitter.com/Tobias_Ellwood/stat ... 1587617793" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Guess we will find out soon enough.

Lancasterclaret wrote:You've done all that? Whilst working and in this time scale?

I'm impressed.

Lets see what the official line is then eh?

Just remember who he “talks to” on Twitter.

Lancasterclaret wrote:You've done all that? Whilst working and in this time scale?

I'm impressed.

Lets see what the official line is then eh?

Only have to make a phone call to the bloke, it isn't difficult these days.

Yeah I'll wait for the official line before I show any outrage, you should try that sometime.

Bordeauxclaret wrote:Just remember who he “talks to” on Twitter.

I'm not on Twitter, or Facebook, so I'm not really sure what you're referring too here.

Bordeauxclaret wrote:Just remember who he “talks to” on Twitter.

Himself, sometimes. Usually in order to bolster some preposterous ruse he’s floundering with on here.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:On closer inspection, his picture hasn't actually been shot has it, just splatter I'd say?

Reading that twitter thread they use that loft for practising their protection of VIP duties.

Usual mockrage on there though.

'It was just splatter' is the new 'It was just banter'

JohnMcGreal wrote:'It was just splatter' is the new 'It was just banter'

Nah, banter is a stupid word and overused.

They should realise that Jeremy Corbyn wouldn't have sent hundreds of soldiers to their deaths in the killing fields of Afghanistan and Iraq... unlike a former labour party leader.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:I'm not on Twitter, or Facebook, so I'm not really sure what you're referring too here.

That’s because you deleted your two accounts you used to talk to yourself after you were found out.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Only have to make a phone call to the bloke, it isn't difficult these days.

Yeah I'll wait for the official line before I show any outrage, you should try that sometime.

Like I said Sid, I'm impressed.

Very impressed.

Looking at it from the Paras' point of view, I'm sure they see Corbyn as a threat to our security, given his 40 year history of support for the IRA, Hezbollah, his well known views on Trident and our military in general, failure to agree with the civilised world that Russia was complicit in the Salisbury poisonings etc, etc.

We should remember that these boys and their predecessors, often parents, have lost friends to some of these groups.

They are trained to kill, and put their own lives on the line to protect our country. They should have realised that, in 2019, it would get out and there would be outrage here and there.

But in their position I'd probably have hatred for the man. Lucky for me I'll never get killed in my job so I can content myself with just thinking he's a mildly dangerous idiot.

Quite pathetic that someone saw fit to alert the press. Inevitable, but pathetic.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Nah, banter is a stupid word and overused.

A bit like ‘mock rage’, it’s a gambit glibly used by people who don’t want to have a proper debate about a subject.

To be fair, the probably printed off a picture of Gerry Adam's or members of Hamas, and trimmed the wrong person off

Disgraceful behaviour by the Paras.

They should be using the real thing for target practice instead.

BurnleyFC wrote:Disgraceful behaviour by the Paras.

They should be using the real thing for target practice instead.

Have you just advocated murder there?

Dike Muff wrote:A bit like ‘mock rage’, it’s a gambit glibly used by people who don’t want to have a proper debate about a subject.

I've been debating, but some are busy being outraged first and foremost.

I'll wait until the Army decide what to do now.