Red Ken makes Jewish concentration camp guard jibe

Sand

Poor old Red Ken, darling of the old left in the UK, made a bit of a whoopsie there, asking a reporter first if he was a German war crinimal and then upon being told he was Jewish, said he was acting like a concentration camp guard. Upon being told of this George Bush was reported to have said "What a fricking idiot - I cant believe those morons voted for someone so stupid!"

The reporter has since made a complaint about it through the Board of Deputies of British Jews, that could see Red Ken removed from office, and Red Ken has refused to apologise, despite motions being passed by the London Assembly asking him to. Hes claiming his insults were not racist and struck a Mayor Quimby note declaring he would stand by his racial slurs.

He probably didnt intend them in a racist manner, though one wonders why he specified a German war crinimal rather than just a plain old war crinimal, and why he would specifically call someone he knew to be Jewish a concentration camp guard when he could surely have guessed it would be especially offensive. Id have expected something like this from the Tories, but not from a Old Labour warhorse? My whole world view has collapsed, I was always told the left wingers were the anti-nazis! Now I dont know what to think!

If only he had taken some advice from Kevin Myers and stuck to simply calling him a bastard. Or even followed his lead apologised for offence caused. Even Prince Harry had the cope on, or good advice to apologise for wearing a very badly thought out costume.

A Dub in Glasgo

It is offensive to the person but it is hardly racial

mycroft

He was refering to the fact that the Evening Standard was a supporter of Mosley, and the British fascist party.

the fact that Ken was the standard's restaurant critic for four years before his election as mayor.

The defense of ken is weak but the majority of criticism steems to Ken's timings coming the week before the IOC's inspection.

It's one of the pieces of Irony, you can understand Ken's criticism being doorstepped leaving a G&L event by a journalist for a paper whose owner would have been a fascist supporter 50 years.

However Ken has taken the papers shilling.

On the other hand the paper's editorialship has changed in the interium and the paper has attacked Ken's policy of attempting to set up a competitor of the standard in london.

It's a complicated issue, in comparsion to Harry, harry went out picked out his outfit and made a conscious decision to wear it. Ken was leaving a party, may have made a offhanded comment to a representive of a paper who has consistently attacked every one of his policys and still refuses to give him credit for a policy of his they now grudgenly support (congestion charges)

It was stupid, he's being bloody minded a personality trait that marks his career, but to compare it to harry is ill concieved and this is the kind of cheap shot his enemies have been waiting for.

Sand

It was stupid, he's being bloody minded a personality trait that marks his career, but to compare it to harry is ill concieved and this is the kind of cheap shot his enemies have been waiting for.

I agree to an extent, but in Harrys favour, hes A) Young, Has Prince Phillip the Diplomat as a grandfather/influence and C) Was at the very least smart enough to issue an apology for offending people, even unintentionally.

Ken is far older/experienced with dealing with the public and should be a little more capable of recognising that the only person more offended by being described as a concentration camp guard than a German ( remember the Italian PMs slur? ) would be a Jewish person. And even if he was caught up in the heat of the moment and spoke before thinking, he should have the common sense with the passing of time to recognise it was a stupid thing to say and apologise for offence caused, whilst stressing that he didnt mean it in a racist manner. People accept an apology and an exscuse far more easily than an exscuse alone - bar people with covert agendas of course as recent history tells us, but thats out of his hands anyway.

Boggle

In fairness its all a bit stupid really... the jews are up in arms over every little statement that they don't like. Nazi Germany is over so they should let it die...

Poker_Peter

He should have retracted it when he found out the journalist was Jewish.

A Dub in Glasgo

On tape Mr Livingstone is heard asking reporter Oliver Finegold if he is a "German war criminal".

Mr Finegold replies: "No, I'm Jewish, I wasn't a German war criminal. I'm quite offended by that."

The mayor then says: "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?"

