Next week there is a by-election in the Norwich North seat, triggered by the resignation of Labour MP Ian Gibson after he was deselected over his expenses claims. The views of one of the 12 candidates – the Green Party’s Rupert Read – have been discussed feverishly at Harry’s Place this week at the foot of fellow Green Party member Peter Tatchell’s enthusiastic endorsement of Read.
To be clear, Read disputes some of the views and behaviour that have been attributed to him in the comments on Harry’s Place.
But he cannot deny that just days after the July 7 bombings, as the bereaved were still burying their loved ones, he wrote in The Independent that “we in Britain have quite simply had this coming”, nor that he made a similar comment about the Madrid bombing. There can also be no denying that he has a history of unpleasant views on terrorism, an obsessive, aggressive focus on Israel and made a very dodgy allusion to the Nazi holocaust.
The normally courageous Peter Tatchell refuses to withdraw his support from Read in the light of this week’s revelations. It’s such a shame. Is Tatchell ignoring Read’s views out of sheer ambition…or something worse?
Earlier this year, Tatchell repeated the libel that Israel ‘indiscriminately’ bombed Gaza during Operation Cast Lead, a propaganda claim that has been expertly disproved. Tatchell also repeated his call for a boycott of the Jewish state, an agenda he has been pushing for decades.
Admirably, he has often demonstrated against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s oppression of the Iranian people. However, in relation to Israel he ludicrously described Ahmadinejad as “progressive” and “basically right” to say that “the key to peace in the Middle East is concessions from the occupying power”[Israel]. Wondering why the media was ignoring this, Tatchell suggested a “pro-Israel agenda” as one explanation.
He was a founding member of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, whose logo is a map of ‘Palestine’ with Israel eradicated. Just months ago he expressed his sympathy for “a one-state solution – a unified democratic, secular state of Palestine-Israel”, the clear effect of which would be that the Jewish people would lose statehood forever.
There is a history of antisemitism, conspiracy theory and homophobia among Green Party parliamentary candidates. One former Green Party parliamentary candidate left the Party to join the BNP. Across Europe, the Greens have associations with the far-right.
Tatchell’s track-record on Israel is disagreeable to say the least, but there’s so much to admire about him. It’s a shame he endorses a man like Read and supports a party like the Greens.
Be active. If you like this post, please click below to show your support.
Kemp is very interesting on the idea of ‘indiscriminate’ strikes in Gaza. He is very convincing on the matter
The statistics also reveal the lie behind Tatchell’s accusation:
The deaths were not indiscriminate: in Gaza, males over the age of 15 make up 25% of the population, but they made up over 74% of the fatalities, so Israel was actually very accurate at pinpointing the right targets. Also the distinction between children and adults, civilians and terrorists, are not always clear: Hamas will use males under 18 as front line fighters and terror operatives.
Have you seen this Chas?
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443834129&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
‘Shovrim Shtika’ (Breaking the Silence) funded by UK embassy…?!?
You accuse Peter of being anti-Jewish; Palestine people accuse him of being a Mossad spy. He’s obviously doing something right, innit!
I am absolutely not accusing him of that, Jim.
I love the idea that by pissing off both sides of an argument, you can conclude that someone is doing something right! How interesting!
As far as I’m aware, Peter’s prefered solution is a hypothetic one-state solution. However, it’s hypothetical in the sense that he believes that the best thing would be for Israelis and Palestinians to put aside their differences and form one single secular liberal state. He recognises though that it’s down to both sides to agree to such a thing, and that it shouldn’t be forced – and that in the meantime, leftists should support those on both sides who campaign in favour of a two-state solution.
While his rhetoric might be a touch off at times, unlike many on his side of the political spectrum (esp. given how far left he is), he has no time for Hamas at all.
Wow he ‘has no time at Hamas at all.’ What does he want a medal?
Look at him on Harry Place yesterday, arrogantly telling Jews who they are and aren’t allowed to consider anti-semitic.
Sorry Chaz but Tatchell is an asshole.
How many decades does someone have to push for a boycott of Israel before their rhetoric becomes more than “a touch off at times”?
Shmuel I agree with you that his comment about antisemitism on Harry’s Place was patronising and arrogant.
You seen this ‘Jews control media’ crap? http://www.greenparty.org.uk/mediacentre/releases/2009-01-19-pressbias.html
What the hell is up with the guy. In Gaza his life, if he was allowed one would be miserable beyond belief. In Tel-Aviv he would be free, to march, to go to any bar he wished. Make your mind up Peter, Islamofacism or Social Democracy.
Exactly why I would never vote Green. Do you know that Hitler was a vegetarian? You’ve got to laugh.
I’ll remember this next time Thatchell or any Green asks for my vote
AND as you say, Greens have a tradition of kooks, loons, Jew-bashers and their ilk: Green party last refuge of the failed bigot.