It's easy enough – pleasurable, even – for the left to criticise cases of corruption, chicanery, bungs, backhanders and general no goodery that emanate from New Labour or the Tories; it’s rather harder to speak out when apparent impropriety is closer to home.
The natural tendency is to close ranks, to prevaricate, make excuses, advance more or less spurious justifications, plead attenuating circumstances, and shrug off inconvenient accusations as baseless allegations mischievously gotten up by political opponents.
Yet such desperate avoidance of candour leaves socialists open to accusations of double standards and logical inconsistency. Are we for the highest standards of probity in politics, or are we not?
When those ostensibly on the left are under fire from the right, to call for them to put up a convincing defence case or take the rap is not a route to easy popularity; some even regard it as tantamount to scabbing. My criticisms of George Galloway after the ‘cash for oil’ charges five years ago brought me intensive opprobrium from those now making the very much the same points.
Today it is the turn of Livingstone race adviser Lee Jasper (pictured), who has been forced to step down after revelations that he sent intimate emails to a woman just days before advancing a £65,000 grant to one of her projects.
Now, that infinitesimally small proportion of the population at all interested in the nuances of leftwing politics will know that I am closer to the McDonnell/Corbyn wing of the Campaign Group than the Livingstone/Socialist Action side of things, and that relationships are sometimes less than comradely.
But in as far as 99% of the politically aware public lump all of the above together as ‘the Labour left’, the Labour left should take a clear stance on the Jasper affair. If the reported details are correct - and I haven't seen them being denied - then the allegations must be taken seriously.
Let’s leave aside the fact that the use of a work email account to send messages of an inappropriate nature to a colleague would merit disciplinary proceedings in many workplaces. Cheesy chat-up lines are not a crime, although some of Jaspers's are so bad they probably should be; misuse of public money very clearly is.
Jasper properly benefits from the presumption of innocence and the right to due process, as anyone else does in these circumstances. Earlier claims against him have been investigated, and Scotland Yard has ruled that he has no criminal case to answer.
But it is not enough to cry ‘racist stitch up’ and dodge all questions. Nor will it do to accuse Andrew Gilligan of being a Tory; I happen to know he isn’t.
Jasper has only his own actions to blame for finding himself in the unenviable position he now occupies. It would be a huge mistake for Livingstone to allow his project to be prejudiced by understandable loyalty to a political associate of long standing.
I hope – for the sake of the Labour left and for the good of the Labour Party as a whole ahead of the crucial London elections on May 1 - that Jasper is exonerated. If not, we should, to use his own choice of words, let him cook. Honey glazing optional.
Comments (70)
"Nor will it do to accuse Andrew Gilligan of being a Tory; I happen to know he isn’t."
Fair enough, but why did he do that programme and continually denounce Livingstone in the Standard at this crucial time? Same goes for Nick Cohen and others.
The outcome of this may well be that we get Boris the bigot as mayor. Is that what they want?
The Standard has behaved appallingly. I hardly ever read the rotten rag but when I saw a headline attacking Jasper for living in a council house it was obvious that they were just looking for any mud to throw at him.
You see they reckoned that when Jasper got his well-paid job at City Hall, he should have given up his house for more deserving lower income people. It was a pathetic and nasty piece, similar to articles in The Sun when Labour was led by Kinnock and Foot.
Er, what exactly is Livingstone's 'project'? Don't say advancing the working class/socialist cause or I'll get a hernia laughing.
I first took a dislike to Japser when he spoke on the telly about these lefties that criticised his 'black-power' (he is as retro as that) views who didn't understand the inner-cities because they went home to their suburban homes. I second disliked Jasper when he lined up with the pro-Islamicist crew. I thirdly loathed him when a close black female comrade told me, actually about three weeks back, about how he 'came on' to her.
A super-rich fraud is how I would describe him.
Spot on. Not only that, his stance on race issues made things worse.
Someone said:
"Nor will it do to accuse Andrew Gilligan of being a Tory; I happen to know he isn’t."
Fair enough, but why did he do that programme and continually denounce Livingstone in the Standard at this crucial time? Same goes for Nick Cohen and others.
The outcome of this may well be that we get Boris the bigot as mayor. Is that what they want?
Maybe Gilligan is just an honest journalist.
Jasper earns well over £100k yet deprives needy families of accommodation by staying in a large Housing Association home for a small rent - not exactly Socialism as I understood it.
What's appalling about the Standard uncovering the extremely dodgy dealings of this jammy so-and-so? It's certainly my taxes, as a Londoner, that this joker is squandering without proper accounting. And since Jasper is a very big mate of the Labour candidate for Mayor, why isn't this an appropriate time to expose him - just like the mud the Left are trying to sling at Boris Johnson.
Ugh! The Tories are here. The thing about the council house is that when he got it, he wasn't earning £100k. As of today, he isn't earning that anymore is he? Getting a council house gives you security of tenure which is one of the many important reason why so many tenants prefer council housing to HA's.
"just like the mud the Left are trying to sling at Boris Johnson"
Got any examples of that?
Does it count as mudslinging to point out his record helping Darius Guppy out with getting an uncooperative journalist beaten up?
And don't forget his offensive racist and anti working class rants.
