(London) Mayor is suspended over Nazi jibe

[muriel_volestrangler]

London's mayor has been suspended from office for four weeks for comparing a Jewish journalist to a concentration camp guard.

The Adjudication Panel for England ruled Ken Livingstone had brought his office into disrepute when he acted in an "unnecessarily insensitive" manner.
...
The hearing followed a complaint from the Jewish Board of Deputies over the comment he made as he left a party.

But the board had not called for the mayor to be suspended.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/4746016.stm

I am a bit surprised at the punishment. Livingstone can be a stubborn sod, as in this case, and this time it has hurt him.

[Behind the Aegis]

1. Them's the breaks.

[w13rd0]

2. Ordnungsdienst

Is that what he called the journalist? If so, he was making a very serious charge. It's the equivalent of calling someone an Uncle Tom. Would be interested in knowing who the journalist was...

[GrpCaptMandrake]

3. Bad journalism moment

What the heck did he say? What was the nature of the exchange?

I hate it when stories do that crap.

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. It's been in the British media for some time

so they probably didn't think repeating what happened was worth it again. Here's the previous day's story:

The inquiry began after Mr Livingstone accused Evening Standard reporter Oliver Finegold of "door-stepping" him at a party in February 2005 marking 20 years since Chris Smith came out as the first gay MP.

The Mayor asked whether he was a "German war criminal", only to be told by Mr Finegold that he was Jewish, and was offended by the remark.

Mr Livingstone went on to say: "Ah right, well you might be, but actually you are just like a concentration camp guard, you are just doing it because you are paid to, aren't you?"

This, the panel was told, was his "long-held and honestly-held" political view of Associated Newspapers, owners of the Standard.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4739880.stm

Further background: Associated Newspapers were quite pro-Hitler in the lead up to the Second World War. However, Livingstone himself once wrote restautant reviews for the Standard, so criticising someone for working for them is hypocritical, IMHO.

[GrpCaptMandrake]

5. Thank you

In essence, Livingstone called this clown an enabler. Pity he had to use the racial epithet.

Is the Evening Stadard a Murdoch organ? If so, I can certainly understand the sentiment.

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. No, Associated Newspapers is the Rothermere family

Long time British right wingers. While Murdoch is about making money, which he does mainly by supporting any government that enables big business, the Rothermeres views, especially as shown in the Daily Mail newspaper, are small-minded "Little England" prejudice, with a bit of xenophobia.

Here's the kind of thing the present owner's great grandfather was saying in the 1930s:

The German nation, moreover, was rapidly falling under the control of its alien elements. In the last days of the pre-Hitler regime there were twenty times as many Jewish Government officials in Germany as had existed before the war. Israelites of international attachments were insinuating themselves into key positions in the German administrative machine. Three German Ministers only had direct relations with the Press, but in each case the official responsible for conveying news and interpreting policy to the public was a Jew.
...
As a purely British organization, the Blackshirts will respect those principles of tolerance which are traditional in British politics. They have no prejudice either of class or race. Their recruits are drawn from all social grades and every political party.

Young men may join the British Union of Fascists by writing to the Headquarters, King's Road, Chelsea, London, S.W.
...
Though this proposal may not be popular, I am convinced that it is wise. We cannot expect a nation of "he-men" like the Germans to sit forever with folded arms under the provocations and stupidities of the Treaty of Versailles. To deny this mighty nation, conspicuous for its organizing ability and scientific achievements, a share in the work of developing backward regions of the world is preposterous.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/BUrothermere.htm

Secret documents released from British Foreign Office intelligence files on 1 April have revealed that the wartime proprietor of the Daily Mail newspaper, Lord Rothermere, sent a series of supportive and congratulatory telegrams to Nazi leaders, including Hitler, just months before the country went to war with Germany in 1939.
In the summer of 1939, Rothermere was appealing to Hitler’s foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop: "Our two great Nordic countries should pursue resolutely a policy of appeasement for, whatever anyone may say, our two great countries should be the leaders of the world." Shortly before Rothermere had written to Hitler: "My Dear Führer, I have watched with understanding and interest the progress of your great and superhuman work in regenerating your country." If Hitler worked to restore the "old friendship", he would be regarded by the British as a popular hero, in the same way they regarded Frederick the Great of Prussia, said Rothermere, great-grandfather of the current owner of the newspaper . "I have always felt that you are essentially one who hates war and desires peace."

