Monday, 29 May 2017
This Man Is Unfit to be Prime Minister
Remember when Chauncey first won the leadership of his party? When he was going to be the new face of politics? When he was going to be honest and straightforward? Last Friday Chauncey gave an interview to the BBC's Andrew Neil in which he repeatedly refused to answer straightforward questions about his policies and in which he told straightforward lies about his past connections to terrorists.
Chauncey told Neil that he never met the IRA. As Guido detailed this was as bare faced a lie as anything told by Donald Trump, infact worse because here we are talking about a man who would be PM denying that he has consorted with and applauded convicted murderers. Not only did he meet them, he invited them to Parliament. And we're not talking about Sinn Fein here, we are talking about convicted terrorists. Gerard McLoughlin not only met Chauncey, he was a friend of his.
In 2000 he shared a platform with Brendan McKenna who was jailed for bombing a British Legion hall. In 2005 he shared a platform with Raymond McCartney, a member of the IRA. In 2007 he spoke on the same programme as Martina Anderson, jailed for plotting bombing attacks around the UK. In 2009 he attended a dinner hosted by Sinn Fein at which various IRA murderers were in attendance. In 2011 he attended an event commemorating the hunger strikers at which Brendan McFarlane was in attendance. McFarlane was convicted of 4 civilians in a pub bombing.
Also on Friday Chauncey gave a speech in which he tried once more to claim that it is this country's foreign policy that is responsible for terrorism. This is arrant nonsense. The Iraq War happened after 9/11. But we are hated much more to do with our values and tolerance than anything to do with policy. Islamists have declared war on us because they simply don't like us. It is racism, or as the left would call it, westernphobia.
The maniacs of ISIL are quite open about this. They don't claim that they are trying to kill us because of foreign policy. They are trying to kill us because they are waging a war against our way of life and our unwillingness to believe what they tell us we should believe. And that is not just Christians or Jews, Hindus, Sikhs or a multitude of faiths or none. It includes Muslims who are not as fervent or simply bovine as they. If you do not believe in their version of their imaginary friend, in their literalist interpretation of their book of infantile, demonstrably false assertions and lame philosophy a child of 8 could see through, then they hate you and want to kill you or torture you until you convert. They cut off the head of David Haines, the aid worker, despite his being there, with Muslims, to help Muslims. That is not a sect of people with whom we can talk and seek accommodation.
Yet Chauncey has spent his entire career believing that the world would be a fairer and nicer and more peaceful place if only Britain and our key allies were less willing to defend ourselves, less assertive in standing up for our values. His position is contradictory and hypocritical. He defended any and all IRA crimes but held British troops and police to completely different standards. He opposes NATO, a defensive organisation created to protect us from the expansionist policies of the Soviet Union. He opposes our nuclear weapons despite the fact that they have demonstrably prevented a terrifying and likely existential war. We cannot uninvent nuclear weapons and so disarmament is a fantasy unless and until technology renders them obsolete. If and when it does war would suddenly become more likely again. The world wars of the 20th century happened because dictators and fascists imagined that they were winnable.
Of course the great irony of the act that Chauncey has perfected these last few months is that this man of reason and soft spoken reasonableness has spent his entire life being the opposite of reasonable. He says we need to talk to and negotiate with terrorists but he has never been willing to compromise on anything his entire life. The reason he is getting into such trouble over the IRA issue is that he was utterly unwilling to compromise. He wanted victory for the IRA in the form of British withdrawal from Northern Ireland and thus the 'defeat' of the British army. In the end the IRA disarmed and Sinn Fein negotiated because they were on the point of defeat. That's why Chauncey and his friends voted against the Good Friday Agreement. Why would a man so keen on peace and negotiation and compromise do such a thing? For Chauncey compromise is a one way street, we should do it and our enemies would gleefully accept it.
This is a pattern he has followed repeatedly and is following now. No compromise or negotiation is possible with Israel in this worldview. He does not call for Russia to disband its armies of conquest or leave their aggressively won territory. But, as he admitted again this weekend, is still opposed to NATO and all that it stands for. Yet NATO keeps the peace and is the only reason why Putin has stayed out of the Baltic states Russia regards as its own. Where does Chauncey stand on that by the way? Does he recognise the notion of Russia's sphere of interest? Does it have a right to one against the will of the people who live there? Would he abolish the Baltic states, parts or all of Poland, Finland to keep the peace?
Not that we can expect Chauncey to be honest about this anyway. He went through endless contortions not to answer questions last Friday and will try to do so all the way to the election. But then this is a man who cannot even compromise with his own party. It is the settled policy of Labour to retain Trident. Yet Chauncey has said time and again he remains opposed to nuclear weapons and would refuse to use them if called upon to do so as PM. So much for the man of compromise and democracy. In the event this country elects Chauncey or, more likely, we have him imposed on us by coalition with the SNP and others, he would risk our security in addition to our jobs and prosperity. He is a liar and a quisling, a traitor who hates this country who is willing to decimate it and reduce it to a hollowed out husk all on the altar of his petty obsessions and inability to compromise on anything.
Anyone casting a vote for this softly spoken maniac does so risking a catastrophe for us all. He is unfit to hold office. His party should be ashamed that they allowed such a man to stay in their party all these years. That he is now potentially only a few days from taking power should mean they hang their heads in shame. Many are refusing to put him on their election literature, pretending he is nothing to do with them. In truth he is everything to do with them, a party that has lost its moral compass and any right to govern.