Cath Elliot, the mover of the resolution that sought to "No Platform" "Rape Deniers" has written a very useful and informative piece at her website ( http://toomuchtosayformyself.com/ ). In this she says:
At the same time the SWP Professor is assembling his cult followers are preparing a "redoubt" at the "Special" SWP Party conference in which they also show that they have learnt no lessons from their crass, if not criminal behaviour in dealing with a serious allegation of sexual assault. Their motion to the meeting states:
We therefore condemn the actions of those members who have circumvented these principles by campaigning to overturn conference decisions outside the structures of the party, using blogs and the bourgeois media. Many of these contributions have been characterised by the use of slurs, abuse and un-comradely language that seem designed to stop serious debate and make joint work impossible, as well as damaging the party’s reputation.
The debates inside the party have been fuelled by the outcome of the Disputes Committee report to conference. This Special Conference affirms its belief in the integrity of the comrades on the DC and of the investigation they conducted. We note the DC was re-elected without challenge at the January 2013 conference. The DC report was approved by conference and the case concerned must be regarded as closed. This means that both comrades involved in the case are members in good standing, with the right to engage in political activity as party members.
Full Motion at: http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/online-only/swp-central-committee-motion-to-special-conference
Not a hint of contrition or shame.
The Prof is obviously getting more deranged in his panic as he continues to wheel out the "first family" of Troskyism in support of his claim to the "SWP silver" The opposition under Richard "I swallowed a dictionary" Seymour is not only in the minority but is clearly foundering by failing to understand how vicious and brutal the SWP leadership is becoming. Seymour and his followers appear to be trying to compromise with the Prof, but comments made by his supporters indicate that the "oppositionists" are heading for the
The motion moved at Unison conference makes reference to George Galloway and Cath Elliot ends her blog with the video of his storming out of the Oxford students debate.
The on-line Oxford students magazine Cherwell.org writes:
George Galloway, the Respect MP for Bradford West, has been accused by Oxford students of anti-Semitism.
Mr Galloway “stormed out” of a debate at Christ Church on Wednesday evening, upon finding out that his opponent, Eylon Aslan-Levy, a third-year PPEist at Brasenose, was an Israeli citizen.
After arriving to the debate two hours late, Mr Galloway had spoken for ten minutes in favour of the motion ‘Israel should withdraw immediately from the West Bank’, before giving way to Aslan-Levy.
Less than three minutes into Aslan-Levy’s speech against the motion, Galloway was made aware that his opponent was an Israeli citizen.
“I have been misled,” Mr Galloway then commented, interrupting Aslan-Levy’s speech. “I don’t debate with Israelis”. He then left the room with his wife, Putri Gayatri Pertiwi, as some members of the audience shouted out, “racist!” He was then escorted out of Christ Church by a college porter. When prompted to explain why Aslan-Levy’s nationality prompted him to abandon the debate, Galloway stated that “I don’t recognise Israel.”
In a statement late on Wednesday evening Galloway explained that “I refused this evening to debate with an Israeli, a supporter of the Apartheid state of Israel.
“The reason is simple; No recognition, No normalisation. Just Boycott, divestment and sanctions, until the Apartheid state is defeated.” Mr Galloway is a leading political proponent of the campaign to ‘boycott’ Israeli goods, services and – it emerged on Wednesday – people.
After the debate Aslan-Levy said that “I am appalled that an MP would storm out of a debate with me for no reason other than my heritage.
“To refuse to talk to someone just because of their nationality is pure racism, and totally unacceptable for a member of parliament.”
Aslan-Levy later told the Daily Mail that “[Mr Galloway] clearly had a problem not because I am Israeli - I’m sure he would have talked to an Israeli Arab, he didn’t want to talk to me because I am an Israeli Jew.”
He argued that the Respect MP should discontinue his membership of the House of Commons. “I absolutely do not think someone with those kind of views should be allowed to continue as a Member of Parliament”, he said.
Mahmood Naji, the organiser of the debate, told Cherwell that he “condemned Mr Galloway’s walkout, on the basis of his opponent’s nationality.”
He went on to deny that he had “misled” the MP. “At no point during my email exchange with Mr Galloway’s secretary was Eylon’s nationality ever brought up or mentioned.” He added, “nor do I expect to have to tell the speaker what his opponent’s nationality is.”
Between them Galloway and the SWP are doing a good job of exposing what the far-left are really are.