We know the saying about sticks and stones but words never hurting. We know about Freedom of Speech and we know about heckling. We know there’s a difference between hurling epithets at a political opponent and hurling stones and bottles.
So let’s compare and contrast two incidents which happened at the beginning of this week. One took place here in our country, in front of Parliament, on camera. One took place in a town in Germany. In both cases, duly and freely elected MPs were the target.
Here, a Remain MP was heckled by a group wearing yellow vests who shouted “Nazi, Nazi” at her. In Germany, an AfD Parliamentarian was nearly beaten to death because the Left had labelled him and his Party as “Nazi”.
Let’s look at the case here first. It was Anna Soubry, the fierce Remain MP, who was heckled. She was outraged. Her colleagues in the HoC, from the Speaker down, condemned this verbal attack vociferously. Some writers in today’s MSM are busy pointing out that some of the hecklers have ties to UKIP, others, e.g. Allison Pearson (here) and Nigel Farage (here) write that this sort of heckling, and worse, has been dished out to Leave politicians for some time with nary an outcry.
All of us who’ve been out and about promoting Brexit have been called names, ‘fascist scum’ being the usual one. One might ask why being called ‘fascist scum’ is ok, but being called ‘Nazi’ isn’t – I’ll come back to this.
Now let’s look at the case of the German AfD MP. He was violently attacked on the way back from a reception. The police speaks of three masked men attacking him from the back and kicking his head when he was on the ground. The German MSM reports as well as those here, e.g. by the BBC, all pixelated the photo of the injured MP, Frank Magnitz. This fact helpfully allowed the ‘usual suspects’ to denigrate the leader of the AfD in the German Parliament for being over the top when she spoke of attempted murder. If you visit the facebook page of the AfD Bremen section (here) you can still find some reports with the unpixelated photo. It is gruesome but shows that Dr Weidel was right. Mr Magnitz is recovering and was able to talk yesterday afternoon.
You need to know that the AfD has been vilified as being ‘Nazi’ ever since their success in getting elected to the German Parliament. You also need to know that the extreme left-wing ‘scene’ is flourishing in Germany and that they are prone to violence. A few days ago they had placed a bomb at an AfD office in a German state where state elections are taking place this autumn. You need to know furthermore that these antifa groups have proclaimed on their blogs that the time for words is past and that the “AfD Nazis” must now be attacked physically.
Does Germany have Hate Speech legislation? Certainly. After all, this is a EU directive. But there’s ‘hate’ and then there’s ‘Hate’. If it’s deemed to be ‘right wing’ then it will be ‘stamped out’. If it comes from left wing groups, antifa: not so much.
Finally, here’s one other point which we and German readers have noticed over the past few years. Our MSM, there as here, are generally more supportive of left wing, green, anti-conservative issues and policies. They are more ready to condemn anything which looks ‘right wing’. Labelling them as ‘extreme far right populists’ is common. You’ll never see the ideas and policies of the Left in either country being labelled ‘extreme far left populists’. This is the soil in which left-wing attacks, from verbal attacks to attacks on objects to physical violence, are allowed to flourish, where left-wing attacks are condoned.
This brings us back to the starting point: Hate Speech and Violence. Hate speech can certainly prepare the ground for Violence if unchecked. Thus, if Hate Speech coming from the Left is not condemned as forcefully as when it comes from the Right – and it isn’t – then we may see attacks as those on the AfD politician being perpetrated here as well.
If being called “Nazi” by a right-wing mini-mob is outrageous then surely being called ‘fascist scum’ is equally to be condemned. It does not matter if the person or MP thus attacked happens to be a political ‘enemy’: if you condemn the one you must condemn the other.
We’ve always had a robust culture of heckling in this country. We did not need Hate Speech legislation to tell us not to be offensive. However, in a society more polarised than ever – promoted by the usual suspects who dish it out, verbally, but squeal when on the verbal receiving end – we must now be aware that there are groups who will step up from speech to violence.
Calling Ms Soubry, the Remain MP, a ‘Nazi’ was so outrageous because at almost the same time the German MP was physically attacked and nearly beaten to death because he had been labelled a ‘Nazi’.