Am no fan of Livingstone, he is far too close to big business and the police amongst other things. But I think its a case of no to Boris the bigot by any means necessary so he will get my 2nd preference vote.
> "just like the mud the Left are trying to sling at Boris Johnson"
> Got any examples of that?
How about trawling through his millions of words and witticisms, finding an ironic reference to "picaninnies" and "watermelon smiles" in the middle of an obscure novel, and casting the whole man as a "hard-line racist" on that basis alone?
People who know him say he doesn't have a racist bone in his body. This punch was way, way below the belt and it did him quite a lot of damage. I'm surprised he didn't take out a libel action, except it is not his style.
On what grounds could he have successfully taken out a libel action then? He said it, after all.
In case our Tory friends need reminding:
Quotes from Boris Johnson:
About Tony Blairs visits to Africa:
"the tribal warriors will all break out in watermelon smiles to see the big white chief", just as "it is said the Queen has come to love the Commonwealth, partly because it supplies her with regular cheering crowds of flag-waving piccaninnies".
On the people of Papua New Guinea:
"orgies of cannibalism and chief-killing"
About the people of Liverpool:
"wallowing in a "vicarious victimhood"; that many Liverpudlians had a "deeply unattractive psyche"; and that they refused to accept responsibility for "drunken fans at the back of the crowd who mindlessly tried to fight their way into the ground" during the Hillsborough disaster"
Johnson did not write the Liverpool piece.
I dont think Boris the Oaf is a racist actually, just your typical clumsy public school buffoon, who likes to get the last larf.
Boris is too public school to really understand the issues of a major section of Londoners, and Ken is now too middle class to understand many of em also. Thats why he is handing out £100K's to cronies like Jasper, cos he feels like its keeping him in touch with the grass roots of London. Not working im afraid...
And no, Jasper didnt have to give up his council house, but you would think any decent political animal would realise that living in a council house when your earning £120K a year is gonna make you look no better than an average street hustler on a scam...
"Johnson did not write the Liverpool piece"
Who did then? Why did Michael Howard send him to Liverpool to grovellingly apologise if he didn't write it?
Gilligan's published work re Livingstone and Jasper does not appear to be of the highest standards he might set himself. Lots of apparent half truths, non sequitors, exaggeration, juxtapositions, innuendo etc etc. It seems to me. A few kites, fishing expeditions and long shots.
I don't think he is a Tory either. But I do think he is taking part in an orchestrated campaign which benefits the Tories. And we know he is connected to Boris and might consider he owes the lad a few favours for helping him out in his own career.
Living in a Council House, having a sex life, believing (as I do as it goes) that many liberals don't get it, and even flirting with or tolerating some dangerous ideas, these don't make Jasper corrupt or bad but do make him a relatively easy smear target.
Clearly any and all allegations with any back up do need to be investigated; though in the final analysis we may need to judge whether cities need a few barrow boys who will "take a view" and keep things moving, within the letter of the law naturally.
I'd guess most successful cities have had some on the books since the beginning of our politics. I don't know Jasper, but I do recognise a continuum from smearage to legitimate journalism and legitimate campaigning and much of this seems to be at the smearage end of that continuum.
>On what grounds could he have successfully taken out a libel action then?
An old lady absentmindedly took a bottle of milk from the supermarket and ended up in court with a conditional discharge. Ten years later a newspaper described her "a thief" on that basis alone. Clear grounds for a libel action. I know - I was involved in just such a case.
In the same way, publications like Compass and The Voice continue to brand Johnson a hard-line racist for a few words written years ago in jocular irony. They continue to describe him as "someone who calls black children picaninnies", which is patently untrue, since this implies he does it as a matter of course.
If you really want to pick nits, look at the sentence in its full context and you will find the expression is used in mocking reference to the kind of language the aristocracy might have used when visiting a hot country in the colonial age. It is so far removed from "someone who calls black children picaninnies" as to be laughable.
In fact I find the whole thing laughable. At best his opponents have only a few fleeting words and exchanges from the past on which to hang him. Short of real ammo, they are exploiting these to the point of ridicule. They also forget that a lot of people find Boris's incorrect take on life quite refreshing. Demonizing him only reinforces their opinion of the po-faced Left.
Compare Johnson's "crimes" with the lake of poop in which Livingstone and his henchmen now find themselves swimming - not to mention his treasonable ambitions to set up a socialist republic within a democratic nation. To grind on about Boris's odd, essentially harmless, bloopers only goes to show how desperate they are. And the public are beginning to twig.
Fucking Hell Dave - get some balls man. Whenever someone on the left comes under fire from the right your reaction is that should just collectively bend over and take it up the arse.
You say that Jasper deserves the "presumption of innocence and the right to due process" but then later state "Jasper has only his own actions to blame for finding himself in the unenviable position he now occupies" - care to reconcile those two statements Judge Dread?
Jasper has no case to answer - the police have announced that they aren't investigating him because they have no evidence. (funny how that woman who recieved the e-mails kept shtum at the time but has now choosen to pipe up in the run up to the election).
Seriously, fuck the lot of these grasping cunts - Bright, Gilligan, the Rothermere Nazis and the tory scum. Wankers to the man the lot of them. Whatever they want I want the opposite (example - they don't want tory scum to be kicked in the balls etc).