Offensive to the reporter - Yes
A racial slur - No
A storm in a teacup - Maybe
A sackable offence for Ken - No

pickarooney

Communists were also killed in concentration camp, so that should mean he's "allowed" make comments about nazi guards, no?

Redleslie2

Political correctness gone mad.

mike65

Ditto that.

I feel a backlash against PC in the air...

Mike.

bizmark

mike65 wrote:

Ditto that.

I feel a backlash against PC in the air...

Mike.

We can only hope

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

pickarooney

I think the whole world should fúcking resign just in case it upsets anyone else.
For christ's sake, journalists are getting upset nowadays.

The Corinthian

You've got to love how consistant the Guardian are. Of Lingingstone's gaffe they say:

"Mr Livingstone is entitled to point out that the Standard's owners are in no position to deliver lectures on anti-semitism - the first Lord Rothermere was an admirer of Hitler, judged Mussolini "the greatest figure of our age" and his Daily Mail carried the headline "Hurrah for the Blackshirts"."

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9115,1415411,00.html

Even when of Berlusconi they said:

"Some have described his suggestion that Schulz should play the part of commandant in a film about Nazi concentration camps as a gaffe by a gaffe-prone politician. This is entirely to miss the point. Just because Berlusconi says things that no other European prime minister would does not mean they are gaffes. They accurately describe the nature of the man and his politics."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/eu/story/0,7369,992070,00.html

:rolleyes:

mycroft

The Corinthian wrote:

You've got to love how consistant the Guardian are. Of Lingingstone's gaffe they say:

Was made to a journalist while Ken was at a party and he was "tired and emotional" (politics for a bit pissed) to a journalist which he assumed was off the record.

Even when of Berlusconi they said:

The other was made in Parliament, while in recorded session, while Berlusconi was holding the EU presidency, to a member of parliament.




Context matters.

The Corinthian

mycroft wrote:

Was made to a journalist while Ken was at a party and he was "tired and emotional" (politics for a bit pissed) to a journalist which he assumed was off the record.

Poor petal. That's all right then.

Context matters.

Does when you're making excuses.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Memnoch

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

offensive to whom? to the journalist? From what I remember the journalist was being hypocritical and Ken pointed this out with his remark.

I still fail to see the "offensive" piece in the statement though.

yossarin

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I would have a problem if ken had made a racial slur . what he said was not racist, just hugly offensive.
Its a storm in a teacup - the only newspapers trying to make a big deal out of it here are the standard and its sister the metro.

I did have to laugh at blair suggesting he apologise though - theres a history of kens reactions to the party line

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Sand

I think the biggest problem is that he hasnt apologised for offence caused. Maybe he has a reputation for being stuborn, but thats his problem - he first called him a German war crinimal, and upon learning he was Jewish altered his line of insults to call him a concentration camp guard?!?!

I dont think Red Ken is a racist or anti-semetic but he surely cant ignore the fact that he picked one of the more offensive names to call someone he knew to be Jewish (in the proccess making light of the holocaust, the real concentration camp guards were no worse morally than nosy reporters, yeah?) and in doing so caused offence to the man himself. He should grow up, be a man and apologise for the offence caused even if he didnt intend to cause it.

I think Fintan O Toole had a column in the Irish Times regarding Myers offensive use of bastard, where he argued use of insults in such a fashion is designed to shock and confuse opponents - how do you debate with someone who calls you a bastard? How do you question the Mayor of London when hes calling you a war crinimal and a concentration camp guard? At least Myers apologised for his stupidity. Red Ken.......

If hes willing to risk his office for the sake of pretending to himself that his remarks werent stupid/offensive then I reckon hes going to have a reputation for stupidity more than stuborness.

I still fail to see the "offensive" piece in the statement though.

I was initially shocked by this, but now that I think about it maybe I shouldnt be.

Victor

Does the Mayor accept the tag "red"?

mycroft

Sand wrote:

I think the biggest problem is that he hasnt apologised for offence caused. Maybe he has a reputation for being stuborn, but thats his problem - he first called him a German war crinimal, and upon learning he was Jewish altered his line of insults to call him a concentration camp guard?!?!

