Harry's Place

“a dangerous driving incident in which a man was killed” – well up to a point Lord Copper. Lord Ahmed was convicted of dangerous driving because he was sending texts while driving at 60mph, but his dangerous driving was unconnected to the crash in which Martyn Gombar died. Gombar’s car was immobile in the outside (’fast’) lane and there was no warning of any obstacle ahead; even the most alert driver would have been lucky to avoid a collision. I think it’s important to be clear about this as the wording above could be taken to imply a connection.

I have added gloss to that effect.

David – has this ex-convict been allowed back into the Labour Party, or is there some error here?

Can you find out?

Going on about Lord Ahmed texting while he was driving is pathetic and counter-productive, particularly calling him ‘ex-convict’ and the like.

Far better to focus on his obvious Islamism and threats of ‘angry responses’ from the Pakistani and Kashmiri communities, not a million miles away from his reported threat to send 40,000 muslims on parliament if Geert Wilders was allowed to come and make a speech there.

“I would strongly urge the Government to distance themselves from Mr Musharraf and his political ambitions here as I firmly believe that any perceived promotion or assistance of his activities here may have an adverse impact on community cohesion within the United Kingdom.”

Is this another barely-concealed threat? The greater risk to “community cohesion” seems to come from peers and councillors far more interested in the politics of a country on the other side of the world than their own. That, I suppose, is multiculturalism (with the attendant refusal to assimilate or truly adopt your host nation).

B

The implication is clear: Angry Muslims will cause disturbances if Musharraf is allowed to stay in the UK. This is nothing short of intimidation.

Lucy

Something else you may not know – are u following the comments thread on the post you made about Garlasco (of HRH and The Guardian fame)

there is now a link to a thread where he wears a rather dubious sweater and also (allegedly) makes comments such as this:

“That is so cool! The leather SS jacket makes my blood go cold it is so COOL! ”

And HRH are happy with this? Do the good liberal folk at The Guardian know?

MattG

Of course it’s a threat, and it appears our current government’s policy is to reward such threats with peerages, seats on panels and substantial quantities of hard cash.

So a general, nototrious for human rights abuses, who took over the country in a coup, is living in London with security provided by the Home Office, and the story and commentators here have a go about Muslims. Muslims protesting about a human rights abuser! Sick.

Musharriaf’s living round the corner from that other celebrated war criminal Tony Bliar by all accounts.

“Going on about Lord Ahmed texting while he was driving is pathetic and counter-productive, particularly calling him ‘ex-convict’ and the like.”

Wasn’t his conviction the reason he was expelled from the Labour Party?

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=106767
@9 Flak88 says: “That is so cool! The leather SS jacket makes my blood go cold it is so COOL! ”

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1113728.html

Hello Suffolk Booy

Got the haaarvest in yet ?

If Lord Ahmed and and his entire tribe were herded off Beachy Head and told to swim to the beach at Karachi THAT would be a major contribution to community cohesion.

“Going on about Lord Ahmed texting while he was driving is pathetic and counter-productive, particularly calling him ‘ex-convict’ and the like.

Far better to focus on his obvious Islamism and threats of ‘angry responses’ from the Pakistani and Kashmiri communities…”

Can’t we do both?

Texting while driving is hardly crime of the century and there was a lot of confusion at the time with many people believing that he had been texting when the crash happened, which was not the case.

The conviction may have been the reason he was expelled from the party, but I think the word ‘pretext’ is more appropriate.

I’m sure we all know people who have texted while driving, whereas we probably don’t know people who use the threat of violence as a political lever.

Could I just point out that my own flat is in the small area between General Musharraf and Tony Blair? Although I am much closer to Tony Blair.

I’ve a feeling Benazir Bhutto also lived around here during her time living in Britain, incidentally.

Does anybody know whether he is a member of the Labour Party again?

How can we find out?

Call ‘em?

The House of Lords website says “yes”

http://www.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/mps_and_lords/alphabetical_list_of_members.cfm

(well, at least if affiliation to the Labour group in the House of Lords is equated with membership of the party. I don’t know if that is the case or not)

I’m not sure peers can currently be thrown out of the lords,so he’d still be listed as ‘labour lord’ even though he may have been thrown out of the party.

I think both main parties were considerin g passing measures so that peers can be thrown out, in the wake of the ‘peers for hire’ scandal.

Hmmm. I know the case is not identical (both in regards of citizenship and, erm, president place of residence) but Conrad Black is shown as “other”, whereas I’m fairly sure he was formerly a Conservative peer

The whip could be withdrawn.