"To grind on about Boris's odd, essentially harmless, bloopers only goes to show how desperate they are. And the public are beginning to twig."
Like trying to help to get a journalist beaten up you fucking thick tory cunt? Come the revolution - your head on a spike. The of piece of shit that you are.
"Like trying to help to get a journalist beaten up you fucking thick tory cunt? Come the revolution - your head on a spike. The of piece of shit that you are."
Going by the above, I think that nice Mr Hughes has been hanging around Southwark & Bermondsey for too long.
Simon Hughes you are a delightful little soul aren't you?
Colin & Darren - I'd be inclined to give Simon the stylistic benefit of the doubt given the time when those comments were written. ;)
Firstly, Jasper is not in a council house, he is in a Housing Association home, an HA that has said it is desperate for more accommodation for the needy.
Second, if there's no case to answer, why are the Police investigating at least 4 organisations Jasper had a hand in? Public money dished out, no accounts kept, no work done.
Third, Livingstone's attempt to divert attention by getting Police involved with Jasper's behaviour at City Hall was a stunt - they need to have a crime reported, they can't investigate 'improprities'.
Finally, have a look at what the other cronies are now saying, in public, about Jasper's empire.
Grow up, wake up, corruption exists in politics, whatever the Party.
Apparently Mr Jasper sends emails like that all the time, to women in many organisations which he and his long-standing friend Mr Livingstone are connected with.
Mr Osler you are part of a racist media conspiracy, clearly. You must be part of Boris' campaign.
Nobody believes that Boris is a racist. Anyone who thinks that people who went to public school should be automatically barred from office should have a quick look at the Labour benches before casting the first stone.
Boris has explained the Darius Guppy thing to most people's satisfaction. Why do the left keep banging on about it? Could it be because Livingstone is now on his way out? The "coalition" of the left is breaking down after Smith's and Blair's valiant efforts and keeping it together. The country can breathe a sigh of relief for there is light at the end of this authoritarian, corrupt tunnel.
Thought you were an English teacher Ed? Isn't onfe of the purposes of literacy to be able to write clearly and put a point forward unambiguously? Go to the bottom of the class.
Well you're a onfe to talk.
Did Lee Jasper actually bed this woman?
To spend £65,000 and still not get her in the sack is a bit of a "failure of policy", surely
Do you mean 'you;'re a one to talk'? Incidentally, was Mr Chouhan, like Andrew Parker-Bowles, laying down his wife for ...un...er..the good of Londoners?
Jasper claiming that his opponents are 'racist' is pathetic. Just like Ken Livingstone after the Channel 4 documentary was broadcast about him, they should answer the accusations made against them rather than crying foul play.
London will be better off without either of them.
"Boris has explained the Darius Guppy thing to most people's satisfaction."
Oh really? Care to give a few more details? All I've seen is him trying to laugh it off while on HIGNFY.
Oh and while you're there, who gave you the authority to speak for 'most people'?
"Getting a council house gives you security of tenure which is one of the many important reason why so many tenants prefer council housing to HA's."
"Posted by Matthew Stiles"
Matthew, I have to say that I wasn't aware of any difference in the agreements entered into by Housing Associations and local authorities. Obviously, older tenancies come under a different set of rules, but today, the agreements grant much less security of tenure - AST's and if you're lucky and AT. May I ask where you get this idea from?
BTW, I don't care whether Lee Jasper lives in a HA or local authority house - what does concern me is that there are many in the Labour Party who believe that HA and local authority housing should be reserved for those who can't afford private housing (rented or purchased). Personally, I think this is a daft suggestion and the practical reality of Lee Jasper position really does present part of the difficulty.
Dave – how about coming down from your ivory tower and explaining how its logically possible to say that Jasper deserves the presumption of innocence and saying that he’s to blame for his situation?
Meanwhile Dougal asks “if there's no case to answer, why are the Police investigating at least 4 organisations Jasper had a hand in?”
Well let’s examine the facts – the London Development Agency has found that 12 out of the 16 subStandard’s allegations are unfounded. The remaining four cases involved external parties so were beyond the agency’s powers. The police found no evidence and stated that Jasper had no criminal case to answer. In other words – there is no evidence against Jasper whatsoever beyond the accusation of the rightwing press and a handful of political rivals and ex-political allies.
Matthew Stiles, That is exactly what he should have done - move out of a house which is intended for those who need it more, who have a genuine housing need.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Does that definition of socialism mean anything to you, or to him? How dare he stay in a house which a poor family could occupy, when he can afford to look after himself?
"Boris has explained the Darius Guppy thing to most people's satisfaction. Why do the left keep banging on about it?"
Well, let's put it this way, if there was a tape of Lee Jasper having a discussion with, say, Errol Walters about having a journalist beaten up, Andrew Gilligan would devote a double-page spread in the Evening Standard to exposing the details, accompanied by a screaming front-page headline.
Back in 1995 the Mail on Sunday published an article based on excerpts from the "Guppygate" tape. It's worth reading.
http://tinyurl.com/2falhd
Perhaps Dave Osler could explain to us why a so-called investigative journalist like Andrew Gilligan - who as Dave has assured us, is not a Tory - shows absolutely no interest in raising this issue. After all, it's directly related to the question of whether Johnson is a fit person to be Mayor of London.
