“I believe there is a large minority – in some cases a majority – for whom the principles of peace, justice and equality are the bedrock of their politics.”

So, on average, you reckon just under half of society believes in peace, justice and equality. Well…that’s peace, justice and equality fucked. It’s a democracy Salma…the 51% of warmongers, criminals and capitalists are gonna win again. Aren’t you meant to say optimistic stuff in these pieces?

This is all well and good but in the real world, with the electoral system we have this country is facing a huge crisis: the prospect of a government led by Cameron and his mates. Clegg has refused to rule out a coalition with the Tories, and as the author points out we have seen in Birmingham what a Lib Dem / Tory coalition would be like in practice. The only way to avoid the catastrophe is to vote Labour. I hate the unprincipled crooks (some of them unelected) of the Labour right who have dragged the party down, but they will have to wait for later. Let’s sidestep disaster first.

Respect’s manifesto is Far Left, it would blast this country into economic extinction.

Salma

There’s not much in your article that I disagree with, and of the various figures associated with Respect you’re one of the few that I have any, well, “respect” for.

Even so, I really can’t bring myself to vote for anything associated with that egomaniac and snake-oil salesman George Galloway. Though you guys did at least have the good sense to kick out the Socialist Workers Party.

I’ll be voting either Lib Dem or Green at the next election.

Do not vote Respect.

Respect is the party of George Galloway.

That is basically all you need to know.

Quite. I thought the whole point of Respect was an ego-trip for Georgey plus a strange mix of desperate and deluded hangers-on.

Also the other reason not to bother with Respect is that outside of the East End of London and Birmingham they have very little by way of political presence.

Last time they fielded a candidate in Wales (where I live) they ran an almost non-existent campaign and polled a microscopic number of votes.

“In the face of this stifling, and increasingly right-wing consensus, what difference would it make to vote Respect?”

Unfortunately nothing.

The reality is that if people that support others in the form of Greens, Respect, UKIP, or whoever really want to see electoral reform so that their parties have a chance of representing the public then they should switch their vote for one election only to the Lib Dem’s.

There’s pretty much nothing to lose in doing so. If the Lib Dem’s hold to their word of decades then a Lib Dem influenced government will ensure that at the very least AV was promoted, put to referendum and (hopefully) enacted. From then you’ll be free to vote in your constituency for who you want knowing it won’t let a worse party in.

If they don’t do it? Well you’ve not lost anything either way as (unfortunately) you’d be unlikely to get any representatives in to parliament anyway. You can go back to supporting the parties you actually want in parliament knowing once and for all that the Lib Dem’s can’t be trusted to make the reforms happen (or that the public won’t accept reforms).

I agree that our so-called democratic system is undemocratic and changing the ‘first-past-the-post’ system will not change it. We also have a mainly unelected second chamber. But changing that won’t make one scrap of difference because all parties that come to power end-up serving the interests of the economic elite. You can choose coca-cola or pepsi-cola and that’s about it
And manifestos are not legally binding contracts, vote Respect by all means, but you’ll still end-up with more of the same- the majority will end-up paying for the financial mess caused by the few.

So you’re assuming Labour won’t continue with electoral reform if they are re-elected?

@Paul Sagar

Don’t vote for Labour.

Labour is the party of Tony Blair, who launched the Iraq war, Gordon Brown, who signed the cheques for it, Alastair Campbell, who lied to the public about it, and various others.

That’s all you need to know.

Wow.

The one part of the Hagley Road series you decide to post is Respect?

FFS.

“The one part of the Hagley Road series you decide to post is Respect?”

Nope. We’ve already crossposted the not voting one by Neil, and the Pirate Party by Aaron. Skipped the UKIP and BNP ones, but will be doing the others (Libs, Plaid, Left Labour and whatever else they’ve got amongst options on the liberal-left) over the next few days.

Do you consider Respect to be part of the “liberal-left”?

Yes.

Wow again!

Why on earth would I vote for a party with strong ties to organised religion? It’s not Islamophobic to say that the sooner Allah and Jesus Christ, etc, are excised from influence on public office, the better.

How anybody could count Respect (or the rough end of it that remains) as part of the liberal left – or liberal anything – taxes me greatly. Tell me, Salma – what are Islam’s views on topics like homosexuality, or, say, late abortion? I know what Galloway’s views on abortion are/were – bit too close to Allah’s for my liking.

Good grief.

@5 George is recognised by his fellow MPs as one of our greatest living parliamentarians. His achievements with Viva Palestina are the greatest single personal achievement any of the 650 MPs has brought off in the last five years.

Salma is the one of the best newcomers to politics for years. She’s got integrity. Birmingham and LibCon regulars should be chuffed to bits to have her.

The idea that the next parliament wouldn’t be immensely strengthened by the presence of these two powerful voices and personalities is risible.

@3 is one of the daftest comments I have ever seen posted on this website. Respect is looking to get 3 MPs.

