In yet another case of religious sensitivities taking precidence over freedom of speech, London Mayor ken Livingstone was suspended on Friday for four weeks for comparing a London Evening Standard journalist to a concentration camp guard.

The Adjudication Panel for England ruled Ken Livingstone had brought his office into disrepute when he acted in an “unnecessarily insensitive” manner.

Jackie Ashley pretty much hits the nail on the head:

Many people will be offended by what he said. Many people are offended by what lots of politicians say. He may have been “unnecessarily offensive” to a journalist; but what would the right and necessary amount of offensiveness have been? Some will feel the dignity of mayoral office has been compromised. Others will laugh. The point is: what do we feel about an anonymous, unknown little clique of unelected bureaucrats removing from power for a month (and their powers are far wider) a man who has twice been elected by Londoners?

Londoners voted for Livingstone and now Londoners have to live with him. He hasn’t been convicted of any crime so the question of whether he was unnecessarily offensive or whether he brought the Mayor’s office into disrepute is one for the London electorate.

Trackback this Post | Feed on comments to this Post