And on the issue of Lee Jasper's house, the Evening Standard helpfully published a picture of it for the assistance of racists who might be thinking of having a go at him and his family.
The Nazi Stormfront site linked to the Standard article, no doubt for the same reason (scroll down to the bottom and click on "pockets").
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?p=4934031
The above Ed is not me, SueR. Different Ed. There are lots of Eds.
This genuflexion at the altar of bourgeois respectability is a sorry spectacle to behold!
Dave’s evidently clinging to the prospect of climbing the greasy media ladder to the dizzying heights of position 91 in Ian Dale’s next “most influential leftist” love in list. Set your sights high comrade Osler – a few more hatchet jobs like this and you’re well on the way!
And if you want an example of another Evening Standard writer abandoning any residual sense of journalistic integrity in order to boost Boris Johnson's campaign and ensure Livingstone's defeat, have a read of this piece by Nick Cohen attacking Lee Jasper for supposedly abusing his position in Operation Black Vote: http://tinyurl.com/2l25dc
It contains this passage on OBV:
Unfortunately, Lee Jasper is its chair and the destruction of high purposes and public trust follows with a wearisome inevitability. The campaign has been hijacked and turned into a vehicle for Ken Livingstone. If you doubt me, listen to Jasper in a recent interview with the Voice:
"I am going to be working hard with Operation Black Vote and a host of other organisations to register as many of our people to vote," he told the black paper. Fair enough - the organisation exists to increase turnout. But, he continued, black voters should vote for only one man. "I think people see that the other candidates don't have substantive policy positions on any of the major issues. Ken, standing on his record and his manifesto, will be declared the candidate of choice."
Readers of the Voice - or of the attacks on critics of Jasper on the Operation Black Vote website - can't doubt that this supposedly nonpartisan campaign is endorsing Livingstone, and that everything about its turn into party politics is wrong.
Note the phrase "he continued". According to Cohen, Jasper first stated that Operation Black Vote was working to increase registration and turnout for the London elections - and Jasper then went on to state that Livingstone would be "declared the candidate of choice" for black Londoners. Cohen claims that Jasper's words demonstrated that "this supposedly nonpartisan campaign is endorsing Livingstone".
In fact, if you read the Voice interview (http://tinyurl.com/2n9zle), you'll see that Cohen completely distorts Jasper's argument.
First of all, Jasper is interviewed by the Voice in his capacity as "senior advisor on race to Mayor of London Ken Livingstone", not as chair of OBV. Halfway through the interview he is asked: "Have these allegations and your suspension jeopardised Mayor Livingstone’s chances to be re-elected in May?"
Jasper replies: "I don’t think they have jeopardised him. Obviously, it is important for the mayor’s campaign to get back to the substantive issues facing London – transport, housing, crime. This will give him an opportunity to do that. I think people see that the other candidates don’t have substantive policy positions on any of the major issues. Ken, standing on his record and his manifesto, will be declared the candidate of choice."
There is no mention of Operation Black Vote until right at the end of the interview, when Jasper is asked: "What will you do while you are on suspension?"
He replies: "It allows me to keep training in the gym (and) be with my family and I plan to encourage those communities in London who are not registered to vote; I can throw myself into that. Voter registration is key. Not turning out to vote is an act of political irresponsibility and political cowardice because the British National Party (BNP) is relying on low voter turnout to become members of the London Assembly. It is vitally important for the Black community to turn out and vote. If we don’t vote, we could ultimately return to the days of the late 1980s where there were areas in London where Black people feared to tread. In the next few weeks, I am going to be working hard with Operation Black Vote (OBV) and a host of other organisations to register as many of our people to vote."
This is the only reference to Operation Black Vote in the entire interview. It can be seen that Jasper does not link OBV with Livingstone's mayoral campaign in any way, even by implication. He states quite clearly that his role in relation to OBV will be to encourage voter registration and turnout in the black community.
The only party-political aspect to this is his point that it is crucial that the black community should turn out and vote in the London Assembly elections in order to defeat the BNP.
What Cohen did was quote the bit about OBV from the final sentence of the interview and told his readers that Jasper had then "continued" by arguing in favour of the black community voting for Livingstone. As OBV itself pointed out (http://tinyurl.com/2tvhsc) Cohen "splices two very distinct answers Jasper gave to concoct a proposition that OBV was being hijacked to aide Ken Livingstone". In other words, Cohen's article is a clear case of politically-motivated journalistic fraud.
Of course, as Dave Osler will no doubt remind us, Nick Cohen is not a Tory.
Osler: "I am closer to the McDonnell/Corbyn wing of the Campaign Group "
You may consider yourself closer to them Dave, but they DO NOT consider themselves close to you
:o)
I thank Respect Renewal for all their support.
100% of their elected representatives are pro life.
As are all their London list.
>"Boris has explained the Darius Guppy thing to most people's satisfaction."
>Oh really? Care to give a few more details? (Rory)
It's obvious Guppy was an old school friend making a bloody nuisance of himself on the phone and Boris just wanted to get rid of him. "Yeah, yeah mate, all right..." We've all done it.