http://www.indexonline.org/en/indexindex/articles/2005/2/britain-secret-papers-reveal-daily-mail-owne.shtml

[wordpix2]

10. speaking of Nazi connections, how about Prescott Bush, Chimp's grandad?

http://archive.democrats.com/preview.cfm?term=Prescott%20Bush

[Binka]

7. MV What Is Door Stepping?

Was Livingstone being hounded or pestered?

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. Livingstone was coming out of a party

in the evening, and the reporter wanted to interview him, and Livingstone didn't want to give one. "Doorstepping" as in "catching a public figure on their own doorstep" coming out of their house (though in this case it was wherever the party was held). Here's a transcript: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/02/15/ukensaid.xml

Livingstone was rather brusque and rude - he really doesn't like the Standard at all.

[Binka]

9. Thanks For The Clarification

It is a good term. In general I rather like Livingstone but this was beyond belligerent. I read where you said Ken once wrote for the paper, did they fall out over his employment, or is it their policies he doesn't like?

I read the article BTW and the Oliver character looks a bit like a prat. I know one can't judge by a photograph but his eyes are shifty.

[iverglas]

13. and look at the press wail about free speech

But Evening Standard editor Veronica Wadley stopped short of calling for the mayor's resignation after the judgement.

She welcomed the ruling and said there was "no question that he caused offence to many Londoners by his comments, and his stubborn refusal to say sorry aggravated the position".

Yup, the press is just the guardian of free speech and never has interests of its own to promote, eh?

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/gla/story/0,,1717202,00.html
"Timeline: Ken Livingstone v London Evening Standard"

And of course:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/gla/story/0,,1717105,00.html
"What Livingstone said"

London Evening Standard reporter Oliver Finegold approached Ken Livingstone when the mayor was leaving a February 2005 party to celebrate Chris Smith "coming out" as the first openly gay MP 20 years ago.

This is a transcript of their 13-second conversation:

Finegold: Mr Livingstone, Evening Standard. How did tonight go?

Livingstone: How awful for you. Have you thought of having treatment?

Finegold: How did tonight go?

Livingstone: Have you thought of having treatment?

Finegold: Was it a good party? What does it mean for you?

Livingstone: What did you do before? Were you a German war criminal?

Finegold: No, I'm Jewish, I wasn't a German war criminal and I'm actually quite offended by that. So, how did tonight go?

Livingstone: Ah right, well you might be {Jewish}, but actually you are just like a concentration camp guard, you are just doing it because you are paid to, aren't you?

Finegold: Great, I have you on record for that. So, how was tonight?

Livingstone: It's nothing to do you with you because your paper is a load of scumbags and reactionary bigots.

Finegold: I'm a journalist and I'm doing my job. I'm only asking for a comment.

Livingstone: Well, work for a paper that doesn't have a record of supporting facism.

For information:
http://www.standardsboard.co.uk/

The Standards Board for England helps build confidence in local democracy. We do so by promoting the ethical behaviour of members and co-opted members who serve on a range of authorities through receiving and investigating allegations that members may have breached the Code of Conduct.

The Standards Board for England was formally established in March 2001. Although set up by Act of Parliament, we are completely independent of government.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2001/20013575.htm

2. A member must -

(a) promote equality by not discriminating unlawfully against any person;
(b) treat others with respect; and
(c) not do anything which compromises or which is likely to compromise the impartiality of those who work for, or on behalf of, the authority.

... 4. A member must not in his official capacity, or any other circumstance, conduct himself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing his office or authority into disrepute.

Now, all that said, Ken Livingstone has been a thorn in many people's side, including Tony Blair's. Heh, google ken livingstone thorn side labour ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/forum/809718.stm

On Monday former Greater London Council leader Ken Livingstone formally takes up his powers as mayor of London. The man Tony Blair said would be a "disaster" for London will once again be running the capital.