I think he was pissed. Drunk. Said something to a tabloid journalist from a paper with a campaign aganist him and then tried to find away out of in a rambling drunken way.

As a tabloid journalist the "injuried" party has probably had worse flung at him and deserved it.

So whats the issue here, Ken's insult (should we envoke Godwin's law) he flung a Nazi insult at ajournalist paper who's owners were nazi sympathisers, now if the reporter wasn't jewish (ken didn't know it at the time) would their be outrage? Or is the 2nd part the insulting part?

So on who's behalf are we outraged? The jewish community? Or the injuried feelings of a member of the gutter press?

I dont think Red Ken is a racist or anti-semetic but he surely cant ignore the fact that he picked one of the more offensive names to call someone he knew to be Jewish (in the proccess making light of the holocaust, the real concentration camp guards were no worse morally than nosy reporters, yeah?) and in doing so caused offence to the man himself. He should grow up, be a man and apologise for the offence caused even if he didnt intend to cause it.

Agreed but again to whom does Ken owe the apology to?

I think Fintan O Toole had a column in the Irish Times regarding Myers offensive use of bastard, where he argued use of insults in such a fashion is designed to shock and confuse opponents - how do you debate with someone who calls you a bastard? How do you question the Mayor of London when hes calling you a war crinimal and a concentration camp guard? At least Myers apologised for his stupidity. Red Ken.......

One ken directed an insult at a very specific group of people. In a premediated assault, and he picked a word, bastard, in his article states "oh you didn't like that word did you"? And proceeds to use it a further 16 times. His apology is for the "unintential pain and hurt feelings that we not intented in my piece" When in the piece he was quiet clear that he carefully choice the word because he knew it would cause offense. I'd describe his apology as an empty gesture, and makes no attempt to apologise to single mothers and bastards and the article which pretty much states they're the root of all evil in modern society.

The Corinthian

mycroft wrote:

I think he was pissed. Drunk. Said something to a tabloid journalist from a paper with a campaign aganist him and then tried to find away out of in a rambling drunken way.

What I can’t get over is how you’re falling over yourself to dream up excuses for such a gaffe and are quite happy to vilify Berlusconi for the identical screw-up. That Livingstone was drunk and at a party or reception may be reasons for this coccuring, but they are not excuses.

Personally I’m no fan of either of the two men and think that the PC gang has blown both instances out of proportions, and at worst they reflect badly upon the competence of the two individuals in question - in short, like the prince Harry affair, nothing to get worked up about. However, I do take point at the double standards used when judging both instances of buffoonery as it is blatantly hypocritical.

So whats the issue here, Ken's insult (should we envoke Godwin's law) he flung a Nazi insult at ajournalist paper who's owners were nazi sympathisers, now if the reporter wasn't jewish (ken didn't know it at the time) would their be outrage? Or is the 2nd part the insulting part?

Actually they were Fascist sympathisers, for the Blackshirt movements in both the UK and Italy. I don’t think anyone has suggested evidence that they also supported National Socialism in Germany.

sceptre

Sand wrote:

he first called him a German war crinimal

Now that's not quite true, according to this (it's Saturday and I'm trying to do my weekly news roundup). The first jibe was aimed at the newspaper rather than the reporter ("When the reporter outside, Oliver Finegold, said he was from London's Evening Standard, Mr Livingstone retorted: "How awful for you. Have you thought of having treatment? What did you do? Were you a German war criminal?"").

The Corinthian wrote:

Actually they were Fascist sympathisers, for the Blackshirt movements in both the UK and Italy. I don’t think anyone has suggested evidence that they also supported National Socialism in Germany.

See my link above for the text of Viscount Rothermere's telegram to that young Schicklgruber boy (convenient that, spotted your comment after posting the link). That's assuming you're OK with equating support for "Adolf The Great" with support for National Socialism of course, which I reckon is reasonable.