In your hypothetical case of Lee Jasper talking to Errol Walters about having a journalist beaten up, I would want to know whether it was just banter or deadly serious. If the former, which this clarely was, it would hardly be worth a second glance.
Don't forget, nothing whatsoever came of that call, except for the Left still trying to brand him a journalist-beater-upper and hard-line racist with no other proof.
I hold no brief for Boris, but I do detest this trick of exploiting the public's short attention by using soundbites and labels to brand the whole person as something he's not on the strength of some silly comment or unwise choice of words in the long-gone past. That goes for Lee Jasper too; but I'm afraid in his case it is rather more than a few poorly-chosen words.
Peter
aka fucking thick tory cunt, piece of shit. Thank you, Simon Hughes.
"...treasonable ambitions to set up a socialist republic within a democratic nation"
Off with his head!
I think all these claims that Jasper has no criminal case to answer are just muddying the water, probably deliberately. I don't imagine he has done anything criminal. Getting Ken to sign over grants to his mates without any business plan to support them was probably breaking the rules but not actually criminal, as the police have pointed out.
But is it moral? This is where all our politicians are failing, MPs as well. When it is pointed out (to Labour and Tory politicians alike) that they have their noses in the trough, and are steering moeny to family and friends. many shriek that they are innocent because they have not broken any criminal law. (Or that their critics are racist if they are Jasper and Ken.)
Morality, codes of conduct and probity have all been ditched in favour of venality, favoritism and in some cases, distribution of public money in a way close to corruption, though let us call it patronage. The public thinks this is wrong, politicians like Livingstone and Jasper (and some Tory MPS as well) do not. This is why the public despises politicians.
Still it is cheering that Jasper was booed off the stage by a black audience recently in London when he tried to claim he was being victimised as a black leader. Ken's loyalty is misplaced. And if Lee cannot deliver the black vote, then he will indeed be ditched, as he deserves to be.
2005: Lee Jasper is invited by a struggling black BME organisation in West London as keynote speaker. He first asks to be paid for this, then he changes his mind and says the organisation should make a cash payment to a charity of his choice. This was done. Lee Jasper fails to turn up for the event. Lee Jasper fails to offer any kind of explanation as to why he did not turn up.
This summarises the man. He has taken from the Black community and given little back to it except for populist rehtorical hot air. The truth is that he represents everything undesirable and uncouth about a progressive black community trying to make itself relevant in the 21st century in the United Kingdom and beyond. His place in history is defined as a one whom we will forget in a hurry. He came.. Do we care where he's gone?
To Evan
You may well be right about new tenancies (does that include council housing?), but I was thinking about the distinction between secured (council housing) and assured tenancies (HA's).
To all those anonymous Tory / Blairites or whoever they are, use your real names and I might bother responding.
that's very interesting, Akinson - which BME organisation was that?
Mrs Ben, I don't think, from those that get their politics from London, that Lee Jasper is considered a black prol hero. Stories like the one I cited (confirming Dave's post) are too widespread.
I perso couldn't give a toss if his gaff is social housing or what fiddle he's operating there - he's a rich bastard.
Give a case: his yearly wages are about the same as 26 years of my dole.
Andy Newman: and who are *you* close to me ol'son? Panto Dame Galloway seems to have a come a cropper with his 'list' eh?
Matthew Styles: "To all those anonymous Tory / Blairites or whoever they are, use your real names and I might bother responding."
Well you've got my name and you haven't responded. Less of the Blairite, please.
Whatever happened to Galloways list?
If Andrew Gilligan is just an honest guy seeking the truth how to explain his smear against Doreen Lawrence. This is from the Labour Home site on Feb 5:
"Andrew Gilligan – who has run the Evening Standard's campaign for Boris Johnson – has launched a blistering attack on the mother Stephen Lawrence.
In an article in today’s Evening Standard, Gilligan links Doreen Lawrence’s criticism of Boris Johnson’s inflammatory race language to a grant given by the London Development Agency to the Stephen Lawrence Charitable Trust.
Doreen Lawrence’s bravery after the murder of her son by racist thugs has led to overhaul of policing in his country. Her work has been recognised by the award of an OBE.
This allegation against Doreen Lawrence is new low for Gilligan. The smear that people in the Black community are not really offended by Boris Johnson’s use of phrases like “piccaninnies”, but are in fact just saying it for payment is as ludicrous as it is disgusting."
I fully agree with Chris Paul's comments. As for Mr Dawes, here are some of Johnson's writings:
'It is said that the Queen has come to love the Commonwealth, partly because it supplies her with regular cheering crowds of flag-waving piccaninnies; and one can imagine that Blair, twice victor abroad but enmired at home, is similarly seduced by foreign politeness.'
Boris Johnson, Daily Telegraph, 10/01/02
He goes on: 'They say he [Blair] is shortly off to the Congo. No doubt the AK47s will fall silent, and the pangas will stop their hacking of human flesh, and the tribal warriors will all break out in watermelon smiles to see the big white chief touch down in his big white British taxpayer-funded bird.'
and
'Rod Liddle recalls that when he and Johnson went to Uganda together to look at the work of Unicef, Johnson cheerily remarked to the Swedish Unicef workers and their black driver: "Right, let's go and look at some more piccaninnies".'