Londoners ignored the prime minister's advice, but will their chosen mayor be able to turn around the city's chronic transport problems, stem the spread of crime and tackle homelessness? Or will his main activity simply be, as New Labour warned, to act as a thorn in the government's side?

... Ken Livingstone: I am a socialist and for most socialists the Labour Party is still the best vehicle for achieving the policies that you want. I think the Labour Party made a great mistake in rigging the election and expelling me when I would not accept it. But you have also got the problem that I don't want to see the Tories in. William Hague is not going to give me, as a mayor, more powers or more money. When you consider the appalling reactionary line Hague is taking on issues like asylum and so on, I would like to see London a Hague free zone, quite frankly. I think the Labour Party needs to get its act together. There was tremendous demoralisation from the split on the mayor issue and I think they should bring me back into the party so we have a united Labour Party in London in time for the general election. People need a sign that Labour is not going to do something like this again and that there is a place for someone like me in the modern Labour Party. And if they don't get that sign I assume that many of them will still abstain.

The government (independent body or no independent body) seems to have bit back.

http://media.guardian.co.uk/presspublishing/story/0,,1696491,00.html
An idea of what Livingstone normally gets up to.

Friday January 27, 2006

London mayor Ken Livingstone has defended Metropolitan police commissioner Sir Ian Blair's comments about alleged racism in media coverage of murder cases, saying he should be given credit for starting a debate about the issue.

Mr Livingstone backed Sir Ian's assertion that, with the odd exception, murder cases involving black or Asian people do not get the same media coverage as those involving white people.

The mayor singled out the "popular press", saying it still had work to do to improve its reporting in this area.

... "Sir Ian has rightly highlighted that the media is not immune from the problem of racism. He should be given credit for opening up the debate about the relationship between the media and London's diverse communities."

And for the record, I very definitely do not believe that it was appropriate to suspend Livingstone.

Apparently he did not know that the reporter was Jewish when he made the "German war criminal" comment, and so that factor is completely irrelevant (as, really, was the response: "No, I'm Jewish"). He was at a function celebrating a gay politician, and he regarded the newspaper, which is evidently very illiberal and hostile to minorities of all sorts, as being there to harass rather than report.

And I do not believe that Nazi crimes are icons that belong to only one group in society; Nazis persecuted gay men and lesbians and other minorities and dissenting factions of society and put many of them in concentration camps, and conducted a war of aggression against numerous countries, and imposed vicious occupation on several. "German war criminal", or "concentration camp guard", is NOT a "racial epithet" as has been suggested here. No one has exclusive claim to victimization by the Nazis, and no one may interpret someone else's reference to the Nazis solely by his/her own frame of reference in such a way as to take offence at it when the meaning supposedly inferred was not intended.

[Zhade]

18. Agreed. Excellent points.

NT!

[Nihil]

20. Thank you for posting the facts!

IMO the most telling was Finegold's response after the alleged "slur":

> Finegold: Great, I have you on record for that. So, how was tonight?

Not only did he gloat that his needling had provoked a response for him
to blow out of all proportion (yep, that's just "great" reporting) but
he continued to ask the same question that Livingstone had refused to
answer four previous times in < 12 seconds.

Any other reporter would have given up with a muttered "Oh f*ck off then"
but Feingold decided to play it up for every second of self-indulgent
publicity that his rag (and the Board of Deputies) decided to milk out
of it.

[Dutch]

21. Finegold really revelled in it

I don't think I've ever heard anyone claim to be offended with such a glee-filled voice. Having said that, I think Livingstone's comments were dumb for someone in his position, but not really anti-semitic- let's face it, calling anyone to the right of Tony Benn fascists or nazis is a rich tradition on the British radical left (just as the radical right tar anyone left of Enoch Powell as commies or trots with reckless abandon). I can't speak for the Jewish community as a whole - and I really wish some others would stop acting as if they can - but I wasn't really offended, and I'm actually not a huge fan of Red Ken.

[iverglas]

22. ackchewly

Any other reporter would have given up with a muttered "Oh f*ck off then" ...

