Sheridan abandons hope for the SSP and tries to form new party

[Fisher_Gate]

He said this: http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=8071

however I would concede that it is a softer formulation than the one I quoted, which was what he said in a conference speech.

But the point that nwnm was making, which I repeated and you ignored, is that Fox SAID he was going to Manchester, then went elsewhere instead. He told a little porky.

And Respect is involved in plenty of stuff apart from the war, as you well know, eg the stuff about east london council housing that has been put up on the respect website just recently.

Sounds to me like you're so pissed off over Scotland that you are throwing the positions that you've previously defended in England out of the window. A dubious method surely?

I looked up the Rees article - it's not a "softer formulation" at all, there's no criticism of Galloway. It just says "We didn't agree with the idea but by that stage the die was cast" - no detail of who "we" is, though it's an easy guess that Rees means the coterie of SWP full timers in Galloway's office and not the elected bodies of Respect. There's also no suggestion from Rees that Galloway could have consulted Respect before "the die was cast" though both Rees and Galloway know he would have got short shrift.

I haven't changed my position one jot. I'm for a united left - which is why I'm (still) in Respect and support the SSP. The SWP (and CWI) are for a united left only when they can run the show. And any united left must have democracy and the right to express counter views - something else neither organisation has a good track record on.

 

[JHE]

Aitkin, Archer, Sheridan

It's a tape, not a video. You can listen to sections of it courtesy of their website.

Apparently, the meeting was video recorded, though it is just sections of the sound that are available on the NotW site.

Whatever difficulties Joe may be having with his computer, most of the snippets are perfectly audible.

The most damning part, IMO, is TS's account of the special Exec meeting. We all fuckin' knew that TS was the perjurer and not the 11 Exec members TS dragged into court and shat on, but Social Workers and others pretended it was the other way round and that poor old Tommy was the victim of a dastardly conspiracy against him. Have the Sheridanites got the brass neck to continue with that twaddle?

Where now for Tommy and the Thomists?

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Apparently Sheridan has put out a statement ending with "I intend making no further comment on this pathetic pack of lies". So no legal action is threatened. To me this is suggestive that the tape has not been falsified.

BarryB

It's a pity that wasn't his line at the beginning of this whole sorry saga - let it not be forget that he was the one who went to court, not Murdoch's rags and not the state.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

Apparently, the meeting was video recorded, though it is just sections of the sound that are available on the NotW site.

Whatever difficulties Joe may be having with his computer, most of the snippets are perfectly audible.

The most damning part, IMO, is TS's account of the special Exec meeting. We all fuckin' knew that TS was the perjurer and not the 11 Exec members TS dragged into court and shat on, but Social Workers and others pretended it was the other way round and that poor old Tommy was the victim of a dastardly conspiracy against him. Have the Sheridanites got the brass neck to continue with that twaddle?

Where now for Tommy and the Thomists?

The beginning of the end of the road for them I hope ...

by the way there's a resolution for the SSP conference that says that anyone who has left the SSP to join Sheridan would be welcome to rejoin the SSP again

 

[Fullyplumped]

The BBC has his rebuttal. Very unpleasant - he describes George McNeilage as a former friend, and a liar.

But Mr Sheridan said the paper's story were "lies and smears".

He added: "They have a former friend whom I haven't spoken to for two years to tell lies about me. Mr McNeilage must be seriously hard up to lower himself to the gutter and co-operate against a former friend. A fictitious tape has been invented, concocted, and unleashed on a Scottish public sick to the back teeth of the News of the World's constant lies.

"They (the News of the World) will not forgive me for humiliating them. Their vendetta against me, my family and my political beliefs continues. They are trying to break me politically and personally. They will fail on both counts. My new party, Solidarity, grows daily while my relationship with my wife, Gail, is unbreakable."​

George McNeilage is a pillar of the community in Pollok and it's shameful of Mr Sheridan to treat him that way. Mr Sheridan is quickly alienating all those who kept him going at the start of his career, when it wasn't one. Now all he has is the SWP and suchlike who envy his charisma and ability to speak, but only want to use him for their own pathetic ends. They won't get the vote out, though.

 

[Fisher_Gate]

It's a pity that wasn't his line at the beginning of this whole sorry saga - let it not be forget that he was the one who went to court, not Murdoch's rags and not the state.

Spoke too soon ...

why on earth would McNeilage want to make this up is the question to ask ...

 

[junius]

It is easy to feel vindicated by the new allegations. But the damage Sheridan has done to the left far outweighs any amusement to be gained from his plight.

He should be disowned by the whole of the working class movement for this, not his bedroom antics.

And the two main groups on the British far left have been complicit in the this. Shame on them.

 

[tollbar]

Doubtless the SWP have their escape plan drawn up ready for action long beforeTS ends up in the Bar-L. I expect that they will continue to abuse those who opposed Sheridan in court but will denounce him and the non swipe element of Solidarity as 'narrow nationalists' and fuck off to set up Respect which was always the plan anyway.

