More Tory Kiddy Politics: 400 Words When 40 Will Do

Juvenile Manchester Tory letter writers might have said :

"We disagree with Phil Woolas MP raising the issue of persistent marriages between first cousins - particularly prevalent among Pakistanis from rural backgrounds - and accuse him of blowing a dog whistle and pandering to racist elements in his constituency."

What they actually said is a very tedious and malformed rant. I'm surprised that the Manchester Evening News Postbag indulged them quite so much. Perhaps it has been edited down already?

Either way they - Messrs Adlard and Ali - are wrong in various regards. They impugn Mr Woolas by putting words into his mouth that were in fact press concoctions. They refuse to engage with a very serious issue. Are they supporting this kind of nonsense analysis?

Are Adlard and Ali effectively supporting that old tosh? This is of a kind with creationism, literalism and fundamentalism around Biblical texts. The learned Sheik's wishful thinking may say different. But it actually ignores the Quran. This cites the Prophet as commanding to: “marry those who are distant”.

These Tory Toddlers should not resile (like that Mary?) from having the debate. As on Pickled Politics where Bartholemew comments and posts a link to the NY Times which confirms that it is repeated cousin marrying cf toffs, royals and superstitious rural people that brings the dangers.

FOR THE RECORD: Phil Woolas is a tireless fighter against the BNP. And he has very publically slam dunked some local Lib Dems for very specific pandering and mirroring of racist attitudes. Reading his text and explanations is recommended rather than relying on the Daily Mail. First cousin marriage repeated generation upon generation is a very serious problem. Whereas as a one off it has little risk.

Adlard and Ali will very likely get a proper twatting from Phil himself in tomorrow's paper.