The piece is completely sh*t when based in the fact that Corbyn won't condemn the IRA... in particular.
It's how the media do it. They pressurise you into making a statement of identification and then they hammer you with it or use it to smash down the door of another situation to be specific about. He never gave them those avenues before.
He was smart then, just roundly condemning all acts of war, including those from these shores.
"One man's terrorist..." and all that, in my opinion.
At the moment, being forced into making a statement about 'something' is the same trap he was so good at avoiding, is his downfall.
But, as I said before, you guys churn out the SAME talking points, leaving out the whole context, in order to feed your 'argument'.
I would say it's 'shocking', but that would be a bold faced lie...