I wonder if TS will issue GG with a visiting order.

I wonder if he will turn up.

 

[bellator]

Having read this story today I'm wondering how the hell he got awarded damages in the first place. Surely a jury didn't think that 11 people from that meeting were lying, obviously they did but why? Is TS that convincing in court?

 

[JHE]

Surely a jury didn't think that 11 people from that meeting were lying, obviously they did but why? Is TS that convincing in court?

The decision was by majority. Seven members of the jury decided for Sheridan. There are various possible explanations of their decision.

Perhaps, as you suggest, they really did believe Sheridan's version of events. If that's what happened, those seven jurors were bloody gullible, IMO.

Alternatively, perhaps they didn't care much whether Sheridan was telling the truth or not but decided as they did because:

• They liked Sheridan or...
• They dislike the prurient scandal-mongering press and decided to punish it or...
• They thought Murdoch could easily afford to lose, but TS couldn't or...
• They thought the News of the Screws' QC was a boring old git (while TS was a much more engaging passionate speaker) or...
• They were impressed by and liked Mrs Sheridan and didn't want to contradict her (apparent) belief in her husband's faithfulness or...
• They were having a laugh

 

[JHE]

Oh, one other possibility:

Maybe they recognised that Tommy wasn't telling the truth, but nevertheless thought that some of the NotW stories about him were made up or embellished (as indeed they may have been) and that amounted to defamation.

 

[phildwyer]

If I ever found myself on such a jury I'd support just about anyone over the NotW.

 

[JHE]

If I ever found myself on such a jury I'd support just about anyone over the NotW.

I understand your dislike of the NotW, but do you not also dislike Sheridan's treatment of his fellow SSPers before, during and after the court case?

 

[phildwyer]

I understand your dislike of the NotW, but do you not also dislike Sheridan's treatment of his fellow SSPers before, during and after the court case?

The fact that he defeated the NotW is more important to me.

 

[JHE]

The fact that he defeated the NotW is more important to me.

A Pyrrhic victory...

 

[urbanrevolt]

Also what the fuck are SSP members doing supporting the NoTw in court. If TS goes to swingers parties or not or anyhtring else about his consensual sexual life then we/ they shouldn't care and if he denies it then either support him or at least refuse to support the scum bourgeois media

 

[JHE]

Also what the fuck are SSP members doing supporting the NoTw in court. If TS goes to swingers parties or not or anyhtring else about his consensual sexual life then we/ they shouldn't care and if he denies it then either support him or at least refuse to support the scum bourgeois media

Great. Tommy decides to lie through his teeth and drag his comrades into court - and it is then the duty of his comrades either to commit perjury for the Dear Leader or go to prison for contempt of court. How long should they have spent in prison before agreeing to give evidence?

 

[urbanrevolt]

But it's a long established principle that one's consensual sex life is one's own.
We should have no interest in supporting the bourgeois media- I'm not suggesting committing perjury- if- and it is an if unless you happen to have witnessed the acts, however likely you find the story- TS did these things then refuse to testify or claim to not be able to remember. That way the SSP would have come out of the whole mess looking principled

 

[junius]

But it's a long established principle that one's consensual sex life is one's own.
We should have no interest in supporting the bourgeois media- I'm not suggesting committing perjury- if- and it is an if unless you happen to have witnessed the acts, however likely you find the story- TS did these things then refuse to testify or claim to not be able to remember. That way the SSP would have come out of the whole mess looking principled

Have you actually followd the matter in detail? You know, McCombes put in prison etc.

 

[urbanrevolt]

I do acknowledge McCombes' position which was honourable but am questioning why the SSP didn't refuse to wash their linen in public- not saying they should have all gone to prison but surely it would have been quite possible to not remember the details and refuse to do the dirty.

Also not saying TS isn't guilty of over the top language in exchange, or that he should have fought his position in the party.

The sad thing is this is all a big diversion from the politics- both Solidarity and the SSP as far as I can see make adaptations to nationalism and reformism. However, it should also be acknowledged they have played a leading role in the anti deportation work and a campaigning role on issues such as school dinners and nutrition.

Think the best thing both sides can do now is refuse as much as possible to comment on the matter any more and return to poitical issues: not very likely I suppose.

 

[JHE]

We should have no interest in supporting the bourgeois media- I'm not suggesting committing perjury- if- and it is an if unless you happen to have witnessed the acts, however likely you find the story- TS did these things then refuse to testify or claim to not be able to remember.

The SSP people were questioned about what happened at the meeting of the Exec of the SSP.

You have suggested commiting perjury. Claiming not to remember, if they do remember (which of course they did), would be a lie. A lie in court under oath is perjury.

The alternative you suggest is to refuse to give evidence. For that they'd be put in prison for contempt of court. I repeat: how long should they have spent in prison before agreeing to give evidence?

