Friday, October 16, 2009

Hypocrite and Chancer: Vehement John Leech MP Has Postbag Rant

In the inevitable rebuttal letter to the EDL supporting clown who wrongly promoted Mr John "Hospital Hoax" Leech (right) to the Labour Party but correctly identified him as a hypocrite and a chancer Mr Leech claims:

"I can assure Mr O’Neill and others that along with my Lib-Dem party colleagues I was vehemently opposed to the illegal war in Iraq from the start – a position that has surely been vindicated by the groundswell in public opinion against the invasion in recent years."

Now, I don't doubt that Mr Leech was somethingly against the war in Iraq, on the quiet, but I think to say vehemently is rather taking the piss actually.

  • Mr Leech's leaflets as a Councillor in Barlow Moor Ward as was and the rechristened Chorlton Park as it is now scarcely betrayed this "vehemence";
  • No-one I know can recall ever seeing Mr Leech at an anti-war vigil that carried on for well over two years in Whalley Range ward, where he actually lives, just an hour or so every Friday, where was he hiding his "vehemence"?;
  • No-one I know can recall ever seeing Mr Leech - before his election as MP, or since - at the similar vigil at Chorlton Four Banks - Chorlton being where he likes to say he lives. Vehement, not;
  • No-one I know saw the vehement fibster Mr Leech at either the big London demonstration in February 2003 or indeed even those in Manchester;
  • There is no trace I can find of any anti-war letter or comment or press release from Mr Leech in 2001, 2002, 2003, or 2004 about Afghanistan or Iraq;
  • In the last couple of months of the 2005 campaign the vehemence did show by way of vehement fibbing about Keith Bradley MP's anti-war voting which, in the last two votes, the ones that particularly counted was (a) anti-war and (b) exactly the same as Lib Dems, many of whom had ducked earlier votes; and
  • As well as the low- or no- profile of the Iraq war or Afghanistan on Mr Leech's councillor propaganda in 2001-2004 there was little of it - apart from defaming Bradley - on his 2005 campaign literature;
  • And why not? Because this was largely taken up by a smirking John Leech and his smirking Lib Dem friends holding up Save Our Hospital banners and the like as they pretended that Christie Hospital faced an existential threat;
  • John Leech's vehemence on this matter led two of his big fat expensive glossy leaflets, and possibly a third which was burnt smokily rather than distributed, and one of these was disgracefully distributed to vulnerable cancer patients and their friends and relatives as they waited for chemo- and radio- therapy.

  • Now that's what I call vehemence. Mr Leech's position and that of his Manchester co-franchisees on the EDL and the BNP and the far-right down the years could also be de-constructed and queried. We'll save that. Perhaps for another day.

    MEANWHILE: Mr Leech appears to have arranged for Thursday's letter, critical of him, to be removed from the Postbag archive. It is supposed to be just here. This trick has also been applied it seems to much of the press coverage of his Christie campaign of 2005. Although the letter was dead wrong removing it, the context for today's effort, is a great disservice, but the full text is available right here. Pleased to be of service. MEN - have a word with yourself.


    Anonymous said...

    And he still hasnt published the result of his Legg letter

    Anonymous said...

    Any comments on Tony Lloyd's massive repayment or Kaufman's attempted £7k television and frankly pathetic excuses?


    Gordon Brown's massive repayment?



    Chris Paul said...

    Anonymous 19:21

    Take a deep breath, and read on ...

    Good to see you've the guts to identify yourself. Brilliant.

    Anyway, Tony Lloyd has a repayment of around £2k over what is very obviously a clerical error. Over which he is upset and apologetic.

    The MEN have printed his statement. He doesn't now and never has owned a second Home and will make no capital gains from a long and honourable career in parliament.

    Leech on the other hand made an immediate capital gain as he allowed some genial old pensioner Labour Lord to sell him a flat in Battersea or wherever at a huge under value, selling at the price that honourable old buffer Lord bought at, though prices may have doubled or more.

    Leech was absolutely cock-a-hoop at the bargain he'd struck.

    £2,000 by accident is also only half what Leech deliberately claimed from the tax payer to donate to his regional office for who knows what EACH YEAR.

    It doesn't stand comparison to the deliberate printing gimmicks Leech appears to have been operating each year. Renting back a Riso machine the tax payer already part owned (with a far greater share than the proportion of print for political use vs parliamentary by anyone's estimation) using tax payers' money to pay for it again.

    Running a shadowy printing society taking secret donations and making secret profits while Leech was pretending to be all for openness.

    It is not like employing Lib Dem politicians to campaign using tax payers or council tax payers money.

    It is not like taking adverts on political material which de facto subsidises them. Leech appears to have done both.

    It is not like claiming two tellies in two years either! Perhaps that is one of things stopping Leech publishing his Legg letter?? Or did Legg suggest that "fat and unfit" Leech should pay for his own effing bathroom scales.

    As for Gordon ... we all know about the inherent unfairness of Legg tackling the blue collar cleaning and gardening bills and letting the white collar mortgage ramps lie.

    Gordon is paying up despite that unfairness. Perhaps that will all come out in the wash?

    Meanwhile we can only look forward to the non ACA claims - where the Lib Dems have scored big time, even being coached by their Campaign guru on how to game grey areas - being properly scrutinised.

    Not to mention Lib Dem tithes and other hidden fund raising methods coming to light.

    And, personally, I still think Leech MUST apologise over his Christie campaign which was IMO as close to evil as most polis get.

    And he should also examine his conscience over taking £23,000 and the rest from a woman of 69 who really should not have been parted from her life savings in this way. IMO. Despicable.

    A sensitive area for Mr Leech who has fielded at least one national media enquiry on this with what appear, on the surface, to be dirty fucking slurry lies.

    Next time I deal with that I'll be getting off the fence!

    Will Leech also promise to give any profit on his miniscule mortgage for his under-value purchased home to CHARITY as in CHARITY (not Lib Dem calumny) and also to explain fully what he did with his councillor allowances.

    Was it all used to employ a party political worker? After he had paid the appropriate tax, natch.

    Would that be fair on the council tax payers who funded this unearnt pay? And have his statements on the matter been consistent and honest?

    Chris Paul said...

    Sorry. that slur-y not slurry, those lies of Leech's.

    benchilltory said...

    talking of libdems, i did not know that Chris Hunnes real name is
    Chris Paul-Hunne.
    I noticed Mr Rowen sat on the benches during last weeks PM questions.He looked very much pinker in his skin colour than all the other MPs. i think he needs to keep an eye on his blood pressure.