“Tell me, Salma – what are Islam’s views on topics like homosexuality, or, say, late abortion? I know what Galloway’s views on abortion are/were – bit too close to Allah’s for my liking”

No, Kate. Ask Salma what Respect’s policies on abortion are, that’s what she’s answerable for. George Galloway’s views on abortion are those of the Roman Catholic tradition, which you appear to be unaware is a Christian church, And he doesn’t impose them on anyone else in Respect

Au contraire, Strategist. I left the SWP because of Gorgeous George’s views on abortion infiltrated the party to a frightening extent… when I raised my concerns about his anti-abortion, anti liberal stance, people in the party (mostly blokes) told me to shut my girly trap and leave my minor issues (ie women’s rights) at the door. When I asked GG for an interview for confirmation that his views would not compromise thei women’s agenda, I was told to piss off.

He most certainly does impose his views. That’s one of the reasons there’s almost nobody there anymore.

“Skipped the UKIP”

See, see! I told you the bastards around here would never publish anything I wrote…..

“I believe there is a large minority – in some cases a majority – for whom the principles of peace, justice and equality are the bedrock of their politics.”

Taking that as being true thenclearly neither you nor they believe that your party principles are those of peace, justice and equality. For your vote ain’t a large minority nor a majority, it’s umm, what, 0.1% or something?

… and given that Salma plays the Islamophobic card in her post here, she can damn well tell me what Islam’s views of abortion are. She’s here on a public site whoring for my vote, after all. Are you telling me that those who presume to rule us only have to answer questions that suit? How terribly Swuppie of you.

And wasn’t it Lindsay German who said that gay rights shouldn’t be a “shibboleth” preventing the SWP allying itself with the clerical fascists of Respect?

Sorry, I mean the liberal-leftists of Respect….

cjcjc – I think you may have touched on one of the many issues that many of us have with putting the words ‘Islam,’ ‘Respect’ and ‘Liberal left’ in the one sentence…

I didn’t spent all those years as a feminist and leftwing activist just so I could start worshipping Allah and/or Jesus Christ or who feckn ever and turning a blind eye to various deities’ reactionary views on abortion, gay sex, etc… but for some reason, the likes of Lindsay thought there were sales to be had in just such a configuration…

and people think I’VE got problems with logic.

I told you the bastards around here would never publish anything I wrote….

In fairness, Tim UKIP could hardly be described as a liberal left party. However as liberals are in favour of free speech I am sure they wouldn’t censor it either.

You’ll have seen that loudmouthed rude man on TV recently: that Nigel Farage. Yes, he’s one of us, one of UKIP, the UK Independence Party.

Yes, quite, we’re adults and we’re British, so we’ll decide for ourselves thanks very much: vote UKIP.

Hi pagar,

‘s fine – but a link to the original would have sufficed, we don’t normally have entire articles crossposted into comments…

The reference, pagar, the reference.

Fair point, claude.

But I don’t think anyone would believe me capable of writing UKIP manifestos any more than they would think DHG capable of writing speeches for female Democrat senators……

“So you’re assuming Labour won’t continue with electoral reform if they are re-elected?”

I assume that they promised electoral reform once before when it was looking like they would potentially have a tight fight on their hands for power, and then they spent 13 years explaining why it wasn’t needed.

I also assume that the Lords only have about 3-5 days to rattle through the bill that would ensure we get our referendum.

I also assume that should it go to wash-up the conservative front bench will find the referendum too “controversial” and block the bill from going through.

If the law passes then great, vote for who you want and hope that nothing goes wrong. If not, then voting Lib Dem’s is the only way to guarantee that the agenda of electoral reform remains pressed (unless you already live in an area with a high likelihood of a Green or Respect member, assuming that either would vote for reform). We know from history we cannot trust Labour.

George is recognised by his fellow MPs as one of our greatest living parliamentarians.

I’m reminded of the film promos which flaunt their five-star ratings from the Sun.

Can I make a complaint to the mods – I assumed that brazen elctioneering (which is what this thread clearly is) was banned on this site ?

@Strategist

George is recognised by his fellow MPs as one of our greatest living parliamentarians.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Seriously, that was the best laugh I’ve had in ages. Do another one.

Respect is looking to get 3 MPs.

Yes, good luck with that. Just because you’re “looking” to get 3 MPs doesn’t mean you’ll get them. You’ll be lucky to get 3 deposits returned.

@Matt Munro: I think you’re allowed if your chances of winning any election at all – council, parliament, class captain – is five-eights of fuck-all.

@17 Kate Belgrave said: “Tell me, Salma – what are Islam’s views on topics like homosexuality, or, say, late abortion? I know what Galloway’s views on abortion are/were – bit too close to Allah’s for my liking. Good grief.”

@18 I replied: “No, Kate. Ask Salma what Respect’s policies on abortion are, that’s what she’s answerable for. George Galloway’s views on abortion are those of the Roman Catholic tradition, which you appear to be unaware is a Christian church, And he doesn’t impose them on anyone else in Respect.”

@20 Kate said: “I left the SWP because of Gorgeous George’s views on abortion infiltrated the party to a frightening extent… when I raised my concerns about his anti-abortion, anti liberal stance, people in the party (mostly blokes) told me to shut my girly trap and leave my minor issues (ie women’s rights) at the door. When I asked GG for an interview for confirmation that his views would not compromise the women’s agenda, I was told to piss off. He most certainly does impose his views. That’s one of the reasons there’s almost nobody there anymore.”