It must be obvious to even the most partisan reader that it can be a small step from name-calling to violence: once someone has been given a ‘Hate’ label, a physical attack can seem righteous to sick minds.
Conservatives cannot be part of that. Moreover, calling some Remainer ‘Nazi’ is stupid and unimaginative. Conservatives must speak their minds, even forcefully, but that can be done without resorting to violence, verbal or physical. Conservatives do not need to ape the Left.
The leave side has been remarkably restrained and patient considering that the few could end any confidence and worth of what was deemed a democratic process here in Britain.
What are we going to do if a clean Brexit is denied by a few third rate politicians who had their vote at the ballot box like everyone else?
Are we still going to be courteous and accept that we lost even though we won by over 1.2 million votes?
Any person ,young or old …Male or female or anything in between , that wishes to put their name in the frame and accept democratic Public Office , especially as an MP ,should complete the task that has been set for them by the electorate . If they then decide that their personal wishes are preferable , but do not comply with the majority vote ,. they have an opening to avoid castigation by said electorate it is called,” Resignation”. If they do not want to resign then they must be fully prepared to soak up every form of verbal bile it is possible for the voters to display, in the knowledge that at the next election their chances of reelection will be virtually nil.
Good piece, Viv. I’ve shared it (with accreditation to you of course) on my new FB Group – Rutland Brexit Debate. https://www.facebook.com/groups/548835842280180/ This started off as ‘Rutland 4 Brexit’ but I changed it yesterday as it was just becoming a platform for preaching to the choir – now the Lib-Dems and Labour have started contributing – it will be interesting to see how it goes… 🙂
Thanks!And do keep sharing the links to our articles.
So, just to clarify, these appear to be the current rules:
It’s acceptable for a SNP MP to cower behind parliamentary priviledge whilst calling Tommy Robinson a ‘violent, racist, thug’.
It’s perfectly OK for the Speaker of the House of Commons to call Tommy Robinson ‘loathsome, obnoxious and repellent’.
The fact that neither of of these statements is truthful is apparently not a problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3V4ASVa-u8
It’s also allowed for Nigel Farage and many others to be outrageously intimitated, and actually physically assaulted, over many years.
But it’s definitely not OK for Anna Soubry, or any other ‘right-thinking’ MP, to be heckled, or harrassed in any way; and ‘heaven forfend’ to ever, ever, ever be called a ‘Nazi’.
I’m glad we’ve got that sorted out.
Well said Howard – excellent comment.
Nineteen Eighty-Four: “Two Minute Hate”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KeX5OZr0A4
A very powerful scene from the movie of George Orwell’s iconic book.
But a moment to pause and reflect: which side is which?
One could quite easily reimagine this scene with Donald Trump, Nigel Farage or Gerard Batten on the screen, with the baying crowd consisting of brain-washed EU-loving leftie students.
But then take a step back, and then reimagine that scene, but with Jeremy Corbyn, Hilary Clinton, or even Theresa May on the screen, with the baying crowd consisting of disgruntled Brexit-supporters and others of a ‘right-wing’ ilk.
There is no difference really. Because we are all the same, and we are being played off against each other, in the ultimate game of “divide and conquer”. We the people have been turned against each other in the biggest distraction con going. Left or right, male or female, gay or straight, working-class or middle-class, Leaver or Remainer, While we are busy fighting and squabbling amongst ourselves, our actual enemy, the Establishment Elites, are gleefully pushing and carrying out their agenda right under our noses.
And as our fighting and squabbling intensifies, we are giving ‘Them’ more and more ammunition to use back at us.
Viv is incredibly tolerant allowing the Tommy Brownshirts and AMW mob on this site in the first place.
I would not.
However my New Year’s Resolution is that I’m not playing your games.
… and the clock still ticks for UKIP to condemn the Soubry attack….
> Viv is incredibly tolerant allowing the Tommy Brownshirts and AMW mob on this site in the first place
Indeed VIv is.
And with all sorts of other Agents Provocateur too, lol. ;D
Tee Hee
Welcome back Mr. Vaccha. I haven’t seen a comment from you for some time. Also, are we going to see you at Leave means Leave protests outside parliament. We really need a UKIP presence on this. I was there today as were some others Kippers, but none wearing their UKIP rosettes.
Hello, Colin.
