Skip to main content

Sad death of 100th Service person in Iraq


John Hemming MP together with Lorely Burt MP, John Barrett MP, John Leech MP and Richard Ross MP attended the vigil in memory of the deaths of 100 British Servicemen and Women at 5pm on Tuesday 31st January 2006.

The Liberal Democrat MPs shared in the reading out of the names of the servicepeople who had died.

John Hemming MP said, "The government have a key responsibility for the lives of our service people. They need to recognise that there is no good reason for keeping our boys and girls as military targets in Iraq. Work should commence for their return to the UK."

"This war was a mistake. The continued occupation is also a mistake."

"We do recognise that in theory we could have been arrested for reading the names of the service people. However, it is important that MPs stand up for free speech and the right for people to have their voice heard."

Lorely Burt MP said, "Our hearts go out to the families of the service people who have been killed in Iraq. We only hope that there will be no more tragedies as happened today."

Comments

TonyF said…
Who were the Labour and Tory MPs there?
Richard Gadsden said…
Uh, John, probably not 31st March...
TonyF said…
However, it is important that MPs stand up for free speech and the right for people to have their voice heard."

That's not what you said when you had me and my wife expelled from the party!
John Hemming said…
I did not see any Labour or Tory MPs there.

Secondly, I did not move to have Tony Foley expelled from the Lib Dems.

Thirdly, if you are a member of a political party then you cannot campaign against that party. There is a limited extent to which the party can be criticised and as soon as people say "don't vote for this candidate" they are going beyond that limit. That is not a constraint on free speech it is a constraint on membership of a political party.
TonyF said…
The words were 'refuse to support the candidate'.
You know, the same words you used with Charles Kennedy.
John Hemming said…
There is a difference between quietly not doing anything and running an Evening Mail press story about ripping up membership cards.

A story which might (given that it was reprinted by Labour and delivered across the constituency) have resulted in us losing the by-election.
TonyF said…
I don't recall ripping up membership cards or anything in the paper about it.

As for quietly not doing anything, you were in the Evening Mail say you would not support Kennedy.

I'd say the bully boy tactics used on a middle aged woman who wanted to speak to Kennedy in the By Election had more to do with Nokia losing the election.
John Hemming said…
I have since found the article. In fact you were ripping up a party poster.

It says "City Liberal Democract activists have withdrawn their support for candidate ..."

It has a photo of you and Maxine tearing up a poster.

That is publicly campaigning against a candidate.

It is not the same as not supporting someone in an internal party election.
TonyF said…
Publicly campaigning against a candidate?

Why not print on here the actual words John.

Liberal Democrats in Birmingham were campaigning against the siting of mobile phone masts near schools. Nichola Davies was and still is a member of the Mobile Phone Operators association. She was responsible for the siting of a phone mast next to a school in Boldmere, Sutton Coldfield. To support her would be Hypocricy. There was no mention of a campaign against her. But then, the rest of you supported her, didn't you?
So who kept to their beliefs and who was the Hypocrite?

I now refer you back to 'free speech and voices must be heard'

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England.

The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity.

The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back.

This is an issue that needs further work.

In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.

Problems with Outlook Express - emails lost dbx corruption

In the light of the enthusiasm shown for my post relating to the OCX control that must not be named (and probably Microsoft's most embarrassing error of recent years) I thought I would write someting about Outlook Express.

Outlook Express is the email client that comes as part of windows. I use it myself, although I have my emails filtered through a spam filter of my own devising written in java. It takes email off a number of servers using POP3 (Post Office Protocol TCP Port 110) and sends it using SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol port 25).

I have recently spent a few hours dealing with the problem that arises when .dbx files get corrupted during compacting.

Outlook Express (OE) stores the emails (and other things) in files with the suffix .dbx. Each folder has its own .dbx file. They are stored in hidden directories. This makes it harder to deal with things when OE goes wrong.

It is very important to back up your stored *.dbx files as otherwise if you have a disk crash/stol…

Statement re False Allegations Campaign

Many people will know that my family and I have been subject to a campaign of false allegations by Esther Baker for the past 4 1/2 years. Yesterday there was a court judgment Baker v Hemming [2019] EWHC 2950 (QB) which formally confirmed that the allegations were false. Esther Baker, who had brought a libel claim against me, dropped her defence of Truth to my counter-claim and was taken by the judge as no longer trying to prove her allegations. Due to Baker's various breaches of court rules and orders, she has been barred from further repeating her allegations even in the court proceedings. Further claim of mine in libel against Baker are ongoing. There is a good summary in the Daily Mail here.

This demonstrates the challenge in fighting false allegations in today's Britain. A substantial campaign was built up to promote allegations which had no substance to them. Various Labour MPs and in pa…