Why miserable Ken Livingstone lost – it wasn’t the Jews, it was him
KEN Livingstone has shuffled off the political stage to dedicate himself to his newts and his media career. So. Why did face ache lose? Anorak recalls draconian Ken telling Londoners not to flush the toilet for numbers 1s. It was Ken who told us: “There’s a real chance that human civilisation will not survive beyond the end of this century.” Ken is not all that keen on people. He told us that he planned to “educate the mass of Londoners” about Islam. Because without Ken, Londoners would be too stupid to investigate a religion for themselves. Ken is the joyless one who said in 2002, when he was mayor, “New Year’s Eve is not an event, it is a public order problem.”
And then there was his problem with the Jews. Hugh Muir looks at the matter in the Guardian:
How much damage did he inflict by failing to make peace with the Jewish political establishment, still sore over conflicts past: the insult to a Jewish reporter, the embrace of Muslim cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi? When in March he secretly met a group of senior figures who hoped to reach accommodation, why didn’t he make nice? Instead he upset some again by referring to the Israeli government as Zionists and implying that “rich” Jews wouldn’t vote for him anyway. “I can’t say words that I do not feel in my heart,” he once declared.
Do only Jews see a problem with Ken’s embrace of al-Qaradawi, a man who thinks the Nazis were a good idea and homosexuals are against God? A mn who told female suicide bombers the correct way to dress. In 2004 Qaradawi said:
Concerning the point on hijab, a woman can put on a hat or anything else to cover her hair. Even when necessary, she may take off her hijab in order to carry out the operation, for she is going to die in the cause of Allah and not to show off her beauty or uncover her hair. I don’t see any problem in her taking off hijab in this case.
“People are understanding that Ken Livingstone is in touch with ordinary Londoners and is going to fight for them.”