I’ve attended two.
The redoubtable Richard Braine is often there, note.
By-elections are popping up all over, though, and those involved usually need a lot of hand-holding. Reaps dividends later, as the training is useful for more scheduled elections too.
Viv is very tolerant – she allows you to comment on here!
Why on earth would UKIP condemn the “Soubry attack”? Did we hear the other parties condemning their own members for e.g. forcing Farage to have 24/7 security protection?
…..Tacitus, I observed these peoples behaviour on the ground for a couple of hours on Monday. I believe the best word to describe their manner is “juvenile”. Oiky OTT behaviour needs calling out where ever it comes from.
Having said that, the price of freedom of speech is you have to put up with poor behaviour and even, insulting behaviour.
Soubry is many things, but a Nazi she is not. This crowd continuing that chant was ignorant, ridiculous and, juvenile. But sadly they probably believe that the huge amount of attention they have received means they were successful.
If you are going to take on someone like Anna Soubry you have to be a whole lot smarter than this crew were.
The mood music is starting to play. As we leave the EU the stakes will be raised. It will be a cliff edge, but not the cliff edge anyone had imagined. There is already too much pressure, more may push everything into touch.
I believe Tomaz is correct. We have all talked of the LibLabCon party. Why? Because they are all influenced by Socialism. We have recently been subjected to a number policy advancements not least the idea of treating violence as an illness. Maybe we are too close and not seeing the stunningly vast forest in front of us.
The Ideology has ripped through our society e.g. the metropolitan police chief speaking out in favour of the EU, what the?
Anne Soubry a Nazi, no, but, in my opinion, a thoroughly rude person, and I believe in many others opinion. But that isn’t the point.
We have to get a grip of what is happening. Perhaps start a campaign of informing the public what Socialism is, what fascism is, what the signs are, what the policies are, who those extolling this deceitful Ideology are. But first understand ourselves what these things are.
Personally I think it is wrong, in any way, to escalate what has happened here. That would include internal argument about who had photos with who or who is endorsed by who, or not. This is not important. But what may happen in the future will be.
Let’ not let anything spoil our leaving the EU, please!
> the metropolitan police chief speaking out in favour of the EU
We don’t have a Metropolitan Police Chief, at least in the sense that previous generations had.
Instead we’re lumbered with a wretched Common Purpose Drone – Dick.
Never forget what her competence led to. Ask the loved ones of poor murdered (sorry, I meant extrajudicially executed – no oops, just an ‘elf and safety breach) Jean Charles de Menezes about her. I did, and heard what I expected. Disgusting doesn’t begin to describe it.
But this creature is the perfect tool to carry out the bidding of her master, the Khan.
The result – London littered with corpses, a veritable khanage,
Police who won’t investigate or often even record real crimes.
But time aplenty for ThoughtCrime and making political statements.
soubry stood on a leave mandate which she has now proved to be a lie Parliment voted the law into been and entered into law by the queen in june 2018 so she has now also committed treason so should be removed from parliment and imprisoned also losing all parlimentary pension rights
No. That is not the definition of treason.
Treason, in the absence of statutory definition to the contrary, is the crime of betrayal, typically of one’s country…
When considering that the People are Sovereign , she is attempting to betray the wishes of the country,ergo, she fulfills the definition of … committing Treason
WATCH ME! I hope to get one or more of my two questions selected at/on tomorrow’s -10/1/2019 – 1045pm BBC 1 TV Question Time; one is about optimising policing cost effectively by coaxing landlords and landowners in all sectors to install CCTV, the other is to reduce institutionalised £wastefulness and fraud in our public sector due to maintenance neglect of installed CHP(Combined Heat & Power Units) – particularly by our Local Authorities. http://www.directcostscutters.com
Don’t we have enough CCTV cameras intruding on our lives?
I joined the Leave Means Leave group outside Parliament on Monday holding my home made “Treason May” placard, I saw up close and personal the group that loudly heckled Soubry and the liar Owen Jones.
When they arrived they were loudly shouting in favour of Brexit. Fair enough I thought, a little raw for my liking but their protest is as valid as the next mans.
Then they moved towards the Remainiacs camp and started shouting “we want a Peoples vote” !
