Vile right-wing cretins campaigning to sack (or murder) a man for telling the truth
OK - here's a post from Bonni the Holocaust denier at BareNakedIslam that begs a response on so many levels.
Point one, Councillor Aftab Hussain did not "support nine Muslim paedophiles". He gave a character witness for ONE of them (Abdul Qayyum) as this report makes very clear. But then we;re used to Bonni's lying about the stories she posts.
Point two, he has since said (see report linked above) that providing the reference was an error of judgement.
Point three, since when was providing a character reference for someone on trial "standing against" their alleged victim? I have personaally known someone very well who went on trial for manslaughter. I wasn't asked to provide a character statement for him but would have had no hesitation in doing so. Would that have been "standing against" his victim, whom I think I met once and couldn't claim to know at all? To say that someone's crime was out of character, not at all what one would have expected, is not to say that it wasn't committed, or that it doesn't deserve to be punished. It's exactly what it says on the tin: a character reference. If you are one of those weirdos who believe that a paedophile is just that, and only that - a label, not a person - then I think you're as much of a danger to society as any paedophile.
Councillor Hussain said "I provided the reference in good faith as I had known him for a number of years and as far as I was aware he was of good character. People are innocent until proven guilty and I had no reason not to provide the reference. However I would like to sincerely apologise for my serious error of judgement. The disgraceful behaviour of these men who have inflicted this abuse is despicable and I find it abhorrent. I now deeply regret that I became involved and I am as appalled by this case as everyone else. I welcome the verdict, I praise the courage of the young women and I fully support the work of all the agencies involved to tackle this abuse and swiftly bring offenders to justice."
Personally I don't see why he should regret in the least that he gave the reference. He said what he knew to be true: that the guy was a good man. If the skeletons emerging from Sir Jimmy Savile's closet demonstrate anything, it's that (seemingly) good men can do bad things. There must be thousands of people who have praised Savile over the years. Should they now all be beating their breasts and wailing that it was a dreadful error of judgement even though they had no idea that he was (as it appears) a child molestor? Of course not. You have to judge people by what you know of them.
Point Four - why is Bonni picking up on this story now when the trial was five minths ago? Is it to distract attention from this American Christian supporter of child abuse?
Point Five: Bonni has linked to Labour25.com, a British vigilante site which posts allegations of paedophilia against members of the British Labour Party. In this case, despite there being no suggestion of any kind that Councillor Hussain has ever indulged in or supported any kind of child abuse, they have kindly published his photograph, home address and telephone number. Because that's the kind of scum they are. So far Bonni has one commenter who calls for the councillor to be beaten to death.
As I typed the title of this post I was reminded of this exchange from The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938), starring Errol Flynn.
Robin of Locksley: Come now, Sir Guy, you wouldn't kill a man for speaking the truth, would you?
Guy of Gisborne: If it amused me, yes.
Locksley: Be thankful my humour's of a different sort.
These vigilante types should watch their backs: Britain doesn't like their kind, and never has. (Of course, most likely the people who run the vile Labour25 site are based somewhere well away from Britain, just like Bonni: somewhere where their smears and calls for murder will go unpunished. "Patriots" my arse.)