I am diasppointed by Michael Rosen
"we still live in a society which treats women who have been raped with hypocrisy, disdain and distrust. This is true from the newspapers to the church and the courts... where (although not required legally) over 60 percent of rape victims have their past sexual history brought up in court. Where in 82 percent of all rape cases which reach the courts it is a question of consent – did she really say no? It is a society where women are taught to blame themselves for rape, ‘was it something I said/did’, ‘maybe I shouldn’t have taken that drink’ and where this attitude is embodied into every institution surrounding rape." Julie Waterson, June 1986
A fellow comrade - in theory an equal and key member of the party-vanguard within the working-class is "questioned about why she went for a drink with him, her witnesses were repeatedly asked whether she’d been in a relationship with him, and you know, she was asked about sexual relationships... she hasn’t been told what evidence was presented against her by Comrade Delta... she was being interrogated and felt they were trying to catch her out in order to make her out to be a liar. She did not accept the line of questioning, saying ‘they think I’m a slut who asked for it’. Rita, a comrade who is experienced in working with rape victims and was supporting her in the questioning – she had to actually go back into the room and have a go at the DC for their inappropriate questions. Her treatment afterwards has been worse. She feels completely betrayed. No one on the CC has ever contacted her voluntarily, not even to tell her that Comrade Delta was standing down, and she feels she’s been treated as this non-person. The disgusting lies and gossip going round about her has been really distressing and disappointing for her to hear, and the way her own witnesses have been treated in Birmingham hasn’t been much better... so bad that the CC received two formal complaints from comrades, and a formal complaint has been lodged with the disputes committee. Recently the complainant wanted to attend a meeting and tried to talk to a local member. He told her that it wasn’t appropriate for him to speak to her and he walked away... if you have a serious allegation to bring against a leading member, don’t bother because you’ll be victimised for doing so? ... a young woman has to plan her route to work avoiding paper-sellers, or that she comes away from a meeting crying because people refuse to speak to her... her witnesses are questioned about their commitment to the party because they missed a branch meeting?" SWP leadership behaviour in 2010 before the 2011 January Conference
Another fellow comrade: "Finally – [voice breaks] in my opinion the worst part was the nature of some of the questioning. I was asked if it was fair to say I liked to have a drink.... I shouldn’t be punished for bringing forward a complaint. Within days of the hearing I asked to be allowed to return to work, but in many meetings and appeals to the central committee I was repeatedly told that I’d disrupt the harmony of the office. The worst part and the most stressful part of this is the motivations that have been ascribed to people coming forward. We’ve had accusations of the state"
"I don’t want to discuss this in public, but I’ve heard that Martin Smith was having an affair with Bruce Forsyth. Don’t tell anyone, keep it under wraps but if people would like to discuss it, I won’t stand in their way. I think it could turn out to be of great significance to the…er… movement… " Michael Rosen (in public) in 2011
"shocked and saddened to hear the news that socialist and antifascist campaigner Julie Waterson died on Friday 16 November. Julie was a formidable opponent of fascism Under Julie’s guidance the ANL helped defeat the growing threat of the Nazi British National Party. ...
We have lost a dear friend and brilliant campaigner." Delta (and Weyman Bennett) as joint secretaries of UAF, Nov 2012
" " Delta (in public) on his behaviour against two separate women
Behaviour against SWP fellow members trying to secure minimum responsiveness to Julie Waterson's points in 1986, SWP's own principles:
"1) 2011 conference lied to, told nothing of the real nature of the allegations;
2) party members not allowed to discuss the issues in aggregates before 2013 conference, with 'confidentiality' used as the
excuse;
3) a legitimate faction including W prevented from being formed before conference;
4) four party members with known concerns expelled on spurious grounds without any investigation or even preliminary interview in the run up to conference;
5) W prevented from speaking at conference;
6) Party Notes and CC falsely claiming after conference that the party had voted never to discuss it any more;
7) CC members telling people at report-backs and aggregates that they had to defend the line or leave the party;
8) the CC imposing, and gaining NC approval for, an arbitrary unconstitutional deadline for branch motions for a special conference;
9) the CC using party publications and Party Notes to slander the opposition, with no right of reply.
10) the CC imposing, when forced to accept a special conference, a curtailed debating period of one month (the norm is three months).
11) the CC imposing, at district aggregates (where members are elected to go to conference), bizarre debating procedures allowing the faction only six minutes to speak with no reply, while up to two CC speakers take as long as they need and get a right of reply.
12) the CC stacking aggregates with 'the living dead' (members hitherto totally unknown to anyone in local branches) to get a bare majority sufficient to deny any faction members in that area the right to go to conference. This meant that while the faction was as big as, if not bigger than, the CC's not-a-faction, it represented less than 20% of delegates. They ensured at at conference, there would be no real debate: the idea was to numerically 'smash' the opposition. There's more one could say, but the point is this pathetic shower ducked a debate from the very beginning, because they had something to hide." Richard Seymour, early March 2013
"I guess it's a matter of waiting (for the time being) for the organisation to declare that a) it got this one completely wrong b) it got it wrong precisely because it acted beyond its terms of reference and c) in the event of anything like this happening again, they would behave in a completely different way", Michael Rosen in mid-March 2013.
What planet is he on?
