Sunday, August 26, 2007

Yasmin Zalzala Asks: About Lib Dem Perfidy

Yasmin Zalzala has commented here, asking about the Lib Dem dishonesty in Ealing Southall where they claimed that Vivendra Sharma was 72 years old. He is actually a venerably vital 60. One leaflet, making this claim - late in the election incidentally as a BLATANT LIE - is reproduced above courtesy of the wonderful by-elections leaflet repository. The Lib Dem man (right) seems to be laughing his head off at the fibs in his own leaflet!

Obviously the bar chart was utter tosh also. Goes without saying I suppose. The leaflet also claimed that Cllr Sharma had missed "most" of the council meetings in the past year.

Also a BLATANT LIE. But amusingly they sent none other than Councillor John "Two Jobs" Leech MP to back up their man's claims that HE would be a full-time MP. In his Blue Peter shoes. Obviously Leech is missing a large proportion of meetings that he would normally attend as a Councillor, particularly those on police, health, environment, local improvements, and TRANSPORT which is his portfolio as number three in his parties "front bench" team. They're almost all on that! On the front bench team. He has spent two full years already as a part timer in two jobs, as well as going off on his footballing and other junkets. He intends to spend another year moonlighting though should there be an early election he will be able at least to cling on to his Town Hall sinecure.

Yasmin Zalzala (left) and John Leech (right). All smiles.


jailhouselawyer said...

"Who is the best for Ealing?". Erm...Tony Lit?

Chris Paul said...

Certainly not a man who would add 12 years to a man's age to make himself look like a good punt. Young Sharma could I suspect wrestle Bakhai to the ground hopping and with one arm tied behind his back.

This is of course an especially good "big lie" for a party who are struggling along with their leader Menzies Campbell (96) whose zimmer frame is now fit with wheels as "Martin Pantling" reports.

This last paragraph is partly made up in homage to the Lib Dems' persistent perfidiousness.

Napoleon said...

You still got that axe murderer commenting on your pathetic blog, then?

Plus ca change....

Chris Paul said...

Er, "Napoleon" what did your Doctor tell you about posting drunk and maniacal at 2 am in the morning in multiple identities when you need a good night's sleep?

jailhouselawyer said...

The amount of people in mental institutions claiming to be Napoleon never ceases to amaze me. Are you the Bonaparte one or the one in 1984? Manslaughter, you pathetic swine...

Chris Paul said...

It is the one whose IP was the only one online here when three silly comments were made on three different posts and under three different names. And she's been here before ...!

Tim Kinsella said...

"Virendra Sharma, 72, a councillor in Ealing for 25 years was selected as Labour candidate." -,,2126798,00.html

Chris Paul said...

Mmmm "Tim" - that wouldn't be any sort of excuse when the local Lib Dems knew it was 60 and I think almost 30 respectively, now would it?

And btw this would be what's at that (curtailed in most people's browsers) link now:


We haven't been able to serve the page you asked for.

If you typed in a URL, please make sure you have typed it correctly. In particular, make sure that the URL you typed is all in lower case.

If you require further assistance, please contact our user help staff at the following address

The correct link is this one and it does indeed read as you quote.

That was the Observer on Sunday 15 July, almost two weeks before polling day. this would be a similar story, though by two different scribblers the Guardian the very next day:

Labour's candidate, Virendra Sharma, works in care services, and has been a councillor here for more than 25 years. "Every byelection is tough ... People will have to decide if they want someone with a proven track record of working with the community," he says.

The softly-spoken 60-year-old contrasts starkly with charismatic political newcomer Mr Lit, 34.

And they might have added the uncharismatic lightweight ... etc.

Just for fun I've googled you Mr Kinsella and find this earlier example of your standing up for Mr Leech when he makes a pig's ear of something and/or for Lib Dem lies:

House of Commons debates
Wednesday, 31 January 2007
What are Commons debates?
Point of Order

See the whole debate « Previous speaker Next speaker »

2:15 pm

John Leech (Manchester, Withington, Liberal Democrat) | Hansard source

Has my hon. Friend ever met a single constituent who has told him that they would prefer an identity card to more police on the street?

See this speech in context

Withington Observer
Posted on 9 Mar 2007 4:40 pm (Report this comment)

This is a false dichotomy. Though i suspect the Hon Member for Manchester Withington is far too dim to know what that is!!

Let's try one on him:

Would you prefer a Lib Dem chancer for an MP or a hospital hoaxer and general lying scumbag?

Do you see John? It's not really an either or question.

Or another:

When it comes to condemning Cluster Bombs would you prefer an "anti-war" Lib Dem (not Lords Garden or Ashdown then) or a man who was a PR and lobbyist and recent factory visitor and complementer for Raytheon, the fifth biggest arms dealer in the world?

