In an interview with one of his followers, arrogant Ken Livingstone made it plain he does not consider it necessary to inform voters of some of his key plans until after the election. It is surely only fair that voters know what they are voting for and what to expect? Such democratic considerations though do not trouble the Labour Mayoral candidate.
Ken seems to have some sort of mental hold over his supporters, several of whom appear to be decent people with ideals. Nobody is suggesting that Ken is another Charles Manson. Amiable and reasonable Dave Hill of the Guardian is perfectly rational – until you discuss Ken with him, and then you hit a brick wall. On twitter, Dave told me he “didn’t know much about Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradi” whose views appal all decent people. He said he wasn’t covering City Hall at the time that the Sheik was a visitor. This is an incredible thing to say, surely Dave is as capable of doing the research as the rest of us? He told me he had not agreed with Ken about his Press TV job – but still supports Ken as a Mayoral Candidate? I don’t get it.
The author of the blog Mayorwatch knows an awful lot about transport…. an awful, awful lot about transport, ROFL. No, this is good, and it is my failing that I zonk out and find it tedious. Transport is of vital concern to thousands of people and my bright suggestion “If they are stuck, why don’t they just take a taxi?” is frivolous. (Not that I have tons of money myself, hahaha. This is probably why…..) But how can someone who is so solid and reliable in such a vital area support a candidate who is as seemingly unethical, uninspired and above all, as divisive as Ken? Particularly when they have an option like peace-loving, democracy loving, inspiring, idealistic Boris Johnson to vote for.
However admirable the qualities displayed by both these men, I am staggered that they don’t stop Ken from keeping some of his policies secret until after the election. Hardly democratic, is it? I am also appalled that they can find Ken’s silence on the homophobic heckling at Tower Hamlets acceptable, and appalled they are not repelled by his other associations. Andrew Gilligan, London Editor of the Daily Telegraph, believes that Ken is giving his support for cash. However small a part of London the gay community is, and however unimportant Ken seems to consider the vote of the Jewish community to be, these commmunities are an integral part of London and cannot be slighted or offended with impunity. It was considered fine to persecute minorities in Nazi Germany. This is not a trivial matter, that can be safely ignored.
UPDATE: I have had some feedback from @shellyasquith and agree that maybe my description of @Mayorwatch, albeit half teasing, as brainwashed and a cult follower was too harsh, so I have deleted it. However, I have to stand by my later comments on the lack of knowledge of these journalists on the subject of Sheik al-Qaradi and Ken’s other unfortunate associations. This whole issue is so vitally important that I believe it is a fundamental responsibility of all of us to acquaint ourselves with every detail. I very much regret that I have offended Dave Hill, a nice man, for whom I have a lot of respect, in quoting remarks he made to me that were partly on DM. However, it would be letting down the gay and Jewish communities to retract and delete what I believe to be true.
I might be muddling up Boriswatch and Mayorwatch. One is a transport geek and one is a encyclopaedic dweeb, both very good on detail. Get out now guys! For God’s sake, save yourselves!