“Texting while driving is hardly crime of the century ”

You mean, taking your eyes completely off the road ahead and concentrating solely on something other than propelling your ton or so of vehicle at high speeds on a road shared by many others, including more vulnerable people such as cyclists and pedestrians, is a trivial offence?

You must be nuts!

Both the House of Lords website and the Labour Party website list Lord Ahmed as a Labour peer so it seems fairly clear that he is in receipt of the Labour Party whip. I don’t personally see a problem with that.

Is Lord Archer still a Tory Peer?

He has been imprisoned FFS!

(Plus, he’s a nut)

No, David, he’s “other”, too.

Look:

http://www.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/mps_and_lords/alphabetical_list_of_members.cfm

Are there any Lords who have been imprisoned, who have been re-admitted to their party and had the Whip restored to them?

Lord Kagan returned to the Labour benches immediately after leaving prison.

The last member of the House of Lords to be tried by his Peers was over manslaughter which would probably have been a charge of causing death by dangerous driving had that offence existed. Lord de Clifford was found not guilty.

I didn’t say it was trivial expat, what I said was it isn’t crime of the century.

Of all the charges that can be laid against Lord Ahmed’s door, text-driving is probably the most trivial. The fact people seized on it and apparently wanted to believe that his dangerous driving caused the death of Gombar is one example of ‘anti-muslim bigotry’ that does stand up.

Attack him for thinly veiled threats and intimidation, or his failure to uphold the principle of freedom of speech, accuse him of working to an Islamist agenda and/or indulging in tribal politics, but going on about him sending a text while driving seems silly – to me at any rate.

Thanks David

As always, a mine of useful political information!

qo’bblers is talking cobblers. I don’t think causing anyone death for whatever reason is trivial. Does he text while driving? If not, why not? I wouldn’t say it was anti-muslim bigotry to take an interest in this aspect of Lord Ahmed’s driving, I would say it was anti-social to do it.

SueR,

The death and the text-driving were unrelated.

It’s a great shame that Lord Ahmed cares a lot less about the feelings of the Jewish community in the UK. From Stephen Pollard’s blog back in 2005:

‘On February 23, Lord Ahmed hosted a book launch in the House of Lords for a man going by the name of Israel Shamir. “Israel Shamir” is, in fact, a Swedish-domiciled anti-Semite also known as Jöran Jermas.

The gist of Shamir/Jermas’s speech at the meeting can be gleaned from its title, “Jews and the Empire”. It included observations such as: “All the (political) parties are Zionist-infiltrated.” “Your newspapers belong to Zionists . . . Jews indeed own, control and edit a big share of mass media, this mainstay of Imperial thinking.” “In the Middle East we have just one reason for wars, terror and trouble — and that is Jewish supremacy drive . . . in Iraq, the US and its British dependency continue the same old fight for ensuring Jewish supremacy in the Middle East.” “The Jews like an Empire . . . This love of Empire explains the easiness Jews change their allegiance . . . Simple minds call it ‘treacherous behaviour’, but it is actually love of Empire per se.” “Now, there is a large and thriving Muslim community in England . . . they are now on the side of freedom, against the Empire, and they are not afraid of enforcers of Judaic values, Jewish or Gentile. This community is very important in order to turn the tide.” ‘

Pollard adds the following:

‘If, however, Lord Ahmed does feel that he made a mistake in inviting him, he has yet to demonstrate it. Shamir/Jermas’s speech was made nearly two months ago. On learning of its contents, I wrote to Lord Ahmed, asking him two questions. Did he consider the invitation to have been a mistake? Did he condemn the remarks? He did not reply.

Yesterday, I phoned him. When I told him that I planned to write a piece drawing attention to his actions in hosting Shamir/Jermas and that I wanted to give him every opportunity to respond, he replied: “I am not even going to speak with you.” He then put the phone down.’

http://www.stephenpollard.net/002084.html

In January of this year, David T wrote this about the same incident:

‘Although Lord Ahmed’s co-operation with this extreme racist was widely reported, he did nothing to distance himself from “Israel Shamir”.

There were no meetings with whips or leaders.

There were no demonstrations.

The meeting was not cancelled.’

http://tinyurl.com/c5jk4s

Ahmed only cares about ‘community cohesion’ when it suits him. It is his pathetically thinly disguised way of threatening to whip up mass (probably violent) rebellion to whatever it is he disagrees with. As shown with the Pollard article, he is not in the least bit bothered about offending British Jews, possibly because we’re not in the habit of carrying out violent or extremist popular rebellion to such things.

“Texting while driving is hardly crime of the century ”
This is why loads of Pakistanis are run down like dogs everyday in Pakistan. If Gordon Brown killed a person on the road to Islamabad the crowd would gather kick him and beat him with rocks until the brains spilled out1