Is Ken Livingstone Adolf of London?
By Osman Ozter
March 20, 2005
We, the people of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) both within the TRNC and living outside of the country would like it be known that we object to the racist attitude of the Mayor of London Ken Livingstone for banning advertisements of the TRNC within the London Boundaries. This is a direct violation of our human rights and flagrantly favours the Greek Cypriots over those of the Turkish Cypriots. The Turkish Cypriots voted YES to reunification of the island whilst the Greek Cypriots voted NO. Yet again, the Turkish Cypriots have been denied the economic benefits that tourism adverts would bring to the Northern part of the island. This will only enhance the rich Greek Cypriots further in their desire to make Cyprus a completely Greek island, and make a fair and unbiased reunification of the island even more remote. Ken Livingstone is directly supporting the propaganda machine that the Greek Cypriots have at their fingertips due to their international political and economical voice.
So,
Is it simply a payback of the possible financial support by Greek Cypriots in his campaign or is he a dangerous 21st century racist?
What has Turkish Cypriot community done to deserve a "racist" discrimination as such?
After a quick search on the Internet I was not surprised to find out that Livingstone had similar racist behaviour to others as well. The following are from Times Online (22 February 2005).
As a Jew, I found Mr Livingstone's comments very hurtful. It is wrong for a public figure to downplay the monstrosities that occurred during the Holocaust. Whether he intended offence or not is quite frankly irrelevant. To compare a journalist to a guard of the most evil group of people in history is not only to be disrespectful to the journalist, but also to the six million Jews who perished in the Holocaust. He should be ashamed and should apologise immediately. What with Harry's stupid behaviour earlier in the year, youngsters are seeing it as acceptable to mock the Nazis merely as bad people - this is not right. I have supported Ken Livingstone for best part fo 25 years, but now hubris has got the better of him. A good politician should understand the implications of his words and deeds. If he makes a mistake in the heat of the moment he should be prepared to admit such and apologise.
Joshua Sasto, London
If Ken Livingstone believed he was being victimised by the Daily Mail Group he should take it up with the proprietors, not one of the workers of said group. He certainly should not have made those remarks, but having done so, he should apologise. I do not like traffic wardens. I feel victimised by their actions toward me. But I do not hurl abuse at them, I take any complaint I may have with them up with their superiors.
Chris Saunders, London
I have never in my life liked, or even respected, Ken Livingstone. However, on this issue I am on his side. Every day people (especially public servants) are being told what not to say. This is a serious assault on the right to free speech. The British people do not seem to realise that this is a form of implicit censorship. The other key point is that if people actually thought about what he said, it was very clear that he was actually speaking out in support of the people persecuted in the concentration camps, not making a remark against them. He simply re-stated the old mantra that it is not an acceptable excuse to claim to be following orders.
Mark Otto, London
Of course Ken Livingstone is right to have "no regrets". Have we become so sensitive in this country that a mans reaction to a journalist pursuing him down the street, persistently thrusting a tape recorder into his face, is blown up out of all proportion? We need human beings as politicians not "politically correct" robots who spew out carefully spun statements which bear little relation to reality or trust. Ken reacted as an ordinary person would with a remark that maybe could have been in the heat of the moment but if an apology is due, it is from the journalist and his newspaper.
Keith Downer, London
I'm confused. Surely the people who should be offended are ex-Nazi prison guards? These are the minority group Ken Livingstone dislikes. How anyone thinks he's anti-Jewish or racist is beyond me. There is nobody for him to apologise to - unless there are some Nazi guards left who want to make something of it!
George Mitchell, Brighton
My aunt died in Auschwitz and my uncle (who lives in Israel) did five years hard labour in Siberia. For me, resisting anti-Semitism is more than just an intellectual exercise. I agree that this individual incident does not constitute evidence of anti-Semitism but feel that the Mayor has exhibited a pattern of behaviour showing disregard for the feelings of London's Jews and in particular their leaders which is undoubtably related to his attitudes to Zionism. I feel that the Mayor has crossed a red line and should either make amends or face concerted opposition from within the Jewish community.