So which camp were they actually representing ? I believe neither, I believe most of them did not know what they were shouting about or for whom. They were there to make a scene and a scene they did. To be fair to the Police I thought they handled the situation well.
I see it as a very good thing that the highly cosseted Westminster class see and hear the Peoples views. Thats why I traveled to London on Monday myself, to do my own waving and shouting and will be doing so again over the next few days leading up to the important vote next Tuesday.
Yes, this motley crew were unpleasant but nowhere near as unpleasant and damaging to democracy as what occurred outside the shut down Lewisham East by-election hustings meeting last June . Where was the outrage by snowflake Soubry and Bercow then, where was the British main stream media reporting on the Labour Party encouraged left wing mob, nowhere, thats where.
I am sure Mrs May will not approve of my placard. If so, I would welcome her stop by when she see’s it, jump out of her chauffeur driven limousine and inquire with me why I have made it !
Or is this just all another slip towards what George Orwell predicted would happen and some day soon the pip squeak Bercow will throw the likes of me, my placard and that motley crew, into the Tower.
I believe they were shouting “we won the Peoples vote” not “we want a peoples vote”
John Freeman ….. that is right, they were. They 100% support Brexit.
Jeff, I was at the ‘Leave means Leave’ protests today, and jolly cold it was standing there for fours hours. I have been down there several times, but today Leave means Leave supplied cups of tea and coffee. A group numbering about fifteen in total passed us by in Abingdon wearing yellow tabards, no doubt taking a leaf out of what is presently occurring France. However their yellow tabards were covered in various messages in biro, including ‘Brexit’ and ‘Paedo’s Out’ None of them were holding any placards so at first glance you would never have known what side of the argument they were on. They walked down to where the ‘Remain contingent were and started shouting ‘out means out’ OK, some of the Remain contingent have in previous days come down to where the ‘Leave means Leave protesters were standing and goaded us with various comments, but generally there has always been a degree of respect between the two camps despite the political differences between us. However this yellow clad bunch are not in my opinion doing our side of the argument any favour’s at all by doing what they are doing. If they were really passionate about leaving the EU etc they would ditch their pointless yellow tabards and join the Leave means Leave protest. There is no point trying to sir up trouble to the point whereby a decision could be made to ban all protest groups from the vicinity of parliament on the grounds of security.
….I agree with you Colin.
I was in London today and spent a few hours there again myself, pity our paths did not cross 🙂
Orwell and Huxley were truly men of vision; maybe they also gave politicians ideas?
An awful thought isn’t it?
A while ago it occurred to me that a hate crime (or at least a hate incident) could have been committed against Nigel Farage – I think I had in mind the occasion when he was chased into a pub (for safety) by a mob. He had not complained, but the hate crime law allows anyone observing the incident to make a complaint, even if they were not involved. I was also mindful of the occasion when Nigel came to Newport to speak prior to the referendum when he was accompanied by several security guards, such were the threats to his personal safety.
So I investigated the hate crime legislation only to find that a “hate crime” can only be against a few, specific categories of people, and politician is not one of them. So no matter what Anna Soubry, or anyone else, may think of what was said, it can not have been a hate crime nor a hate incident.
Seems to me the premises of a “hate crime” is nonsense and the sooner it is scrapped the better. We already have laws for libel and slander, and that is good enough to deal with words used.
If Nigel were gay ( he’s not ) he could have gone for the ‘hate crime’ angle. But you are correct, he’s not on the list.
It’s a bit like ‘Gammon’ . Gammon is in fact a racist insult aimed at WHITE men who go red with rage at the Brexit issue. It’s pejorative and offensive.
Just like the ‘N’ word.
I was Tweeting with Ernie Warrander and Gawain Towler earlier. We agreed that we would reclaim our Gammon identity.
So we can call each other Gammon all we like. However if a ‘person of colour ‘ uses it against us , it should be reported to the police and we should have the law changed.
Yo ! Gammons…
I couldn’t care less if certain persons call me “gammon” or “honky” or “white trash”. It simply reminds me that I won the lottery. The reason they are shouting, is envy, because they didn’t.
> the hate crime law allows anyone observing the incident to make a complaint,
> even if they were not involved
Correct, but it goes further.