So here it is in black & white: http://www.therespectparty.net/manifesto.php?category=Women

“Respect supports a women’s right to choose whether or not to continue a pregnancy, and will oppose any attempt to change current legislation on this issue which further undercuts women’s rights.”

So. Let’s go through it slowly for Kate’s benefit.

Salma Yaqoob is a Muslim running for election for the Respect party. The party’s policy is pro the status quo on abortion, but – just like every other left-liberal political party in the country – it does not impose this view on its members or elected representatives. George Galloway, out of a Christian Catholic tradition, opposes abortion, but has not “imposed” this policy on his party – this is a complete fiction.

What Kate Belgrave appears to have wanted to do was impose the SWP’s policy on abortion on to everybody who wanted to join or be elected for Respect, and was disappointed that the SWP wouldn’t do this for her.

Which makes this particular heat & fury from Kate particularly risible @22:

“Are you telling me that those who presume to rule us only have to answer questions that suit? How terribly Swuppie of you.”

Kate, when you start finding friends like cjcjc, that’s when you need to start worrying.

Kate Belgrave, why do you hate Muslims?

Hi Blanco,

I pretty much dislike all religions. Islam just happens to be on the menu today.

Will you denounce and reject Labour, the Tories, the Lib Dems and pretty much all parties because they have prominent figures who follow a religious belief?

Yes. The infiltration of organised religion into politics in this day and age is one of the many reasons I’m so disillusioned by politics.

In this day and age? When was it ever different?

Respect are the sweaty perineum between the scrotum of Stalinism and the anus of most vicious form of theocracy.

Frankly, the sight of their propoganda being published on a ‘Liberal Left’ site makes me want to bash my head against a spike.

tim f –

I meant that in this day and age – when nobody goes to church and the Lord has about as much gravitas as Santa – I’d expect things to be different.

@Shatterface

Please go and do that – you’ll be making everyone’s day.

Will gay rights be in this year’s Respect manifesto?

http://www.ukgaynews.org.uk/Archive/2005nov/2202.htm

Respect is a religio-political party with a strong socially conservative ethno-nationalist base. To see it promoted by a supposed left-leaning, ‘liberal’, wannabe think-tank makes me want to go and do what Shatterface is suggesting.

One of the many problems with the British electoral system is that it is fundamentally undemocratic

It returns to office candidates which received 30 or 40%, sometimes even a plurality of the vote. It’s an imperfect system, yes, but definitely more democratic than the likes of Jamlaat-i-Islami.

Kate, when you start finding friends like cjcjc, that’s when you need to start worrying.

This is just a blog. She might – but considering the general Stalinist tactic of smearing individuals with association with someone who has read their comments – I doubt very much Kate knows Cjcjc off-blog, let alone considers him a friend.

It’s doubly strange when one considers the freaks who tag along with organizations like Respect!

@38 “The infiltration of organised religion into politics in this day and age is one of the many reasons I’m so disillusioned by politics.”

Kate is disillusioned by politics because when she tries to impose her views on others – others who simply want to hold a different point of view and have no intention of imposing their views on her – they tell her to piss off.

Let the trolls on here who deny that George Galloway is one of Britain’s greatest living parliamentarians tell us who they think is a superior performer on the floor of the House.

Galloway aside, what Kate and Shitface fail to grasp is that a truly liberal society would allow people to openly practice whatever faith or belief they want, even if others don’t like it.

Kate doesn’t like Muslims. Does that give her a right to ban Muslims? No.

If those Muslims were to try and force her to be a Muslim, then she would have a right to resist that.

But Muslims aren’t. Frankly, they’re better off without such a moaning, useless idiot.

If you don’t like the fact that Muslims, Christians, Jews or people of any other religion aren’t just going to hide their beliefs at home, tough luck.

Kate was saying in an earlier thread that she thinks she should have the right to walk around with a dangerous dog that can kill people in a few seconds, even if it makes others feel uncomfortable and afraid for their own safety.

So Kate would grant rights to vicious dogs that she wouldn’t grant to Muslims?

I think that tells us all that needs to be told about why she dislikes Respect.

So Kate would grant rights to vicious dogs that she wouldn’t grant to Muslims?

I really think you should make some attempt to listen to what other people say because that is a ridiculous statement.

Of course people should be free to worship whatever God they want – the problem only arises when a liberal response is required to a particular religion that is anti-liberal.

Should the Catholic church have the right to ban abortion or prohibit birth control. No of course not.

Should Islamists be able to treat women as inferior beings. No, they should not.

Kate was saying that she dislikes Respect because its political agenda appears to be influenced by both of the above religious dogmas and this conflicts with her commitment to womens’ rights.

Can’t quite work out where the vicious dogs came in or their relevance.

Kate is disillusioned by politics because when she tries to impose her views on others – others who simply want to hold a different point of view and have no intention of imposing their views on her – they tell her to piss off.

STRATEGIST

Glass houses and stones spring to mind.

Let the trolls on here who deny that George Galloway is one of Britain’s greatest living parliamentarians tell us who they think is a superior performer on the floor of the House.

What is this, a wall pissing competition in Lilliput?

