Skip to main content

Labour Candidate faces integrity test on Nukes slur

The Labour Candidate has recently claimed that John Hemming was campaigning for unilateral nuclear disarmament at the 2015 General Election. This has been done on twitter and this is what she has said:

She also seems to be confused between multilateral disarmament and unilateral disarmament.

The Lib Dem position in 2015 and now was one of keeping nuclear weapons, but having fewer of them. In a world with rogue nations such as North Korea we cannot throw away the nukes as Jeremy Corbyn would do. It was recently confirmed that even though many Labour MPs wish to keep the nuclear weapons, Jeremy Corbyn might still scrap them as PM.

John Hemming's view has been one wishing to see multilateral nuclear disarmament (where everyone in the world gives up having nuclear weapons), but of course with North Korea doing what they are doing this is not possible now and is unlikely to be possible for many years. He has not supported unilateral nuclear disarmament (where the UK throws away the nuclear weapons whilst everyone else keeps theirs).

The Labour Candidate relies on the fact that John Hemming was photographed with the three General Election Candidates from 2015 who supported unilateral disarmament to substantiate her case. In 2015 three of the candidates organised a joint stall in Acocks Green. John Hemming was in Acocks Green on the same day and took a photograph of the new Post Office.

He also discussed nuclear policy with those campaigning for unilateralism as is clear from this.

This tweet from Teval Stephens (one of the candidates) makes it clear that his view not one of unilateralism.

The notes from the hustings at South Yardley Library also make that clear.
So it is clear that what the Labour Candidate has said is untrue. This should have been obvious to anyone who read the twitter account of Teval Stephens (which is where her original tweet sources the image)

This is the integrity test for the Labour Candidate

Will she:
a) Say it was a mistake and retract it ... or
b) Leave it without any clarification so it becomes a lie?


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Six months for recording a court hearing - Norman Scarth

The link is in Russian about the imprisonment of Norman Scarth who is actually 85. He has a complex history including a court hearing which found that he used a chainsaw to fight off bailiffs when he was 75. [a court judgment which is disputed see comments] However, that does not justify imprisoning him for 6 months for recording a court hearing (see the link and ask google to translate it if your Russian is not up to it). It has got into the Argyll News Because he has been held such that people cannot get to him to sign paperwork an application for a writ of Habeas Corpus was made today. This has been adjourned until next week. The English judicial system is really not good at responding to major abuses of human rights by the judicial system.