Redleslie2

sceptre wrote:

See my link above for the text of Viscount Rothermere's telegram to that young Schicklgruber boy (convenient that, spotted your comment after posting the link). That's assuming you're OK with equating support for "Adolf The Great" with support for National Socialism of course, which I reckon is reasonable.

Actually Lord Rothermere was quite matey with his dear fuhrer.

Adolf Hitler, letter to Lord Rothermere (7th December, 1933)

I should like to express the appreciation of countless Germans, who regard me as their spokesman, for the wise and beneficial public support which you have given to a policy that we all hope will contribute to the enduring pacification of Europe. Just as we are fanatically determined to defend ourselves against attack, so do we reject the idea of taking the initiative in bringing about a war. I am convinced that no one who fought in the front trenches during the world war, no matter in what European country, desires another conflict.

Lord Rothermere, The Daily Mail (10th July, 1933)

I urge all British young men and women to study closely the progress of the Nazi regime in Germany. They must not be misled by the misrepresentations of its opponents. The most spiteful distracters of the Nazis are to be found in precisely the same sections of the British public and press as are most vehement in their praises of the Soviet regime in Russia.

They have started a clamorous campaign of denunciation against what they call "Nazi atrocities" which, as anyone who visits Germany quickly discovers for himself, consists merely of a few isolated acts of violence such as are inevitable among a nation half as big again as ours, but which have been generalized, multiplied and exaggerated to give the impression that Nazi rule is a bloodthirsty tyranny.

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.

The Corinthian

sceptre wrote:

See my link above for the text of Viscount Rothermere's telegram to that young Schicklgruber boy (convenient that, spotted your comment after posting the link). That's assuming you're OK with equating support for "Adolf The Great" with support for National Socialism of course, which I reckon is reasonable.

I stand corrected.

mycroft

The Corinthian wrote:

Personally I’m no fan of either of the two men and think that the PC gang has blown both instances out of proportions, and at worst they reflect badly upon the competence of the two individuals in question - in short, like the prince Harry affair, nothing to get worked up about. However, I do take point at the double standards used when judging both instances of buffoonery as it is blatantly hypocritical.

1. One was said while in parliament to a elected representive who asked the current head of the EU a legimate question.

2. Was said to a gutter journalist doorstopping a politican as he walked away from a party.

Again context matters.

I ask you again, to whom does Ken, in your mind owe an apology to?

Redleslie2

It was a lousy thing to say but there's no comparison between this and idiot boy Harry's faux pas, because the windsors have a history of nazi links - philip's sisters, that michael woman's daddy and hitler fan edward VIII. Orwell was right, the whole gang should've been wiped out after the war.

The Corinthian

mycroft wrote:

1. One was said while in parliament to a elected representive who asked the current head of the EU a legimate question.

2. Was said to a gutter journalist doorstopping a politican as he walked away from a party.

1. One was said to a German MEP who was heckling and barracking the then president of the EU.

2. Was said, in full knowledge, to a member of the racial and ethnic group that suffered most as a result of the Nazi Holocaust.

And indeed context does matter - depending exactly on how you want to twist it and in what light you want to present it.

I ask you again, to whom does Ken, in your mind owe an apology to?

I’ve already stated that I think the entire matter has been exaggerated in both cases and that both proponents are guilty of nothing more sinister than buffoonery.

My only real objection in this is the apparent hypocrisy of some to act as apologists (indeed the article I indicated goes so far as to applaud him) in one case while describing the other incident as accurately describing “the nature of the man and his politics”.

The lowest form of political partisanship, TBH.

Redleslie2

mycroft wrote:

1. One was said while in parliament to a elected representive who asked the current head of the EU a legimate question.

The German MEP is from the social democrat party whose members were among the first to be rounded up and carted off to the camps. Berlusconi probably knew this and so it was a calculated insult, especially coming from someone who tells porkies to make excuses for fascism. Mussolini Wasn't That Bad, Says Berlusconi