Lynn Barber, Observer, 5/10/03
Is that it, Matthew Stiles?
You forgot about when Boris pulled a girl's pigtails at primary school. Not just a hard-line racist but clearly a raving misogynist too.
Oh of course there is more:
In a radio debate in 2003, Boris Johnson tells Clare Short that “the British empire ended slavery”, and he blames “native rulers” for inventing slavery.
Boris Johnson: Do you really mean to saw the empire wasn’t a good thing?
Clare Short: No it wasn’t
Boris Johnson: The British empire ended slavery, though; no one else.
Clare Short: The British empire helped to organise slavery.
Boris Johnson: Well, I say, it was the native rulers of West Africa who invented and also helped organise slavery.
Clare Short: It was the black African kings who had feudal friends in Europe.
He wrote about Mandela
Johnson wrote: ‘Mandela never accepted the Swiss-style constitution he [de Klerk] proposed; and last year, fed up with being marginalized, de Klerk quit the government. He must have known that this would happen, that the minority tyranny of apartheid would be followed by the majority tyranny of black rule.”
He wrote about the Damilola Taylor murder
Boris Johnson writes that Peckham is “so much nastier than, say, the Nigerian suburbs from which Damilola originated. [This] is to do with the anomie of the inhabitants, a sense that they have no stake in their society. They take their benefits from the state, but feel no particular loyalty in return.”
He added: “There seems no reason to behave respectfully towards that little old woman coming out of the Post Office if you feel that she belongs to a culture that is alien from your own... Why not piss against the wall if you feel that it is not really your wall, but part of a foreign country.”
Johnson is a buffoon.
Matthew Stiles:
1. Claire Short is half agreeing with him. The empire both fed and abolished slavery.
2. Zimbabwe
3. Many a sociologist will tell you the same thing (outside earshot of the PC police).
"Johnson is a buffoon".
Or, as others would say, frank, honest and extremely well read.
If that is buffoonery, give me a buffoon any day rather than the manipulative liars who dominate politics these days.
Thought you were an English teacher Ed?
No, thought wrong.
If Boris was guilty of the things he was accused of he would be under investigation. Same rules apply.
You can't have Johnson under investigation for "Guppy" offences and then say "oh but Jasper is whiter than white" on his issues.
More excerpts from the shithead Johnson:
'The problem is not that we were once in charge, but that we
are not in charge any more... Consider Uganda, pearl of Africa,
as an example of the British record. ... the British planted
coffee and cotton and tobacco, and they were broadly right... If
left to their own devices, the natives would rely on nothing but
the instant carbohydrate gratification of the plantain. You never
saw a place so abounding in bananas: great green barrel-sized
bunches, off to be turned into matooke. Though this dish
(basically fried banana) was greatly relished by Idi Amin, the
colonists correctly saw that the export market was limited...
The best fate for Africa would be if the old colonial powers, or
their citizens, scrambled once again in her direction; on the
understanding that this time they will not be asked to feel
guilty. (Spectator 2 February 2002)
‘Chinese cultural influence is virtually nil, and unlikely to
increase... Indeed, high Chinese culture and art are almost all
imitative of western forms: Chinese concert pianists are
technically brilliant, but brilliant at Schubert and Rachmaninov.
Chinese ballerinas dance to the scores of Diaghilev. The number
of Chinese Nobel prizes won on home turf is zero, although
there are of course legions of bright Chinese trying to escape to
Stanford and Caltech... It is hard to think of a single Chinese
sport at the Olympics, compared with umpteen invented by
Britain, including ping-pong, I’ll have you know, which
originated at upper-class dinner tables and was first called
whiff-whaff. The Chinese have a script so fiendishly complicated
that they cannot produce a proper keyboard for it.’ (Have I Got
Views for You p277).
"A sweet-faced Chinese air stewardess [is] standing over me in
my aisle seat. 'Prease, sir,' said the BA girl, 'Prease come with
me. I have found a better seat for you in row 52'." It transpires
that BA have a policy of separating adult men from young
children. But one of Boris's offspring gives the game away:
"'He's our father!'... 'Oh,' said the stewardess, flummoxed. 'Velly
solly.'" (The Spectator 4 January 2003)
'it is as if the PC brigade, having punched this hole in the
Metropolitan Police, having forced this admission, is swarming
through to take over the entire system. There has been a whiff
of the witch-hunt as the Lawrence road-show tours the country,
demanding confessions of racism from senior officers, and
excoriating those, like Sir Paul [Condon] who are not prepared
to defame their entire force. If, in a few years' time, you were
to ask a member of the public: “Who killed Stephen
Lawrence?”, the answer would probably be “The Police.” Am I
alone is wondering whether a sensible attempt to find justice
for the family of Stephen Lawrence has given way to hysteria?'