If they claim it was motivated by racial or religious hatred
1. They do not need to have directly observed it at all. Told about it tenth hand would suffice.
2. The Old Bill is obliged to record the complaint as a hate crime “incident”, which counts towards the statistics even if it doesn’t get upgraded and allotted a crime reference number.
This does not oblige the police to do anything more than that. But even if it doesn’t appear to have legs, if the alleged perp is unpopular…
Perhaps just gets recorded as a hate incident. What happens to/with this information afterwards?
I’d like to add two points:
1) ‘Nazi’ has become as meaningless as ‘racist’ since the Left started using it in an inflationary manner. It has become devoid of any meaning and is now just a four-letter-word like scum etc.
2) However, using ‘Nazi’ in this way cheapens the crimes committed by the real Nazis and demeans the sufferings of their millions of victims.
It’s not just an example for the coarsening of our political discourse, it is an example of the Left debasing the meaning of political expressions and turning everything they touch to dross.
It’s only since the second world war that politics in Britain has been so meek and mild and nicely ordered, this has not always been the case as anyone who was in Birmingham in the 1930’s could have told you, neither was political comment and demonstration in the 19th century, it could be argued that the politicians of today have never had it so good and some would argue that they need to be aware that the population is not as nice and ready to ‘debate’ in a nice orderly manner as they would wish. Keep pushing and alienating and see where that will lead.
Anna – Finger- Soubry thought nothing of insulting Nigel in public on TV. “He looks like he’s got a finger up his bottom and really rather likes it”. Funny how she can’t take it when she’s on the receiving end – that’s what we call a snowflake!
That said, Soubry may be a snowflake but she is no more a national socialist (Nazi) than I am, or a fascist. Neither should anyone calling out anti-democrats, like Soubry and her chums, ever harass, insult or threaten them like that, not just because it is appalling behaviour but because, as we well know, that is how Bunny and her screeching antifa mob behave. We have right on our side so we should never sink to their level.
Yep, it’s easier to stoop to a low level than each up high, but that’s what we must do. We have suffered ‘words’ for years now, We will never get used to it but it becomes like water off a ducks back. As my friend replies to these persons in true Brizol accent ‘Love you!’ They are left speechless!
That’s because we now live in a one party state.
One example I know well is Slovenia, which has been (and still is) a one party state continuously since 1945. Not de iure, but de facto, all the political parties — bar one, which the entire repressive machinery of the state ensures cannot get into office, e.g. by imprisoning their leaders on trumped up or entirely fabricated charges immediately prior to any election — are controlled by the criminal underground comprised of the former leaders of the communist party and the secret services. When one refers to “the opposition”, it means not a political party not currently in government, but the anti-communists. Completely different rules apply to “the opposition” (who are portrayed literally like the successors of the Nazi collaborators during WWII, since the narrative of WWII has never come to an end in Slovenia) than apply to communists, who are the ruling class of the one party state (between 1945 and 1991, de iure and de facto, now only de facto) and whose rule must be protected (implictly, from the threat of the Nazi enemies) at all costs and with the same urgency as though WWII was still in progress.
The EU is not very different, except that perhaps the veneer of democracy is perhaps slightly thicker.
Yes, a mini-mob harassing her on a public street is simply not on.
And the “Nazi” analogy (see Godwin’s Law) is almost invariably invalid. The Nazis were happily unique in modern (last few centuries) history. Most fascists don’t qualify as Nazis.
This said, Soubry herself adopts an extremely rude, aggressive, combative style in public.
Consider this barrister’s crassness and crudity on national TV at a time when large numbers of kids could well have been watching:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10533408/Minister-apologises-for-crude-Nigel-Farage-comment.html
And hasn’t Soubry publicly hurled “Nazi” at those she doesn’t like? Doesn’t sauce for the goose apply equally to the gander in Broxtowe?
Not that Soubry’s frequently appalling conduct is or should be a measure of what people should say and do. I don’t take lessons in behaviour, morality or decency from the likes of her. Personally, I think she’s got more than a screw loose.
NOTE
No one in the mob who harassed her is or was associated with UKIP in any sense of the word “associated” which would survive a trial for defamation…
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/politics/the-rising-tide-of-civil-unrest-globally/
Rising civil unrest everywhere.