Nah, seriously, I’d like to see what criteria are being used here, and if you know of more than a couple of dozen MPs. I’m biased, but I’d rate John Thurso near the top… unless, by “parliamentarian” you mean “shouts loudest”.

Galloway aside, what Kate and Shitface fail to grasp is that a truly liberal society would allow people to openly practice whatever faith or belief they want, even if others don’t like it.

BLANCO

Good, when’s Nick Griffin getting a slot? What you don’t appear to appreciate is that freedom of speech is not a guarantee of venue. LC is, of course, free to publish, uncritically Respect promos – it’s just that it then has difficulties in claiming to represent any values of sympathetic humanism.

There are many Bengali-led counter-protests against the arch-conservativism in Respect and similar organizations (recently outnumbering the attendees at a StWC meeting). But, for you it seems, the pride in offering space to said arch-conservatives trumps all.

Kate doesn’t like Muslims.

She said no such thing. She said she “doesn’t like all religions” (including Islam)… personally, I think this is as much a cop out as the cultural piracy of taking whichever part of different religions pleases oneself, but there was no mention of flesh-and-blood humans.

Galloway aside, what Kate and Shitface fail to grasp is that a truly liberal society would allow people to openly practice whatever faith or belief they want, even if others don’t like it.

Hang on… of course everyone should have the liberty to be as socially conservative as they please *in* *private*. But to do so *openly* is to impose their mores on others.

No they cannot. This is a free country. Or should be.

‘Let the trolls on here who deny that George Galloway is one of Britain’s greatest living parliamentarians tell us who they think is a superior performer on the floor of the House.’

Galloway and Respect are fucking cowards who support homophobia, misogyny and anti-Semitism by proxy and who silence critics by abusing Britain’s libel laws.

They have more in common with the fucking BNP than the liberal left.

of course everyone should have the liberty to be as socially conservative as they please *in* *private*. But to do so *openly* is to impose their mores on others.

FFS that is the exact argument used by Catholics, Tories and whoever else who want to ban gays being openly gay. Substitute “socially conservative” for “homosexual” – I think you need to re-examine what liberalism means, fucker.

Good lord, Strategist and Blanco – you’re still going? I salute your indefatigability.

Just a few points – to argue, as I do, that religion has no place in politics does not mean that one is saying that all Muslims should be kicked in the head. It is simply to say that religion has no place in politics.

I’ve always had trouble getting the subtleties of this point across to members of the tattered remains of Respect – they really do seem to think that anyone who thinks Allah is as imaginary as Santa and deserves about as much analysis is saying that they hate all Muslims on a personal level and want to see them rounded up and burned. I’ve never been quite sure why you’ve insisted on making that leap. I don’t hate Muslims. I don’t hate Christians. I don’t hate Jews. I don’t hate anyone, as it happens. I just don’t have any time for god-botherers’ nutty doctrines, and get a little testy when they bring those doctrines to the political ring and try and impose them on me.

Legal abortion, for instance, is under real threat in the US, and Mad Nads has taken a few pot shots at it here. Bishops sit in the House of Lords and oppose equalities legislation, even though they represent almost bloody nobody. Adherents of the Respect experiment tried to argue that it was possible to for social liberals and Islamic fundamentalists to find common ground and work together to liberate the working class and those facing inequalities. We all know about the U-bend that that idea went round.
Let’s say it again – I couldn’t give a stuff what tin god, ring of jewels, or imaginary entities people want to spent their lives worshipping. They can even spend their days ringing bells and clapping in front of Galloway’s butt if they feel that takes them closer to heaven. I just don’t want their mad views influencing my choices.

Re: my dog – think he’s a bit young to be making seriously denominational choices, although I’m thinking he’s already moving away from Jesus H, because he did a big wee-wee on a broken angel in Nunhead cemetery the other day. Fair statement, I thought.

My word, I pressed a button there, Blanco.

Homosexual relations are not political choices/campaigning, which is all about altering the conduct of public life. As Respect is a religio-political organization – with strains of social conservatism and ethno-nationalist policies – it can be assumed to be seeking to impose its mores on others.

Also, Tories? You might as well accuse Lithuanians of being anti-gay.

Anyway, back to the thread from which you’re trying to deflect criticism:

Firstly I believe it is essential that we elect politicians free to speak out, and with the courage of their convictions to do so.

Considering that when the vapid Yaqoob wrote for the student rag, Trends (edited by Inayat Bunglawala), she penned on article which longed for an Islamic Republic of Great Britain and concluded with the image of Salman Rushdie fleeing for his life. Now, we all say stupid things when we’re young, but Yaqoob is still young and hasn’t extricated herself very well by joining Respect.

On the subject of gay rights, her press officer in the 2005 GE was Adam Yosef who wrote alluding to physical violence against Peter Tatchell:

http://www.petertatchell.net/politics/adamyosef.htm

Her last foray into electoral non-existence

@47 pagar “[Kate Belgrave] dislikes Respect because its political agenda appears to be influenced by both of the above religious dogmas [Catholicism & Islam]”

Appears isn’t really good enough, pagar. Here’s the entire canon of Respect policy: http://www.therespectparty.net/manifesto.php Work your way through it and come back when you’ve found what you’re looking for, and not a moment before.