(Lend Me Your Ears p426)
'none was hotter than the shadow social security secretary,
David Willetts. Round and round he twirled, squiring one Tory
filly after another, until flushed and satiated they could take no
more. Around him we moved in our admiring orbits, old
beldames, jigging white-haired captains of industry, but none
was faster than Willetts... Why was the evening such a
success? There is one measurement I hesitate to mention, since
the last time I did, I am told, the wife of the editor of the
Economist cancelled her subscription to the Daily Telegraph in
protest at my crass sexism. It is what is called the Tottometer,
the geiger-counter that detects good-looking women. In 1997, I
reported, these were to be found in numbers at the Labour
conference. Now - and this is not merely my own opinion - the
Tories are fighting back in a big way. ' (The Spectator 10
February 2001)
[On driving a Ferrari]: 'I seemed to be averaging a speed of X
and then the M3 opened up before me, a long quiet Bonneville
flat stretch, and I am afraid it was as though the whole county
of Hampshire was lying back and opening her well-bred legs to
be ravished by the Italian stallion.' (Life in the Fast Lane p261)
Or on a Lotus: 'That is why it was such a huge moment when
two of the biggest cheeses in the Lotus group came in to my
office to hand over the swishest, fastest, most chick-pulling
Lotus ever devised.' (Life in the Fast Lane p243)
‘The chicks in the GQ expenses department – and if you can’t
call them chicks, then what the hell, I ask you, is the point of
writing for GQ.’ (Life in the Fast Lane p57)
[On driving an Alfa Romeo] ‘She was blonde. She was
beautiful. She was driving some poxy little Citroen or Peugeot
thing... And she had just overtaken me... And let me tell you, I
wasn’t having it.
‘Because if there is one thing calculated to make the
testosterone slosh in your ears like the echoing sea and the red
mist of war descend over your eyes, its being treated as
though you were an old woman by a young woman... the
whole endocrine orchestra said: “Go. Take.” You can’t be dissed
by some blonde in a 305.
‘Yes there is something about the very marque, Alfa, that
makes the seminal vesicles writhe like a bag of ferrets.’ (Life in
the Fast Lane p26)
‘Like much of western Europe, Britain faces a demographic
quandary. In the words of a recent UN interview the
populations of EU countries are “melting like snow in the
sun”... No one knows whether this is caused by the
fecklessness of the modern British male, or by women’s
liberation; or whether it is because divorce has become too
easy.’ (Lend Me Your Ears p395)
‘Alan Clark... Here was a man, just like the readers of GQ,
Esquire, Loaded – all the reassurance-craving magazines that
have sprouted in the last 10 years – who was endlessly
fascinated by the various advantages and disappointments of
his own gonads. He was interested in cars; he had Bentleys
bulging with tinplate testosterone; he had Rollers and Aston
Martins and special chickwagons for arriving at the Spectator
party... Above all, like the ideal Loaded reader, he had a selfish
side to him. (Lend Me Your Ears p500) 'Some dream their teeth
are falling out, or that they are about to be executed with a
scimitar by a beautiful black woman (I have this quite often,
actually).' (Friends, Voters, Countrymen p48)
‘Labour's appalling agenda, encouraging the teaching of
homosexuality in schools, and all the rest of it.’ (The Spectator
15 April 2000) ‘the essence of that Tory case is unchanged... it
is more sensitive to spare parents' anxieties, than to allow Left-
wing local authorities to waste taxpayers' money on idiotic and
irrelevant homosexual instruction.’ (Daily Telegraph 3 August
2000)
‘Slowly Labour is winning the battle it really cares about, the
Kulturkampf, adjusting what can be said, and what cannot be
said... Homosexuality is to be taught in schools.’ (The Spectator
29 April 2000)
‘I first met the Bishop [of Liverpool] a few weeks ago at a
gloomy convocation of top clergy and journalists in Windsor
Castle. The hacks were thin on the ground... I can say that the
clerics gave us a wigging for being so mean to the Church of
England... Why did we draw attention to tricky subjects like
homosexuality, aka the Pulpit Poofs issue?’ (The Spectator 16
December 2000)
'if gay marriage was OK – and I was uncertain on the issue –
then I saw no reason in principle why a union should not be
consecrated between three men, as well as two men; or
indeed three men and a dog.' (Friends, Voters, Countrymen
p96)
‘When the [hunting] ban is blocked in the Lords, as it surely
will be, Blair will have his excuse for another attack on the
Upper House. If Labour wins the election, Blair will invoke the
Parliament Act to sweep aside the opinion of the peers, as he did over homosexual sex at 16, making a mockery of the Lords
and consolidating his elective dictatorship. (Daily Telegraph 18
January 2001)
‘Notice the way Peter Mandelson is pictured out on the town
with his boyfriend; not that there is anything wrong with that,
perish the thought, just that it would have been unimaginable
before the last election.’ (The Spectator 29 April 2000)
‘More important, I am not sure how widespread this new right-
on mood really is. Metropolitan opinion was wrong-footed over
Section 28, where the public thought differently from New
Labour; and three days after the event it was clear that the
country did not agree with the editorialists on the verdict
passed on Tony Martin. You can say that William Hague is
opportunist to see the gap between the polite view and the
public view. But you can't deny that he is right to go for it.’
(The Spectator 29 April 2000)
What you fail to appreciate, JoePolitix, is that Boris is expressing what a great many people feel, only more eloquently.
By calling him a shithead you are writing off a great many of the British public as shitheads. Great strategy.
