| Topic: | Re:Reply | |
| Posted by: | Andrew Farmer | |
| Date/Time: | 22/05/19 13:16:00 |
| Let me clarify the different issues involved here. An earlier contributor, not I, suggested that Bell’s statement was inappropriate (not immoral). I agree. When a council leader speaks ex officio he should speak only about matters proper to his office, not international affairs. (The gross offender in this respect is Sadiq Khan.) My complaint was of the disparity between the responses. I did not say it was immoral. I said it was religiously discriminatory. The discrimination has not been made good and the offender, Bell, has failed to respond to my accusation. And, really Mr Southwell, your excuse for Bell that “in a white majority country there is a greater need to distance us all from an attack by a white man on another section of the community” will not do. What has “white” got to do with morality? In a borough that has a Christian community, I think a little sympathy for Christians slaughtered by Muslim terrorists would not be out of place. The main point in my post was the failure of Bell, having been asked, to apologise for the anti-semitism in the Labour Party. He has been reminded, but still has not responded. Bell is an avowed Christian. I hoped that the Sunday sacrament might have resulted in an accession of grace, but here was are and it’s Wednesday already. Perhaps he stayed at home and nibbled an unconsecrated digestive. I shall go on reminding him until the next local elections. I repeat: TO FAIL TO CONDEMN IS TO CONDONE. |