I thank Alec for his suggestion @48 of John Thurso and note that Shatterface @50 is entirely unable to name a greater parliamentarian than George Galloway that was elected fair & square to the current House of Commons.

@52 Kate Belgrave: “Mad Nads”. ?

‘Firstly I believe it is essential that we elect politicians free to speak out, and with the courage of their convictions to do so.’

Respect is the champion of free speech? My arse, they are. They support the supression of criticism of religion and would strengthen the libel laws to protect the reputations of quasi-mythical figures.

‘I thank Alec for his suggestion @48 of John Thurso and note that Shatterface @50 is entirely unable to name a greater parliamentarian than George Galloway that was elected fair & square to the current House of Commons.’

I haven’t got the time to type the name of each and every ‘greater parliamentarian’ than that bloated, preening, self-agrandising buffoon.

‘@52 Kate Belgrave: “Mad Nads”. ?’

I believe she’s talking about Nadine Dorres, not your gonad-like messiah.

I dislike respect because their whole being in activism and politics is to promote tolerance of islam and socialist ideals while trying to curtail the views and beliefs of the right wing. I’m not a fan of the right wing but I am a fan of fairness and equality. Watching respect up and down the country arguing as to the merits of islamophobia as defined by muslims while trying to deny Jews the right to define what anti-semitism is to them is the perfect analogy to their way of doing politics.

And then you have Galloway who is the ultimate in corrupt politics, using his power to gain money from his ties in the middle east, to profit in terms of his popular opinion and public image, and to generally be a useless representative who does next to nothing in terms of his parliamentary duty.

Respect have a long way to go before they can prove that they’ll be an even and fair hand in the shaping of this countries politics.

What is a great Parliamentarian? It sounds like the kind of thing that Total Politics would poll.

@ 54 Strategist

I’ve had a look. This is the first paragraph of the Respect manifesto agenda on civil liberties.

Respect condemns the July 7 2005 terrorist attack on London, which killed innocent people – men and women, black and white, on their way to work. We also condemn the war-drive, which created the conditions for it, and the shoot-to-kill response of the Metropolitan Police. Jean Charles de Menezes was killed in cold blood.

I didn’t support Iraq and don’t support Afghanistan, but this has to be the most mealy mouthed condemnation of mass murder I have ever heard.

It won’t do for me.

Pagar, she also called the London bombs “reprisal attacks”.

http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/973

The ability to bather is incredible. Even if they were in revenge – and not, as a listen to Shehzad Tanweer’s *full* speech indicates, rooted in violent hatred of Indian-controll Kashmir with a bit of daddy-hatred thrown in – it becomes equally valid for ‘us’ to launch ‘our’ own reprisal attacks.

And who can forget her claims to have been spat at by some bloke (which is transformed on her Wiki entry to verified and repeated instances):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/nov/30/islamandbritain16

This was after her appearance on Question Time immediately following the 11/9 attacks, when Philip Lauder, the American Ambassador and a New Yorker was was harangued and reduced to tears after he had just watched thousands of his neighbours incinerated or crushed to death.

If the spitting took place, maybe it was a reprisal attack. Personally, I wouldn’t have thought saliva was enough. There wouldn’t have been enough vomit in the world to express my disgust at anyone who participated in that.

…all of which explains why you can hold most meetings of Respect and the SWP quite comfortably in a phone booth. Nobody with even half a brain wants to join their gang, and most people who were in it have buggered off forevermore…

@45.

Let the trolls on here who deny that George Galloway is one of Britain’s greatest living parliamentarians tell us who they think is a superior performer on the floor of the House.

More to the point, how is he “one of Britain’s greatest living parliamentarians” when he’s hardly ever in parliament?

Some numbers from his They Work For You page.

Has spoken in 3 debates in the last year — well below average amongst MPs.

Has voted in 8% of votes in parliament with this affiliation — well below average amongst MPs.

Also, as Write to Them point out he has one of the worst records among MPs for responding to constituents’ letters.

I’ve heard the argument from Respect supporters before that he can sometimes serve his constituents better outside of parliament (I don’t agree, but that’s the argument) but he could at least have the decency to respond to their letters.

What is this, homeopathic parliamentarianism?

Yaqub: >>”On the economy, all three have for years embraced and celebrated the neo-liberal free market dogma responsible for record levels of wealth inequality and the worst recession in over fifty years.”<<

In other words, Islamists want Socialism.

Is there any more proof why the Left-wingers and socialists are so enamoured with Islam? Because they share the same dogma that undemocratic state control of production, whether by the dictator or by the caliph, wlll lead to a free, equal, and more prosperous society. NOT.

“homeopathic parliamentarianism?”

Superb! Yes, that will get stolen. Sorry, but it’s just too good not to steal……

Shatterface: >>They have more in common with the fucking BNP than the liberal left.<<

Never heard of a liberal-left. What kind of animal is that?

There are classic liberals, then there are postmodern relativists who believe thare are no ethical standards and that liberalism is just another ploy to steal oil, and then there are leftwing bigotsand leftwing fascists.

What is a liberal-left?

What’s left, but not right, I suppose?