Come off it, Boris isn't eloquent, he just gets published because he's a posh Tory with connections. There is no relationship between the former and the latter.
But there is no disputing he's a narrow minded bigot. Plenty of reason enough for people to reject him I would have thought.
Wow, I hadn't realised Boris was so gloriously un-PC. Thanks JoePolitix, he has got my vote.
Actually, it is a myth that "Blairites" are out to get Ken. All the ones I know are going to vote for him.
But Ken's campaign shows all the signs of total melt down I'd expect from the people (Joy Johnson, I ask you??) he surrounds himself with.
None of them have any real experience of fighting Tories (as opposed to winning factional battles on the left) for a start. Steve Norris hardly counts as a serious opponent.
Ken should have got Jasper to resign at the first sign that he had issues to deal with (personally, though I still think he has more difficulties with his wife than with the district auditor). Instead of which he ranted on in 1980s Brent LGC stylee about what an outrage it all was.
Johnson is a buffoon and a disater waiting to happen. Livingstone hasn't yet landed a glove on him though. He needs, now, to be ruthless and build a campaign that will take the fight to Johnson and not get stuck in battles about issues which, in the context of running a great city like London, are marginal.
On the other hand all his career to this point suggests he will find that difficult.
So what if Johnson is a buffoon? (which I happen to think he isn't). London functioned well enough for generations without any Mayor. You see, the city contains these things called people, who are amazingly adept at looking after their own affairs if given half a chance.
London also has an administration with many talented people looking after the city's day-to-day running.
If the Mayor is anything, he is a figurehead with a vision - and a gift for making people feel good about visiting, living and working in the capital. On that front Ken is failing miserably. Boris would excel.
The New Left's big mistake is a belief that every individual's life has to be managed in micro-detail and that, without their constant interference, society will break down.
The disproof of that pudding is before us. Society *has* broken down, or is very close to breakdown. Whether it's crime, welfare, education, transport or social integration, the socialist agenda is remarkable only for achieving the exact opposite of that which was intended.
What is "The New Left"?
And what is this socialist agenda you speak of?
The New Left is a quasi-socialist movement that has lost touch with the traditional working classes. It has found itself a new client group in the shape of ethnic minorities, "victims" (of anything you care to name) and suggestible voters over whom it can exercise control by fearmongering tactics (secondhand smoke, global warming, foodism etc).
Unlike the old Labour movement, it hates all forms of tradition because traditions are rooted in the Old Order which it is desperate to abolish. It is faithful to the Orwellian principle of eradicating all incorrect thoughts. (O'Brien in 1984: "It is intolerable that an erroneous thought should exist anywhere in the world, however secret and powerless it may be.")
It despises the working classes - especially those in rural communities - because they are headstrong and grubby, while they are fragrant and pure.
The New Left is intolerant and centralist. It comes in all political guises and has embedded itself in governments throughout the Western world, not least the EU. At once it embraces some of the worst elements of conservatism (greed, corruption) and Marxism (state dependency, mind control). It has little vision other than to further its own ambitions and strengthen its power base. Ultimately, it serves only itself.
the traditional working classes
Numpty. Come back when you have a clue.
There is no point in trying to post thought-provoking ideas here when all you can manage in return is cheap insults.
Thank you, "Last of the Blairites". Any doubts I had about the arrogant, intolerant Left have now been confirmed.
Still puzzled as to what socialism has to do with this New Left clique that controls these governments. Maybe you've redefined socialism as well.
Peter Dawes, you haven't posted any "ideas", you've posted a lot of drivel that comes close blood and soil ideology.
Round here we may disagree with each other but we don't make up crap like "the old Labour movement .... rooted in the Old Order".
The Old Order were the people who murdered at Peterloo, who transported the men of Tolpuddle, who shot the Chartists and hung Dic Penderyn, who passed the Taff Vale judgement and the 1927 trades dispute act.
I'm not sure whether you are a crazed libertarian or a fascist. But either way you are full of shit.
You're right, Rory, I use too many labels. As political boundaries become increasingly blurred, I guess there is only one clear delineator - more state control or less state control of people's lives. The "Left" in all its manifestations falls on the control side.
You will have gathered that I am, to use another label, a libertarian who believes in minimal state control consistent with running an orderly society.
For instance, the blanket smoking ban in pubs has been the greatest triumph of the the New Left when measured by compliance alone, yet it has had devastating consequences for the pub trade and for social cohesion. Smokers and non-smokers could have been accommodated in most places without the deeply divisive effects of a total ban. The punters at local level, helped by an *enabling* government, could have arrived at a satisfactory solution. Whatever you may think about tobacco, smoking was becoming a less popular habit well before the government started to lay down the law. The ban was wholly unnecessary.
One of its many unintended consequences has been an increase in smoking among the rebellious young. For every life saved by the ban - and these exist only on the well massaged spreadsheets of optimistic medics - I can show you an extra gang on the street, excluded pensioners fading away at home, and hundreds of pubs being put out of business as the easy conviviality of a former way of life is steadily destroyed.
This is the way of the New Left. And they call it success.
Last of the Blairites, your post came up while I was writing mine. I don't rise to insults, so you'll be pleased to hear that's my lot. This has been an education.