There seems to be a matter of a few seconds of missing tape, with varying and conflicting explanations (how could fast-forwarding have deleted it? etc.) that I didn't delve into too deeply ... but one version had it that this was where the reporter told Livingstone to fuck off.

;)

[iverglas]

15. just a note

Livingstone himself once wrote restautant reviews for the Standard, so criticising someone for working for them is hypocritical, IMHO.

One of the long list of articles about Livingstone at the Guardian site where I took some of the stuff in my other post is about this.
http://media.guardian.co.uk/presspublishing/story/0,,1416035,00.html

There appear to be some questions unanswered -- like how he looks to have been seriously overpaid for restaurant reviews -- but he has often said that he respected the previous editor, on whose watch he did the work:

The figure will sit uneasily with the mayor's outburst against the Standard, its sister paper, the Daily Mail, and their owners, Associated Newspapers, who he said would have been "at the front of the queue of collaborators" had the Nazis won the war and controlled Britain.

In recent days he has poured vitriol on employees of the group, saying: "You can't expect to work for the Daily Mail group and have the rest of society treat you with respect and as if you're a useful part of society. You are not."

He also branded papers in the Daily Mail group, including the Standard, as some of "the most reprehensibly managed, edited and owned newspapers in the world".

He said earlier this week he had "no problem" squaring his attacks on the Standard with the fact that he worked as a restaurant critic for ES magazine between 1996 and 2000, lavishing praise on Sir Max Hastings, who preceded the current editor Veronica Wadley.

With respect to the various Nazi references, it is not surprising that USAmericans of current generations would impose their own frame of reference on them -- but it is unwarranted.

Brits, and especially Brits of a certain age, have their very own frame of reference for things Nazi. For starters, they were bombed daily for a period of two months in 1940, and regularly for several months after that, as Hitler made an all-out attempt to invade and occupy their country:

http://www.museumoflondon.org.uk/MOLsite/exhibits/blitz/bigstory.html
(that'll be a couple of years before Pearl Harbour, and before the US decided to bother helping out)

-- and the war didn't end in 1945 with prosperity in Britain as it did in the US; they suffered hardship for some time after.

USAmericans mainly have only vicarious grounds for disliking Nazis; Brits have their own, and the Brits' reasons are not necessarily secondary to anyone else's, or defined by anyone else's. And in this particular case, Livingstone's reasons for the comparison were obviously based on Nazi persecution of gay men and lesbians.

[depakid]

11. Say it ain't so Red Ken!

You were so right on during the bombings last year...

Too bad we don't have something like The Adjudication Panel for England in this country. I can think of a few people who might deserve a suspension like that.

[MrPrax]

12. What a joke...

The UK really can't be considered democratic until outfits like non-elected Adjudication Panel for England are removed from interfering in elected officials. Since Thatcher had NO problem getting rid of the 'tradition' of the city council--surely there should be NO problem getting rid of this offensive body.

Imagine a world where elected officials are removed/suspended from office, not by the electorate, but by some quaint High Tory 'board' that judges whether or not the 'commonly' elected have conducted themselves approriately?

Then imagine then that at anytime a politician could be set up for 'discipline'.

The UK is certainly become a questionable outpost in the world of democracy.

Also on the scroll I noticed some ref to 'racial epithets'? How was calling this creep a 'German camp guard' racial? Was it because the guy was Jewish? Now if he called him a 'capo' then there might be a case.

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. It was a reference to 'capos'

Since at first he had asked if the reporter was a "German war criminal", and when the reporter replied he was Jewish, Livingstone then said he was like a concentration camp guard - doing it for personal gain.

[genie_weenie]

16. Since this is the UK I really don't care

however, Red Ken's comments are slightly correct, "This decision strikes at the heart of democracy. Elected politicians should only be able to be removed by the voters or for breaking the law."

Of course, British Law probably does have a law somewhere on their books, stating "all elected officials must behave like proper englishmen, with giant moustahces and to propagate a proper air of catatonic apathy."

London might even have special rules...

Any Brits or subjugated Welshmen/Scots/Wights/Shetlanders know what law he broke???