Respect condemns the July 7 2005 terrorist attack on London, which killed innocent people – men and women, black and white, on their way to work.

Seems pretty unequivocal to me.

What a racist thing for Respect to raise the issue of race in this tragedy.

“The racism of the supposedly anri-racist”.

Too bad a muslim wasn’t killed thinks Respect, so it could claim this as a MI6 job or worse whitewash the fact that the ideology of Islam had anything to do with this crime.

“The fascism of the supposedly anti-fascist”.

Is there any more proof why the Left-wingers and socialists are so enamoured with Islam? Because they share the same dogma that undemocratic state control of production, whether by the dictator or by the caliph, wlll lead to a free, equal, and more prosperous society. NOT.

Is there any more proof why Liverpool fans are so enamoured with Nazism? Because they share the same dogma that standing in crowds, whether in Anfield or in Nuremberg, will lead to a cheery afternoon out. NOT.

Wow BenSix – bad comparison.

Islamists and leftwing fascists both agree on Socialism.

Liverpool fans and Nazis both agree on partying after soccer.

And you compare the two as equivalent reasons? How silly. What happened to materialism and means of production? Jeez, the left was never so clueless until recently.

@HamidKM

Is there any more proof why the Left-wingers and socialists are so enamoured with Islam? Because they share the same dogma that undemocratic state control of production, whether by the dictator or by the caliph, wlll lead to a free, equal, and more prosperous society. NOT.

Er, no. The marriage of Islam and socialism is a bizarre peculiarity of the Respect Party, not a wider movement within either Islam or the political left. Muslims can be of any political persuasion, and, as this thread clearly shows, a lot of leftists have strong disagreements with Islam.

Respect was a political marriage of convenience between various factions of the anti-war movement (mainly the Socialist Workers Party and the Muslim Association of Britain). It was always an awkward relationship and ended with the Muslim faction ejecting the SWP faction.

Oh, and…

Too bad a muslim wasn’t killed thinks Respect, so it could claim this as a MI6 job or worse whitewash the fact that the ideology of Islam had anything to do with this crime.

A Muslim WAS killed on July 7th. And no, not just the ones wearing rucksacks.

Shahara A Islam, 20, had not been seen since Thursday morning. A British-Bangladeshi woman, she lived with her parents in Plaistow, east London.

She worked as a cashier at the Co-operative Bank at Angel, Islington.

A member of the family received a “missed call” on his mobile from Shahara around the time that the bombs detonated.

Shahara’s uncle, Nazmul Hasan, said that his niece was a lively young woman who made friends easily.

Police believe she died in the bus blast at Tavistock Square, but in all cases this can only be officially confirmed by a coroner’s inquest.

it is a remarkable fact that the British parliament probably stands alone in Europe as never having had a single Green Party MP

I love the smell of proper research in the morning…

Islamists and leftwing fascists both agree on Socialism.

Really? Well, those oil-wallowing Saudi aristocrats must’a passed over the memo. And as for that noted classless society Dubai…

The spitting venom and moronic stupidity of some of the contributions on here is disturbing and telling. Bringing the hate-filled cesspit and idiots’ parade that is Harry’s Place to LibCon.

Despite all this, and the wisecracks of others, we still have no concrete suggestions of a better parliamentarian than George Galloway other than John Thurso. This speaks volumes.

And of course who is the very best parliamentarian is not the question to be put on 6 May. It’s whether the 2010 parliament would be a better place graced by the presence of George Galloway & Salma Yaqoob or that of Jim Fitzpatrick and Roger Godsiff. That’s a no brainer that even the most loyal Labour Party supporter would have to admit favours Respect.

@62, 64. George Galloway is in the House of Commons most days, but obviously participation in the business of the house is difficult for a party with one member especially when the party which controls the house is very hostile to it. Therefore he rations his interventions in debates which are of the highest class when made. And his constituency casework is top class, which is sensibly delegated to a superb dedicated team. So your indicator of constituency casework effectiveness is defective, as is the indicator of effectiveness on the floor of the house.

“It’s whether the 2010 parliament would be a better place graced by the presence of George Galloway & Salma Yaqoob or that of Jim Fitzpatrick and Roger Godsiff…”

Shoot me. Shoot me now.

pagar:

no idea what you mean with your dig at 28, I can write speeches all day long for whomever wants them bitch, even you.

Therefore he rations his interventions in debates

Unintentionally hilarious.

obviously participation in the business of the house is difficult for a party with one member

On the contrary. As the sole representative of Respect in the HoC it’s even more important that GG participates or the Respect party line/perspective is never heard. Don’t get me wrong: I think Parliament is immesurably better off for the contempt GG shows it, but please don’t try to sell his laziness as a plus. If he can find time to host a radio show and front a program on a TV station funded by a proto-fascist theocracy, I’m sure he can put one short, chubby leg in front of another and make his way to Westminster once in a blue moon.

Aha, Mr Bumm – that’s why they hate me. My dad was a Jew – and not, perhaps, one of life’s classier ones. His grandad made his money selling ladies’ underpants on overnight trains.

We all gotta live.

