London mayor to face hearing for 'Nazi' jibe to Jewish journalist

[Scurrilous]

"London mayor Ken Livingstone faces a disciplinary hearing on Tuesday that will rule on whether he should be disciplined for comparing a Jewish journalist to a concentration camp guard."

<snip>

"He will appear before the Adjudication Panel for England which rules on the conduct of local authority members.The panel has the power to impose sanctions ranging from a censure to a five-year ban from public office.

Livingstone clashed in February with journalist Oliver Finegold of the Evening Standard newspaper - which has been involved in a long-running feud with the mayor - who tried to ask him questions after a function at city hall."

<snip>

"Livingstone has maintained his remarks were not anti-Semitic and simply reflected his annoyance at a newspaper he has accused of hounding him. At one time Livingstone wrote restaurant reviews for the newspaper."

link

[ixion]

1. if I remember correctly, the mayor was also an outspoken critic of the

illegal invasion of Iraq.

Sounds like character assassination and political revenge, IMO.

[truthisfreedom]

2. of course it is.

character assassination is the mark of bushco. if you see it happening, you can be sure of the source.

[Josh]

3. Right, 'cause that's how local politics are

in England. The Mayor of London is part of a grand "character assassination and political revenge" plan for speaking out against the war, which most of his country was against.

The following portion of the account makes it quite clear that he knew the inference he was making.

"When Finegold told him he worked for the Standard and tried to ask questions, Livingstone asked: "Have you thought of having treatment?" and then asked "What did you do? Were you a German war criminal?"

Finegold said he was Jewish and found the remark offensive. Livingstone then said the reporter was "just like a concentration camp guard, you are just doing it because you are paid to, aren't you?""

Of course if he had been in favour of the war the fact that he called a Jewish journalist a Nazi would be reprehensible.

Riiiiiiight.

[alcibiades_mystery]

4. I'm still trying to find out what's so offensive about it?

:shrug:

Talk about your super-thin-skin. I was waiting to see a drawn out comment, but that's it? That's what Livingstone said? Big fucking deal. If he had been in favor of the war and called a Jewish journalist a German War criminal, the pro-war kooks would be shouting that this is a case of political correctness run amock, and you damn well know it.

[Binka]

6. DINGDINGDINGDING

You just pulled three 7's. This is absurd. Political forces have been out to get "Red Ken" as they refer to him forever! This is BS. :silly:

[JudyM]

12. I'm not thin-skinned and I see where it's offensive.

The journalist responds to the taunt about whether he's a German war criminal (now why would he call him that?) by stating that he's Jewish, and then the guy says back that he's like a Nazi guard --- that is a serious insult, especially to a Jew, whose 'tribe' was gutted by German guards. It is beyond tasteless in my opinion, and not just a matter of political correctness. There is real human pain involved in this history; your comment makes me wonder if you have to be Jewish to feel it...

[Scurrilous]

5. Ken cleared on one charge but still faces second

<snip>

"Ken Livingstone was acting as a private citizen when he called a Jewish reporter "a concentration camp guard," an adjudication panel found today.

The Mayor of London was facing two charges of breaching the Greater London Authority's Code of Conduct by his "failure to treat others with respect" and "bringing his office or authority into disrepute."

But the independent Adjudication Panel dismissed the first charge this morning after finding Mr Livingstone was not acting in his official capacity when the exchange with Evening Standard reporter Oliver Finegold took place.

Panel chairman David Laverick said: "We do not find that, at the time, he wanted to be interviewed in an official capacity and had left the reception. At the time this event took place and in the context of how it took place we find that Mr Livingstone was not on duty in an official capacity."

The second charge will be dealt with tomorrow when Mr Livingstone is expected to give evidence in relation to that charge."



more

[wordpix]

7. a politician "not on duty' when leaving a reception? Yeah, right

You are always on duty when you're a public figure out in public and that includes a public street or sidewalk. I ran for state rep once and just to go to the grocery store or post office I would make sure my hair and clothes were just right because I never knew who I'd run into.

This is the mayor of London who's recognized by all Londoners wherever he goes. Any questions asked anywhere are fair game. The mayor could have answered, "No comment." Instead, he accuses a Jew of acting like a Nazi because the Jewish reporter asks him some questions that he former doesn't want to answer. That is very unreasonable, unacceptable and calls into question the mayor's mental stability.

[Lilith Velkor]

9. How did he know whether the reporter was Jewish?

Was the reporter wearing a big Star of David or something?

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. The reporter told him

Transcript of the encounter: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/02/15/ukensaid.xml

Livingstone and the Standard have been criticising each other for some time (though, at one point, he did write restaurant reviews for them, which make his remarks about working for a 'fascist-supporting paper' a bit hypocritical - he's referring to the Mail group's support of fascism before World War Two).

[pop goes the weasel]

13. he didn't accuse him of acting like a Nazi

He accused him of working for a fascist paper and suggested that the reporter's excuse that he was just doing his job wasn't acceptable, just as the excuse that German guards were just doing their jobs wasn't acceptable. Livingstone had already made his comparison between the reporter and a concentration camp guard before being told that the reporter was Jewish, so we can surmise that he would have made the same comment even if the reporter wasn't Jewish. Still, Livingstone was definitely being rude, but I'm not sure that is the same as disrespectful as defined by whatever law is in operation.

As for being always "on duty," I don't know--maybe in Great Britain there is a different standard of privacy than in the US. From what I've gathered before, that seems likely.

What gets me is that being disrespectful is treated like a crime. I think we in America would all be serving hard time on that one.

[MrPrax]

8. BTW...

Good link,,,but just curious,

Do you know what happens if some outfit calling itself 'Greater London Authority's Code of Conduct' rules against him?

Not to be too snotty from the colonies, but usually in a democracy, we get to decide on 'conduct'.

Clearly using an ethics council to tell us what behaviour we are suppose to accept, could be simply used as a political ploy? and according to Ken, "that the costs of the entire case would run to more than £200,000."

Who's nickel this? Are Londoners footing the cost for this?

Just curious...not argumentative.

[Scurrilous]

11. Apparently...

..he was accused of breaching the Greater London Authority's Code of Conduct. The allegation was investigated and referred to something called The Adjudication Panel for England. According to their website*, if found guilty, "they may suspend a member for up to one year, or disqualify them from holding office for up to five years."

I'm guessing the British taxpayer foots the bill for this.



*http://www.standardsboard.co.uk/Aboutus/AbouttheStandardsBoard/

[MrPrax]

14. Amazing...

So some outfit called The Adjudication Panel for England can overrule and suspend democratically elected reps.

Seems rather inconsistent that someone like Pinochet can receive 'immunity' from the high courts for murder nd torture committed while President, but the Mayor of London blowing up at a scummy reporter, can be stripped of office.

Something is amiss here...too bad Labour wasn't in power. They could simply abolish it as a quaint paternalistic High Tory privilege that is NO longer needed in a democracy. Makes sense as I understand Labour is very bullish on democracy elsewhere.