Jonathan Lowenstein, London
Livingstone's spat with the Daily Mail and/or an individual journalist is irrelevant to the question of an apology. He owes that apology to all the citizens whom he has offended, many of whom live with bitter memories of the holocaust era. To Ken I say just this: at first I thought you should apologise. Now I realise that you have lost the plot. You should resign.
Ian Harris, London
After your racist attitude towards Turkish Cypriots I have already taken it as a humanitarian job to follow what you are doing Mr. Livingstone.
Note: I learned today (26 March 2005) that Mr. Livingstone's wife is a Greek lady. Now, I am more relaxed, since at least I can see some logic in his strange behavior against Turkish Cypriots.
Osman Ozter
(20 March 2005)
Thank you Britain
Britain slams London authority for ban on Turkish Cypriot ads
By Simon Bahceli
(Cyprus Mail)
The British government yesterday slammed Transport for London (TfL) – the body that administers London’s buses and tube trains – after it announced a ban on advertisements for Turkish Cypriot tourism, saying the move flew in the face of UK policy to lift the economic isolation of the north.
“The UK government remains committed to ending the isolation of the Turkish Cypriots and will continue to support efforts to this end,” a High Commission spokesman told the Cyprus Mail yesterday.
The TfL says it has banned advertising for the Turkish Cypriot tourism industry because Greek Cypriots living in London might find it “insulting”.
The British High Commission yesterday sought to distance itself from the TfL decision, telling the Cyprus Mail, “Transport for London reports directly to the Greater London Authority, and not to the government.”
The UK government’s criticism of the move came after the TfL rejected a request for the continuation of a campaign advertising holidays in the north in the face of Greek Cypriot objections over the campaign.
“The government is aware of the decision made by the TfL as a result of protests made by local councilors and interest groups,” the High Commission spokesman said. His statement flew in the face of a TfL claim that it had “received no complaints from Greek Cypriots” and that the move was purely a “policy decision”.
The TfL defended its decision yesterday, telling the Cyprus Mail that accepting the advertising “would have been considered a breach of a TfL policy, which seeks to avoid causing offence to any section of society”.
Turkish Cypriot Hoteliers Association (KITOB) general secretary Huseyin Aktig reacted angrily to the ban yesterday, telling the Mail, “This is pure discrimination. They may be seeking to not insult Greek Cypriots, but they are insulting us”.
He added an invitation for TfL and advertising standards monitors in the UK to address “lies” propagated by Greek Cypriot tour operators claiming the north was “inaccessible”.
“There are laws about telling lies in advertising. In every brochure produced by the Greek Cypriots the north is described as inaccessible. This is a lie. Around 500,000 people come here each year, and for the last two years, thousands have been crossing between the north and south,” he said.
Turkish Cypriot London Representative Namik Korman was also critical of TfL’s decision to ban advertising for the north.
“They say Greek Cypriots would be offended by the ads, but I told them if that were the case, why don’t they take into account the 200,000 Turkish Cypriots living in London who will be offended by this ban?”
Korhan added that the decision to ban ads demonstrated a misunderstanding by the TfL that many in both Cypriot communities were seeking to “bridge the gap” by reducing economic disparities between the south and the poorer north.
“Unfortunately some in the London Greek Cypriot community complained, and this is what the TfL went with,” he said.
Aktig believes, however, that opposition to Turkish Cypriot advertising could stem from Greek Cypriot resentment of a recent boom in the north’s fledgling tourism industry.
“Over the past four years there has been a decline in bookings to the south,” he said.
“We, on the other hand, are already 70 per cent booked up for next summer”.
Whether or not the ban will stand depends on the outcome of an appeal being lodged by the north Cyprus tourism board, the TfL spokesman said.
|
