I guess this might explain Labour’s continued use of homophobia as a campaign tool. With the death of socialism and now without a ‘moral compass’ Labour campaigners clearly don’t know there’s a line.

If anyone wants a copy…

Case dismissed by Employment Tribunal.

I have not defected to Labour.

Please read the whole facts about what the Liberal Democrats did to me on Chris Paul LoL ethnic cleansing

I fear you might have got the wrong facts about my story.

It was not hearsay.

People like Chris Paul and John Hacking meanwhile appear to be saying that because the Lib Dems have been caught out on occasion (and some of their examples are weaker than others), Labour is entirely justified to do whatever it pleases. Anything’s justifiable so long as they can think of an example where the Lib Dems have also behaved badly.

It is this blindness to criticism that makes Labour such a nonsense and ultimately such an empty exercise. Without unity, they are nothing. Yet that unity itself can, at times, be utterly worthless and despicable.

It would be nice to think that it was possible to make them wake up via a comments thread such as this, but sadly that is not the case.

And of course the blog post you quoted is full of supositions and assumptions and wishful thinking – none of which are backed up by the evidence.

I ask again: why are you so unwilling to crticise homophobia in the Labour party?

“do you ever consider how your postings look to outsiders?”,

Not much point really since they are outsiders and therefore not looking at what we post that is why we call them outsiders.

Blogs are different from spoken speech, but then so is writing a letter or sending and email.

I am only intereted in making the point that Lib Dems have a pretty shit record on negative campaigning and for them to get all bloody highe and moral might on blogs like this is bollocks.

I have blogged this now. I don’t think she has actually been found guilty of claiming he was a paedophile. Will you please check that and update your coverage if appropriate?

I think she has been found guilty of the lesser matters of for example saying he was gay and getting his partner’s age wrong. Which she admitted.

Certainly if one reads the extended Times report I link to that seems to be the case. But they take the opportunity to run out all the allegations she WAS NOT found guilty of. So it’s hidden.

The judge has presumably decided this (gay plus age mistake) is a punishable smear within the meaning of this law and if I’m right about this I think that sets a fairly low test precedent. Obviously wrong to out him etc but quite different from the stronger allegations.

The reports e.g. at The Times rehearse all the more serious allegations but I don’t think those – hearsay and not admitted – are the basis of the verdict.

The Times are being especially shoddy and linking MG with Cherie Blair, again.

I am finding such coverage shocking. Despite Lib Dem interest in the case I cannot see any virtue in exaggerating what Ms Grell has been convicted of.

If the judge has found on the paedophilia HEARSAY then whatever the underlying truth that is unsafe. So I think he’s just taken a hard line on what a smear is. Saying someone is gay and getting an age wrong can lead to fines and bars from office.

And surely you might be able to google Miranda Grell?

I wonder – while I still can, as a recent recruit and therefore a comparative innocent – if you ever consider how your postings look to outsiders? Fair enough that this is an activists’ site – would you post like this in a more generalist forum? Would you talk like this in real life, in fact?

[looks down nose and over glasses]

Stop living in La La Land. You want evidence I’ll send you evidence if you tell me where to.

I have leaflet after leaflet with this shit on. You lot play the cuddly “we’re not like the other lot” crap all the time but in reality at least in the urban centres you are like a bunch of rat boys. Smearing, lying, negative, bullying. You need to wake up to the bunch of arseholes that you have in your party and grow up.

And their only source – court reports? Newspapers? No, a piece written by the same Labour blogger who’s throwing around the smears. Forgive me if I take that with a bucketload of salt.

I only highlighted the most recent case, of course; I wouldn’t expect them to have the guts to apologise for their vitriolic homophobia in Lambeth, of course, or the Labour leaflets in Hodge Hill that were indistinguishable from the BNP, but when the courts confirm how repellent a Labour candidate is, someone with more shame than the Labour spin doctors above might find a more contrite response than sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting ‘He who smelt it dealt it!’

Grow up, and admit that one of your party is an evil homophobic witchhunting shit, as the courts have proved.

He has a moustache. What is certain is that in homage to this they ran pictures of other men with moustaches e.g. Joseph Stalin, Saddam Hussein and they are alleged to have smeared Mike on the doorstep as if he was a refugee, handy as they were making a fuss about a local asylum seekers hostel.

Shocking, they really are shocking.