RUPA HUQ UNFIT FOR PUBLIC OFFICE
Unfit for office for many reasons.When asked to condemn a landlord who had tenants living in filth and fire-hazard for years and the council officer who perversely reappointed him as fit to preside over an HMO, Rupa Huq failed to respond. She put protecting the reputation of the local Labour council above care for the safety of her constituents.She has failed to respond to representations from constituents whose lives are being made a misery by a gang of Ukrainians who conduct a trading activity outside their homes and threaten and attack residents, all this occurring due to the negligence of Ealing Council. She defended the anti-semitic posts of Naz Shah. All she could say in her own defence was that she was naïve. She is over forty and supposedly well-educated. I want something better than “naïve” for my MP, especially when it leads to defending anti-semitic obscenities such as saying “everything Hitler did was legal” and suggesting the SOLUTION (sinister word) for the Israel/Palestinian problem was relocating Israel in the USA. When asked to condemn Shah’s post and condemn her for anti-semitism, she ignored the correspondence. She failed to condemn. She condoned. She is as bad as Shah. When asked to condemn the violent language of Jess Phillips, who wrote she would knife Jeremy Corbyn “in the front, not the back” if it looked like he was damaging the party’s chances of electoral success, she failed to respond to the correspondence. She failed to condemn the words. She condoned them. She is as bad as Phillips. When asked to condemn Shah, who shared a tweet saying child abuse victims “should keep their mouths shut” for the sake of Diversity and next posted a tribute to Winnie Mandela with a “meme” which promoted murdering people by putting a tyre round their necks and burning them to death, she failed to respond to the correspondence. She failed to condemn the words. She condoned them. She is as bad as Shah. She defended the use of halal slaughter, condemned by the RSPCA, and did so in total ignorance of scientific evidence. She condemned as racists a group of people of whom she knew nothing for no other reason than that they opposed it according to their own moral values. She was intolerant of other people’s beliefs. The accusation was unfounded and defamatory. She was accused of anti-semitic behaviour by staff. The supposed investigation was held in secret. When asked for a transcript of the proceedings, her representative made the idiotic excuse that it could not be released because it would undermine the independence of the investigation. How could a report of an investigation affect its independence once it has been concluded! She also misrepresented the verdict of “insufficient evidence” and declared Huq had been completely exonerated. A vote for Huq is a vote for tolerance of anti-semitic hate-speech and violent language by MPs and unfounded accusations against people who happen to disagree with Islamic practices. It is a vote for indifference to the conditions in which people in HMOs are obliged to live. And, if you have hope that Labour Party concern for the humane treatment of animals will lead to banning unstunned slaughter, I think you know how Huq would vote. Carry on slitting the throats of the lambs of God! When you vote, vote for whomsoever you judge best placed to rid us of the shame of having Huq as our MP.
Andrew Farmer ● 1967d1 Comments