Do you see John?

Personally I am against iD cards for all sorts of reasons - not principally cost, there are more important principles, don't you see? - but one can have more spent on police and iD cards. It is a wholly false dichotomy. We HAVE had much more spent on police these last 10 years, the Lib Dems have voted for the budgets and then slam them, the Lib Dems are quite simply lying hypocrites.

The fact is that there were THREE MAJOR ERRORS in Leech's "debate":

- he insulted Anne Coffey MP, 10 times better than he could ever be
- he had to concede immediately that the budget balanced
- he had to concede that the clawback he was aksing to stop had already been stopped, but he was too dim to notice

Withington Observer
Posted on 9 Mar 2007 4:42 pm (Report this comment)


How was that a Point of Order you doh! brain?

Tim Kinsella
Posted on 19 Apr 2007 11:07 pm (Report this comment)

Perhaps one should realise that one does not refer to members of the House as honourable unless a) one is a member of the house and is speaking within the chamber or b) the member has previously held office, in which case the member thus becomes the Right Honourable.

Mark Bestford
Posted on 19 Apr 2007 11:15 pm (Report this comment)

Tim, in all honesty the majority of the public do not know and do not care.

The whole thing is archaic and disguises the fact that in all reality the "honourable friend" opposite is probably a) not honourable and b) not their friend.

In fact the majority would appear quite happy to use every cheap trick in the book in order to stab the person they are talking to in the back at every opportunity possible and the majority of the population would rather such schoolground behaviour had no place in today's politics.

Tim Kinsella
Posted on 19 Apr 2007 11:15 pm (Report this comment)

Perhaps one should also realise that Mr. Leech was speaking on a Point of Order put down by the Rt. Hon. Tony McNulty MP regarding a report on the police grant. If one took the time to read the title and the first two sentences of the debate then this would be apparent.

"Tony McNulty (Minister of State, Home Office)

As a Middlesex MP, I beg to move,

That the Police Grant Report (England and Wales) for 2007-08, House of Commons Paper No. 207, a copy of which was laid before this House on 18th January, be approved."

Tim Kinsella
Posted on 19 Apr 2007 11:28 pm (Report this comment)

Mark, I wholeheartedly agree. Many of the systems in Parliament are utterly absurd and are not conducive to increased participation in politics.

I have to admit though, I do have a soft spot for some of it. Personally, If I were an MP, my first act would be to ask the sergeant-at-arms' office for the snuff which they are obliged to provide me.

P.S. I was merely trying to emulate Withington Observer's marvelous pomposity

Mark Bestford
Posted on 20 Apr 2007 1:03 pm (Report this comment)

I find it quite amusing myself, given that the school I went to had set in it's Rules that should the Head Boy marry while still at the school he would be allowed to wear a frock coat, grow a mustache, smoke a pipe and be housed in the 2nd Master's House. No mention was made on where the 2nd Master was supposed to move to however. Makes all the pomp and circumstance of Parliament seem quite sane in comparison.

It is about time that the parties realised that "Party Politics" is dead in this country. What is the point of endlessly condemning the opposition when in reality most policies are exact clones of each other and not one party has had a genuinely novel idea in decades. Mind it does just go to show how much further out of touch the average MP is nowadays.

I also note that you troll under this name at John Leech Watch. But apart from these incursions you do not seem to exist but spookily do have the name of a jazz musician.

Chris Paul said...

Scratch jazz ... make that Chicago Indie ...

Tim Kinsella said...

Your definition of troll seems to be anyone who posts on any website and who also supports the Lib Dems. I'm hardly a member of GNAA, Chris.

Hmmm, I'd say...

Cap'n Jazz = Old-school post-hardcore/very early emo
American football = Experimental (almost prog?) emo
The Owls = Experimental indie

All have ace lyrics, though, you should check them out.

Tim Kinsella said...

P.S. Sorry, couldn't be bothered writing HTML. Does that make up for it?

Chris Paul said...

Cute. Error 404 troll (wiki) ahoy. An interesting discussion there.

As you are quite mild mannered, though brandishing a fake identity, I'll promote you to sock puppet "Tim".

Well done for grifting your more illustrious "namesake" from the Chicago indie band Joan of Arc.

Other readers may like to check your potted history for themselves.

Yasmin Zalzala said...

Did you note that Help the Aged are asking the government to make ageism an offence

No doubt the Liberal Democrats will be the first to jump on the bandwagon to outlaw discrimination against the aged just as they are so hot on anti discrimination (in paper).

And at the same time, they are allowing comparisons of that nature to go on. What hypocracy.

I think there is a lot of similarity between the leaflet comparing the age of the Labour candidate and the unfavorable comparison that was made against me and my race!

Anonymous said...

In the end, all the deception and defections did not fool any one in Southall.