Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, today backed the right of a convicted terrorist to work on the London Underground. This morning he told reporters:
"Has he broken any laws here in Britain? The answer is no. We are happy to have him working for us."And, according to the Evening Standard he said that he doubted the veracity of any conviction in Yemen.
However, he was later forced to try and "clarify" his position. A spokesman told the BBC News that "the mayor did not have all the facts to hand at the conference so we've put out this statement to clarify his position."
Well, he knew that this man had been convicted of terrorism in Yemen. So, what did he not know. Read his "clarified" position:
In this country a person cannot be sacked for what their parents do. It is the actions of Mohammed Kamel Mostafa himself which are relevant. However, Mr Mostafa has convictions in Yemen. These must be taken into account. They should have been brought to light by those doing the security checks, the failure to do so must be investigated. As he failed to declare these to the subcontractor they are correct to dismiss him.In other words, the Mayor did not know that he had lied about his convictions to bosses. As long as he is honest, Ken would have no problems with a convicted terrorist working on the most sensitive parts of the London Underground. How much longer will we have to put up with this man?
UPDATE: Ken's trying very hard to get out of this one. He told the BBC, "I was not aware of this man's convictions at the time of my press conference". Is that true?
According to the Evening Standard report he had cast doubts on the veracity of any conviction from Yemen, thus he knew of it. During his original press conference he said, "Has he broken any laws here in Britain?". Why would he have specified British laws unless he was aware of convictions elsewhere?