Good article.
It is all very sad. Sadly this method of political attack will get absolutely no where. it’s a very bad strategy. Soubry is a traitor to democracy but she is not a Nazi.
There is more about Mr Goddard in the Daily Mail here.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6570763/Thug-harassed-Anna-Soubry-regularly-posts-anti-Muslim-rants-online.html
“..opponents of Brexit, who he dubbed ‘treacherous scumbags’, ‘pricks’ and ‘leftarded trolls’. Left-leaning lobby groups such as Stand Up To Racism were branded as ‘anglophobic… atheist and leftist scumbags”
Seems ok as far as it goes, but where does it go, what’s the vision of Britain? The yellow vest conjures a defeatist vision of subordination to global trade and bureaucracy, anonymous and atomised – the underbelly of Dan Hannan’s global free trade vision.
At least exchange them for boiler suits or Sunday best please, if not cassocks and tweeds.
Soubry is not a Nazi in the sense that she is an international(ist) socialist (Communist), rather than a national socialist (Nazi).
When Anne Marie Waters tried to infiltrate and take over UKIP, it was an attempt to polarize the political discourse in the UK between internationalist socialists (LibLabCon) and national socialists (UKIP as intended).
The untouchable invariant was going to be socialism.
“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.” — Noam Chomsky
Catherine: the “Mail” is clearly running a campaign against UKIP and Gerard Batten in particular in an attempt to damage the Party if not to bring about its demise. To that end the article you refer is part of that campaign and the Mail has attached to it another story endeavouring to smear Gerard Batten “Ukip’s ‘mad old grandad’ behind lurch to far-right”
By Mario Ledwith and Arthur Martin ”
.
This campaign seems to be failing because the majority of Mail readers stubbornly continue to disbelieve and disagree with the Mail as illustrated by their comments on the article. The first comment says:—
“HardBr3xit, OnlyWayToSaveThe, United Kingdom, about 15 hours ago
There’s no excuse for racism. I want to leave the EU so the U.K. remains global and outward looking but retains its identity. I welcome positive immigration and like and respect my European neighbours. But, the EU is a completely unnecessary umbrella structure which only serves a few well paid people in Brussels who have an inflated sense of self importance. We need full control and that means a proper exit.”
These are views I reckon Gerard Batten would fully endorse. Not only that, they are endoprsed by 1369 Mail readers with only 214 against,
I gave up with the Readers’ Comments in the Daily Fail online when I satisfied myself the voting wasn’t manipulated *externally*.
It goes up in increments of c1,000 upvotes (or downvotes) on a single comment at a time…
I have screenshots separated by just seconds to prove this.
And then no movement, or mainly votes trickling in for the other side – the side the Daily Fail doesn’t like.
Shameful?
No, typical.
” …….. I satisfied myself the voting wasn’t manipulated *externally*.”
Did you mean to say that the voting IS manipulated?
If the voting ISN’T manipulated then we might observe it to represent, to some degree, the readers’ genuine opinions.
The Daily Mail is an utter disgrace. Today’s edition of that so called newspaper is the last ever edition that I will pay out good money to read. I would rather read a toilet roll in future. The paper’s owners are obviously prepared to accept that there will be a marked downturn in its circulation. I hope Gerard Batten and UKIP will take the Daily Mail to task over this and seek legal advice over this article.
Colin, it is no surprise that the Daily Mail is rapidly going downhill because Paul Dacre has been succeeded as editor by Remainer Geordie Greig.
I have noticed that readers comments, and votes, in the “on-line” version. are invariably against the Mail’s opinions and particularly regarding UKIP, TR and Batten.
Lets look forward to the Mail’s drastic decline in circulation as sensible readers Leave.
The mini-mob walked beside Soubry but at no point touching her or impeding her in any way. They were just unpleasant, mouthy fellow travellers along the pavement. The expression on Soubry’s face was consistent with her knowing that she was not physically at risk.
The terms `Nazi’ and `fascist’ have become snarl words indicating an attitude and judgement that has noting to do with proper description or their original meanings. It is the left that overused these words and transformed their meaning. So ironic then that they complain when others use them similarly. No-one owns language.