Why can’t the Muslim-haters here like Kate Belgrave bugger off back to Harry’s Place, please?

pagar @ 28,

If you are going to insult my chum Daniel Hoffman Gill, perhaps asking him to write speeches for the GOP would be more to the point?

No doubt he could do that too:

“From my house in Alaska I can see Canada. We are surrounded by communists….”

Kate Belgrove @ 78,

I’d have thought that your great grandad’s business was his business, and not something you’d want to raise here.

Just saying…

———————————————-

Shatterface @ 50,

Galloway and Respect are fucking cowards who support homophobia, misogyny and anti-Semitism by proxy and who silence critics by abusing Britain’s libel laws.

They have more in common with the fucking BNP than the liberal left.

Well said!

blanco @ 79,

Stop trying to police this place. I find Kate Belgrove a fucking site more interesting than you.

And I find Blanco a damn site more interesting then your boring shit Clark and your fellow troll chum DHG so why don’t you shut your big fucking mouth for a change?

Douglas

Unusually, my comment at 28 was not intended to belittle Daniel. In any case it’s becoming tough getting to the front of that queue.

Daniel was spotted on another thread passing off a speech by a democratic senator on healthcare reform as his own thought. I had pointed out to him that when quoting someone else it was normal to reference the fact. Claude was joshing me as I had not specifically referenced TW’s article.

Trust that explains.

And as you’ll see from Daniel’s comment @ 76 most of this sort of stuff goes well over his head so there’s really no point in worrying about his sensitivity to being insulted.

I suspect he rather enjoys it.

My word – we’re not being too forgiving round here, are we? What happened to turning the other cheek and all that?

I’d go back to Harry’s Place except that it isn’t really hardcore enough for me. Also, as I explained so patiently somewhere above, my dislike of organised religion is not limited to the tits who administer Islam in this dimension. I extend my lack of courtesy to Christianity, Judaism, paganism, satanism and anything that might be left over from Heaven’s Gate, etc.

Mr Clark – may I point out that the Belgrave (previously Bilgoray, the name we used while scrubbing a living off a potato-hill in Poland) dynasty is rather proud of Grampa Bilgoray’s achievement with his suitcase of underpants. He sold so many pairs that he was eventually able to set up an underpants emporium in the not-so-well known NZ farming town of Hamilton. Thus, the name Belgrave was stamped forever on the western consciousness. Belgravia is probably a salute to that shop. Respect, my man. Respect.

Paganism and satanism aren’t exactly “organised” though are they ? As far as I know they don’t hold car boot sales to raise money for the church roof and stuff like that . What’s your position on the followers of the Jedi religion ?

@74

It’s whether the 2010 parliament would be a better place graced by the presence of George Galloway & Salma Yaqoob or that of Jim Fitzpatrick and Roger Godsiff.

Isn’t that like asking if it’s more enjoyable to drink bleach or to snort turpentine?

And his constituency casework is top class, which is sensibly delegated to a superb dedicated team. So your indicator of constituency casework effectiveness is defective.

If his constituency casework is “top class”, why is the “superb dedicated team” unable to send out replies to constituent letters?

Or the flying spaghetti monster?

Kate, I was worried we may be related, but my lot came from Transylvania (really!)

Tam @ 83,

Thanks for that. I will keep that in mind.

Blanco isn’t the only idiot that posts here.

Fair point, Mr Munro. Fair point.

I believe you’re right to suggest that paganism and satanism have limited overheads – from what I’ve seen on cable telly, those denominations are all about roaring about in the forest eating squirrels, and humping virgins and sacrificing the uglier ones. I suspect that you, like me, have seen and noted the salient points made in that well-known historical document ‘The Wicker Man.’

As for followers of the Jedi faith – I am very much of the opinion that any religion which largely involves appealing to and rounding up teenage boys so that the rest of us can’t see them should be encouraged and funded by government.

As I always say – dropping your teenage kid at a Star Wars convention with his light saber is a reasonably sure way of getting him to take a two hour break from career wanking. The only down side is that that roomful of young boys, including your own, is probably a bit vulnerable to the pope. Swings and roundabouts, I suppose.

Kate Belgrave @ 85,

You remind me of a quote from Alan Moores novel.

“I travel in suspenders”

But that’s probably just me…

Kate – what was the name of that underpants emporium in the not-so-well-known NZ farming town of Hamilton? I lived in that town though I can’t remember any underpants emporia. There are good reasons fort he town being not so well known – it’s Drearyville.

Yurrzem! – it’s not where you come from that counts in six degrees of separation. It’s whether you ended up in New Zealand. If you’ve got family in Hamilton, my friend, we will definitely be related. As we speak, your Hamilton relatives are probably striding some lower paddock purposefully in Belgrave underpants.

RESPECT.

PS – as regards our man Galloway and his round-the-clock commitment to public office: didn’t I read that he got a bit behind on his constituency mail when was on all fours in the BB house, licking milk out of that old hooker’s fanny? I don’t want to be too hasty, here, so perhaps Blanco and Strategist could help me out. At the time, he looked like he was 100% tuned into the milk, but for all I know, he was typing with his prick.

Am keeping an open mind, people.