[Xithras]

17. Exactly. I'm very glad nothing like this can happen in the US.

Livingstone may have said an extemely stupid thing, and many people may not care for the guy, but to oust an elected official over a comment is basically telling the people "You can have your democracy as long as the elite agree with the people you elect". Whether or not you believe that he should have been punished for the remark, everyone should agree that these actions are authoritarian and undemocratic.

[iverglas]

24. yeah yeah yeah

The USofA is the bestest of all. It sure don't take long for it to start, do it?

Now, I don't agree with the particular decision, but ...

... basically telling the people "You can have your democracy as long as the elite agree with the people you elect". Whether or not you believe that he should have been punished for the remark, everyone should agree that these actions are authoritarian and undemocratic.

... how 'bout that US Supreme Court, eh?

God all bloody mighty.

[Xithras]

25. Supreme Court can't throw people out of office.

They have a defined, narrow purpose, which is to ensure that newly created laws comply with the Constitution. They can throw laws out only when they conflict with a higher set of laws. The fact that those laws can also be changed means that there's no authoritarianism in play with the Supreme Court. They are simply a bounds check for the other branches of government.

[iverglas]

26. hahahahahaha

Are you really saying that you don't know what I'm talking about??? Too funny. Really, too funny.

So recently stolen from the country by a corrupt court, so easily forgotten: RIP, Al Gore.

Cheeses.

A citizen of a country in which the presidential bleeding election is decided by corrupt judges appointed by the party whose candidate they appoint the victor, pointing fingers at the citizens of a country in which a mayor has been suspended from office for 4 weeks for allegedly speaking indecorously.

I know which one I'll be wanting to vacation in.

[muriel_volestrangler]

19. Not breaking the law; see post #13 for what elected officials

can be held to, by a recently introduced law. To me it seems far too vague a standard. I think it was introduced more to stop petty favouritism by local councillors, and similar behaviour that didn't quite qualify as 'criminal'.

[iverglas]

23. but hey, why not yammer about it anyhow?

Of course, British Law probably does have a law somewhere on their books, stating "all elected officials must behave like proper englishmen, with giant moustahces and to propagate a proper air of catatonic apathy."

The law that is actually on the books -- which I posted the relevant excerpts of for anyone who cared to know what s/he was talking about before doing it -- isn't nearly as entertaining.

2. A member must -

(a) promote equality by not discriminating unlawfully against any person;
(b) treat others with respect; and
(c) not do anything which compromises or which is likely to compromise the impartiality of those who work for, or on behalf of, the authority.

... 4. A member must not in his official capacity, or any other circumstance, conduct himself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing his office or authority into disrepute.

General feeling seems to be that it was meant to deal with instances of corruption and the like. I guess anybody who actually wanted to know what the stated purpose of the law was could probably find out.

Any Brits or subjugated Welshmen/Scots/Wights/Shetlanders know what law he broke???

And there's me, a Canadian ... with a link to google ... oh, and some actual knowledge of the federal arrangements of some other nations, too ...

[genie_weenie]

27. I saw your earlier post soon after I posted

And I was just trying to be off-handedly cynical, not pass judgments or besmirch anyone...

[Scurrilous]

28. Court blocks Livingstone suspension

Britain's High Court delays London mayor's suspension over Nazi jibe until appeal can be heard; Livingstone refused to apologize for referring to Jewish reporter as 'Nazi guard'

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3222215,00.html

<snip>


"Britain's High Court has blocked a four-week suspension of London's Mayor Ken Livingstone imposed for comparing a Jewish reporter to a concentration camp guard.

The mayor was ordered suspended for a month beginning March 1 by a tribunal last week for bringing his office into disrepute during an exchange with the reporter outside a party.

But a High Court judge accepted his request to have the suspension delayed until an appeal can be heard.

Livingstone refused to apologize for his remarks and said the panel that suspended him had overstepped its bounds.

"If the issue hadn't been this, it would have been something else," he said. "For far too long, the allegation of anti-Semitism has been used against anybody critical of Israel's policies towards the Palestinians."