Far, far worse than a few self-indulgent people with limited imagination over how to protest, was the left’s behaviour at the Lewisham East by-election in June last year. Hustings were stopped by the police on the grounds that the left wing mob outside could not be contained and so the safety of lawful, legitimate candidates could not be guaranteed. Unlike in Soubry’s case, violence was considered likely and democratic politics was stopped by a left wing mob chanting `Nazis’ and `fascists’.
The two cases are at opposite ends of a spectrum – one clearly non-violent and the other very threateningly aggressive. Westminster and the media whip themselves into a frenzy over words and completely ignored the far more serious interference with the very mechanics of democratic politics, the great tradition of hustings.
The puerile pointlessness of the mini mob, their self-indulgent thrill seeking, is one thing but given the enormous hypocrisy and over arching sense of entitlement from the precious establishment, the disproportionate reaction to the few idiots is quite alarming. Nearly every day one finds reason to think that the Westminster elite are so divorced from reality that democratic politics is nearing its end.
All agreed without reservation.
And, explicitly, like many a politician, Soubry is an opportunist.
Accountants are more trusted than bankers who are more trusted than lawyers who are more trusted than politicians. Used car salesmen fit in somewhere there too.
As to Soubry being an “opportunist”, could it be the look on her face (as I have seen it shown on TV) was because she anticipated using the incident to her advantage?
Indeed. Incidentally, I can get you a good deal on a used Ford Cortina.
Anna Soubry is not a Nazi and has a right, like every other citizen, to walk down the street without being harassed my a mob.
Being called a Nazi is slander, a civil case. Harassment is a criminal matter.
There is NO DOUBT that some of the people involved have strong connections with both Gerard and ‘Tommy Robinson’ . I am not suggesting that either Gerard or TR sanctioned or encouraged this behaviour BUT Gerard should take this opportune moment not use the ‘free speech’ argument or ‘Whataboutery’ to further encourage these individuals ( some of whom were present at the ‘Bookmarks’ incident ) .
They do not represent UKIP’s membership.
Those involved need to be specifically proscribed by the party leadership from membership and UKIP, as a party, should make a clear unequivocal statement condemning the attack and its disassociation with these named individuals.
I hope Anna Soubry in the meantime takes civil action and that she pursues a harassment complaint via the police.
I agree she’s not a Nazi.
She is an anti-democrat knowingly supporting the rule of Britain by 28 unelected bureaucrats, many of whom are (and their predecessors have been) corrupt. We have no way of getting rid of them.
> some of whom were present at the ‘Bookmarks’ incident
By this is meant the ludicrous and wrong invasion of the socialist bookshop on August 4, 2018.
Three then members of UKIP took part in it.
Two of these members were swiftly expelled as a result of their participation. I made damned sure one of them was. The bookshop is in my patch. We don’t fight bookshops. Nazis and fascists do.
The third member, who was, from the video, visibly in a daze on the day, did nothing other than enter the bookshop with the second group and then immediately leave it when the manager (rightly and sensibly) told the lot of them to leave, This member too was (immediately) suspended from UKIP, but was eventually allowed back, given he didn’t break the law or behave badly, but was in the wrong place at the wrong time in the wrong company.
BUT
BUT
BUT
None of these three people were in the group allegedly harassing Soubry.
No UKIP member was in the group allegedly harassing Soubry.
Why are you flogging this, Kevin?
And what about your own connection to Adolf Hitler? It too is tenuous but it does exist. I’d guess your Hitler Number is 7 or less!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erd%C5%91s_number
You are loosing your subtely, Kevin. I’m tempted to increase the odds I’ll offer to a Knight. ;–)
loosing? I typed “losing”. My PC is infected.
I don’t think that having a photograph taken with someone at a public rally is evidence of ‘strong connections’ to GB or TR. A whole group of squaddies had their photo taken with TR. And even if someone is a member of UKIP why should the party react. Do other political parties issue condemnation if one of their members is behaving badly or even convicted of a crime? If that were so the Labour Party would be issuing numerous statements; so many members have been found guilty of chid/sex offences.
Thank goodness Jacob Rees-Mogg dealt with his harassment in a sensible, calm and pleasant way, instead of reacting in a shrill and frankly theatrical manner.
Quite so, Judith.