Strategist @ 74,

Well, there is Lynne Featherstone, occasionally of this parish. Or that Tory bloke, David Davies that stood up against what ought to be illegal imprisonment, or the whole rabble of labour MP’s that voted Nadine Dorries down.

There are probably lots more, if anyone can be bothered.

KB Player – it was known as….(drumroll…)

“Belgrave’s.”

And I think the family sold it in the 1980s sometime. I had an uncle called Michael King who was an historian in New Zealand, and who wrote a book about the family’s Jewish background (starring Mr Underpants) not long before he died about ten years ago. I’ll see if I can find it – give more details.

‘George Galloway is in the House of Commons most days, but obviously participation in the business of the house is difficult for a party with one member especially when the party which controls the house is very hostile to it. Therefore he rations his interventions in debates which are of the highest class when made’

Seriously, I’d worry about you even in Ghandi lead Respect. Any political party which shows THAT much adoration for their leader could tip very easily into fascism.

You aren’t selling this to those of us who think *leadership* itself is a problem.

I can’t remember Belgrave’s. It was probably too expensive for us. I’ve read a couple of Michael King’s books though, the biography of Te Puea and the Penguin History of New Zealand. Both very good. Michael King died way too young.

If you have a postal address, I do believe I have a pair of Belgrave’s finest marinading in a cupboard somewhere… they have a few miles on the clock, but for memory’s sake, just say the word…

Yep, Mike was a really great guy and a marvellous historian.

That’s a very generous offer, Ms Belgrave. I’ll take you up on it

My postal address is:-

Cardboard Box No 4
Under Third Arch
Cowgate
Edinburgh
EH13 13OI

Are you okay if I just send you half? I think I’ll send the back bits to Salma.

We can deduce from this thread that most people are more interested in Underpants than the Respect Party. This is a comforting thought, and one we can hold on to as we grimly await the election.

What is intriguing is that Respect even comes second when up against pants suitable for sale in the less-racy areas of New Zealand.

I wonder how Brown and Cameron would fare.

(Nb: Kate, let’s not bring up the cat thing again please. We don’t all have iron stomachs).

Clark @ 89

“Blanco isn’t the only idiot that posts here.”

No, you are the biggest idiot of them all. What a boring prat you are.

Tam @ 102,

Cheers mate. Your contributions to this site have been, err, notable….

Clark @ 103

And so have yours, with your tedium, frequent ‘misunderstandings’ and generally abusive profanity laden stance.

And I am no ‘mate’ of yours.

It is vaguely interesting, isn’t it?

Underpants in NZ farming town: 20 points
Paganism, satanism, jedi knightism: two points each
Respect party: no points
Gorgeous George: no points
Islam: no points
Christianity: no points

Wow.

But then underpants are soundly based on reality, address a greater range of human needs and are considerably less divisive. Underpant choices are devolved to the wearers, subject to age, and there are no One True Underpant belief systems to fight and die for.
There may be a moral here.

@Kate Belgrave #90:

“any religion which largely involves appealing to and rounding up teenage boys… should be encouraged and funded by government”

Don’t the Catholic Church have enough money already?

pagar:

Again, you seem to be using this here forum as a vent for your personal beef with me, which I’ve already warned you about and considering that you won’t email me directly with your issues, I can only assume you’re yet another coward.

What is pretty low, even for you, is that, as someone also spoofed, you know what attacks I’ve come under over here, less now thanks to some sterling work by the site editors, but to use that as a way in to take a dig is the act of a scumbag, which you are clearly.

And to be clear, I never passed off a speech by a democratic senator on healthcare reform as my own thought, that is a bare-faced lie.

“And as you’ll see from Daniel’s comment @ 76 most of this sort of stuff goes well over his head so there’s really no point in worrying about his sensitivity to being insulted.”

I’m sick and tired of your anonymous, cowardly personal attacks on me, you refuse to deal with me directly but instead use this forum as a place to show off your pathetic, envious mewlings and seem to think, in some half-deluded way that makes you no better than the vile stalker, that your opinions carry weight, impact and people actually want to hear them.

Poor, poor idiot.

I was in Hamilton, New Zealand, today and sadly there is no sign of an underpants emporium by the name of Belgrave. Though I do remember a few chaps trying to get into Kate’s.

Sadly in Hamilton this morning there was no sign of an underpants emporium by the name of Belgrave. Though I do remember a few chaps trying to get into Kate’s.

Mr Stratford – how are you?!!!!

Long time no rub. How’s life in the home nation?

“British model of multiculturalism and pluralism”

Which is? And who defined it? And with the consent of who else? Or is this so-called “British” model, simply that which Socialists deem to be best for us all?

Underpants aside, the comment @52 is one of the best I’ve read on LC for a long time. *applauds*

53. Alec – “On the subject of gay rights, her press officer in the 2005 GE was Adam Yosef who wrote alluding to physical violence against Peter Tatchell:

http://www.petertatchell.net/politics/adamyosef.htm”

Firstly, he is/was her press officer and may not be a member of her party and is not standing to represent anyone politically.

Secondly, he apologised for his remarks at the time, Peter Tatchell accepted the apology and in 2009, he formally endorsed Tatchell’s ekection candidacy, so you can’t really use that against Salma Yaqoob, Adam Yosef or Respect really….