Posted on 02/26/2006 4:56:14 PM PST by Cornpone
THE ONE-month suspension of London Mayor Ken Livingstone for "offending" a Jewish reporter by comparing the journalist with a Nazi concentration camp guard smacks of overkilling at the first given opportunity. But then, we need to remind ourselves as dealing with Israeli machinations.
The Adjudication Panel for England has ruled unanimously that the comments made by Livingstone, 60, to Oliver Finegold, a reporter for the London Evening Standard, in February last year had been "unnecessarily insensitive and offensive."
Indeed, people holding high office are not supposed to use such language as described by the panel and Livingstone's refusal to accept that his conduct was unacceptable and damaging to his office made it all the more serious, according to the ruling.
The case and ruling has to be seen within the framework of recent events; the publication of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed in the European press and the confrontational stand some of the newspapers adopted as they printed the sketches citing freedom of expression; the sentencing last week of a British author to three years in prison on Austria for denying the Holocaust; Iran's offer of prizes for cartoons on the Holocaust, and an Israeli move to sue Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Germany for describing the Holocaust as a myth. These are only some of the incidents that have a direct/indirect link with the overall context of what befell Livingstone.
Livingstone, a veteran politician, should have known what was best for him under all circumstances. He did have a long-running conflict with the Associated Newspapers, publishers of the Daily Mail and the Evening Standard, which he has previously accused of anti-Semitism. and this was the primary reason for his obvious hostility towards Finegold, who was asking him questions as he left a reception at City Hall in February last year. When Finegold went ahead and made a "serious" issue of his comments, Livingstone stood his ground and refused to offer any apology.
Apparently, he underestimated the strength and influence of the European Jewish community, which has never wasted an opportunity to remind the world of the Holocaust and keep the issue alive in order to pressure governments whenever the need arose. We have seen this pattern of behaviour over the decades.
By refusing to back down in the row, the UK's leading Jewish organisation, the Board of Deputies of British Jews, Livingstone in fact provided more ammunition to the assault against himself and a tool to serve the Jewish quest to remind the world yet again that it has a special responsibility towards the Jews because they were victims of persecution 65 years ago. While they might have a point there, however thin that might be, we in the Middle East know that such reminders are also made to serve Israel's self-assumed righteousness, and it is disturbing because it contributes to the case that Israel claims for itself in Palestine.
This isnt Livingstones first offense, its just the first time he has been called on the crap that comes out of his stupid mouth.
Please provide a link.
Tbanks
Blaming the Jews again. As if non Jews don't have a problem with government sanctioned genocide.
Please delete and I'll repost with the link...getting old.
No need, to pull. I added the link provided by A.A. Cunningham.
Thanks
The mediots have make ALL americans the new "joooooze"
From a UAE paper, eh? What a surprise that an anti-Israel/Jewish rant would be written in a nation with such a "secular, enlightened, progressive" population.
coming to YOUR port soon!
i guess any emir that wants to destroy israel, and who has supported the taliban, al qaeda (apparently, at the time al qaeda was bombing the Cole and killing Americans), and hamas, and who allows trans-shipment of weapons to saddam hussein, lybia, north korea, and iran,
REALLY DESERVES TO RUN TERMINAL OPERATIONS IN US PORTS!
i'm waiting for all the supporters of dubai and the uae to come on this thread and accuse us of racism.
i think i'll pre-empt them: we are not against the dubai port deal because we are against arabs. i am against the deal because:
1. i don't think companies controlled by foreign governments (e.g., dubai; china) should be running US terminals.
2. i judge people by their behavior (e.g., supporting hamas, etc), not by their ethnicity
3. dubai has a very "checkered" track record on issues related to aiding terrorism and axis-of-evil governments.
4. i wouldn't want a company run by ANY foreign government (arab or not) that supports hamas, getting a deal to run US terminals.
just because dubai is now an ally does not mean that we have to let them run the terminals. that is NOT a logical argument.
just because it hurts their sensitivities doesn't mean we can't kill the deal. (it hurts MY sensitivites that dubai supports hamas and wants to eliminate israel.)
i have also criticized the PCUSA for its support of hamas (and members of my family belong to that church)
OK--now they can start calling us racists!
And now for a song.......
From my first hand observation there is no worse insult to a Jew than to compare him to a Nazi. None.
So if this is not too much, then there is nothing anyone can say that is.
---------------------------
i'm getting a feeling that the pro-uae side is beginning to lose the debate.
they never answer the part about the uae supporting hamas (or most of the other charges, for that matter). they mainly resort to name-calling and diversion.
i think the longer this plays out, the more likely the deal will be killed. (probably by the uae company withdrawing).
then we should re-open the issue of the terminals controlled by the PLA company.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.