With Kevin’s assistance, I hope to document Kevin’s shameful connection to ADOLF HITLER, arguably the greatest villain of the last century or millennium, whose mania led to fifty-plus million deaths!
The question is only whether Kevin will co-operate.
For guilt only or mainly by connection or association is weak indeed.
I take great care about being photograph “with” certain people, because I know how the smearing is accomplished. I got out of a photo of a group of kippers waylaid by Britain First on Rochester High Street in 2014 (the Mark Reckless election).
Soubry is an opportunist politician. She was grinning while being allegedly harassed. Could it have been for the cameras (putting on a brave face and all that) or was it because she was already planning how she would use the incident?
My sympathy for delicate dahlink Finger-Bum Soubry is limited. My sympathy for the hotheads who tackled her this way is even more limited.
Farage and Rees Mog have both been threatened along with their families.
Nothing done about that either.
These MPs clamour for extra security whilst letting returning jihadis into the country. What about the rest of us?
Quite. MPs appear to be narcissists unable to see beyond their self-image. Every time they put their self-serving hysterical nonsense on display they alienate more voters. The remarkable thing is that no-one laid a finger on her. Credit where credit is due surely.
Two entirely different issues. MPs, especially after the Jo Cox incident, DO need special protection. The Soubry incident was initiated by individuals who have been filmed making threats to the police and making racist comments. One of them is known to be a ‘high spectrum autistic’, violent and mentally unstable.
His parents said so.
Do we forget who killed Jo Cox and why ???
Unstable individuals are dangerous security threats – especially when within 6 feet of politicians .
ALL those who mobbed Soubry ( and Owen Jones AND the highly respected journalist Kay Burley ) have associations within UKIP and some have been on platforms with TR and Gerard. That is not ‘fake news’ , its fact. Whether Tommy’s quasi- Brownshirt mob or indeed any reader sympathetic to these morons here doesn’t like these politicians or journalists is totally irrelevant . NO ONE can be legitimately harassed or attacked like this.
NO EXCUSES.
I have warned MANY times on this site the dangers of association with these people and others in the same circles.
UKIP must immediately grow up or collapse.
This morning Paul Oakley Tweeted Gerard’s defence that he ‘did not know’ James Goddard. But then, on Victoria Derbyshire, stated ‘ their (the attackers ) feet will not touch the ground if they are members of UKIP ‘
Slightly confusing no?
Why then did Gerard share the same platform with Goddard at the TR rally and have a photograph taken with him ? Goddard is a friend of ‘Danny Tommo’ ( filmed hugging him at the same demo ) AND ‘Tommy Robinson’ .
He slept with dogs- he’s caught fleas.
Apply some flea powder.
Let’s face it. Gerard made a big cock- up associating with these idiots and the press – and Parliament- will not back away now.
Can you tell me of any remark that TR has made that is factually inaccurate?
….go on Kevin, Harold is waiting !
Ah Jeff ! Happy New Year Sir ! I hope you are well.
Nope… I’m not debating TR, we have to concentrate on Brexit. I do agree though with your earlier comment that suggests half these brain-donor protesters are just along for the sh*ts and giggles.
Thats why we should be rid of them.
Freddy’s comments that they have nothing to do with UKIP are b*llocks of course.
It’s a shame though that Tommy’s Brownshirts exploit a simpleton ( Red Cap Boy Max ) who has all sorts of emotional problems and that they attack middle aged women who can’t retaliate rather than male Remainer MP’s who might respond with a John Prescott style punch to the mouth.
I’m not interested in debating TR on this site. He’s not a member. I’m interested in making sure the party cuts him and his criminal associates off otherwise UKIP is dead.
24 hours and ticking after the Soubry incident it appears that the leadership, by not cutting them off, are condoning their behaviour.
If you’re not interested in debating Tommy on this site then quit keeping banging on and on about him man!
Some on this site would agree with your opinions but there appear to be far more who actually don’t. You’re the one who’s obsessed with TR, not the party leader.
As Harold A says, find one single inaccurate quote from Tommy.
Clearly now is not the time to associate with TR but that time will come once we are free from the EU.
In response to your very LONG comment Kevin, I totally disagree with you and totally agree with Rob Pearce
So do I, Barbara.