The only sane point in your posts is your claim that someone's consensual sexual activity is none of our business. OK, I sympathise very much with that. If Tommy had handled the gossip sensibly, the fuss would have died down. It would have been half-forgotten by now. And the SSP would still be in one piece. (Compare: The exposure of Mark Oaten's much more peculiar sexual antics has not destroyed the Lib Dhimmis.)

Instead, Tommy made a crap decision to lie, bluster and smear - and he's still at it. He's shat all over his friends and comrades and wrecked the SSP. He's also at risk of going the same way as Aitken & Archer. None of this had to happen.

 

[urbanrevolt]

I am not suggesting committing perjury- unless I suppose you're saying they can quite clearly remeber TS saying certain things but who's to say whether they can remember or not. Apart from calling me insane (whcih is abit much, I'd say!) I agree that TS could well himself have taken the line my private life is my own and neither confirm nor deny the allegations.

I'm certainly not saying his behaviour (in terms of publicly branding former comrades liars, scabs etc.) is good but just saying that the whole movemnt should rise above such pettiness and learn the lessons

PS I don't think anyone should recommend perjury for fairly obvious reasons

 

[junius]

I do acknowledge McCombes' position which was honourable but am questioning why the SSP didn't refuse to wash their linen in public- not saying they should have all gone to prison but surely it would have been quite possible to not remember the details and refuse to do the dirty.

Also not saying TS isn't guilty of over the top language in exchange, or that he should have fought his position in the party.

The sad thing is this is all a big diversion from the politics- both Solidarity and the SSP as far as I can see make adaptations to nationalism and reformism. However, it should also be acknowledged they have played a leading role in the anti deportation work and a campaigning role on issues such as school dinners and nutrition.

Think the best thing both sides can do now is refuse as much as possible to comment on the matter any more and return to poitical issues: not very likely I suppose.

I know you mean well, but even your former comrades in Workers Power have a saner position than you. And, boy, oh boy, that's saying something.

The fact that no SWP or SP members on this list have rushed to Tommy's defence speaks volumes.

 

[urbanrevolt]

This will be my last post on this for this afternoon anyway. The only point I am making is that a comrade's sex life is their own pure and simple as long as it's consenting adults etc. and no one whatever their political differences with TS- and I'm sure we both have many- should compromise this principle in my opinion.

Not sure why you think this is an insane position.

For a slightly different view in nuance at least see latest issue of Permanent Revolution where Mark Hoskisson has a longish article- don't think it's online yet, tho.

 

[junius]

Mark's article is very good. I especially like the bit where he writes, ' As to his motives, they are simple - anyone who has met Sheridan...will tell you he is a man devoted to himself. He is obsessed with his own image, his own sense of destiny. He has an ego that could fill Celtic Park on its own'.

The SSP majority were accomplices in this.

 

[tollbar]

Mark's article is very good. I especially like the bit where he writes, ' As to his motives, they are simple - anyone who has met Sheridan...will tell you he is a man devoted to himself. He is obsessed with his own image, his own sense of destiny. He has an ego that could fill Celtic Park on its own'.

The SSP majority were accomplices in this.

Though of course, TS wouldnt have his ego in Celtic Park having abandoned support for the Hoops years ago, first to support Rangers and then Motherwell.

 

[nwnm]

By the way the attempts to rubbish Colin Fox here are getting a bit desperate. Basically he encouraged people to attend one important political event while attending another one himself. Anyone involved in more than single issue politics would recognise this dillemma.

No, he said he was speaking, taking 500 people with him and the fucked off to South Africa.

 

[nwnm]

Oh dear... the Sherdanites are going to have to take advice from the conspiracy nut fraternity. Faked video... CIA... reactionary pixies...

ooh you mean something similar to what happened to Arthur Scargill in 1989/90. <minus the pixies of course, who were far to busy making some blindingly good music> I'm sure the UK secret state have all become good boys and girls since then, and wouldn't try toppling anyone seen as a figurehead of dissent like Sheridan or Galloway.......

 

[JHE]

ooh you mean something similar to what happened to Arthur Scargill in 1989/90. <minus the pixies of course, who were far to busy making some blindingly good music> I'm sure the UK secret state have all become good boys and girls since then, and wouldn't try toppling anyone seen as a figurehead of dissent like Sheridan or Galloway.......

Your fellow Respekite, Mohammed Naseem, has the courage of his deranged Mohammedan mind. He says that the bombers of 7 July 2005 are framed innocents. Their videoed suicide statements have been faked by gay, Jewish pixie-lizards or something.

Come on, nwmn, have the courage of your hint. Tell us the recording of Sheridan has been faked, if that's what you think or are willing to pretend to think.

 

[Hawkeye Pearce]

Scargill had been a threat though. Sheridan isn't a threat by any means. Why would they bother?