Fact is that Banana Boy Milliband is part of a government on (mercifully) borrowed time.

The Millibands, both of them, have the intellect of school children.

The fact they hold high office in the UK and in David Millibands case he lies and insults this guy in a desperate attempt to smear the tories is a disgrace.

The British government should be above this – I know to look at a defence secretary as bad as Ainsworth is terrible enough – but for the UK to have these thickets as ministers looks really bad on the world stage.

Back off from it Will is my advise.

I understand you need to show loyalty to your dad – that’s ok – but anything else think hard before supporting the unsupportable.

The economy is another important issue but I think it’s fair to say that it was yesterday’s news and covered widely in this morning’s papers. Schudrich/Kaminski is today’s news.

Fayyaz – I don’t accept that Miliband has misquoted Schudrich. They are, in fact, consistent:

David Miliband, 1 October: “a man denounced by the Chief Rabbi of Poland for an anti semitic, neo Nazi past”

Chief Rabbi Schudrich, 30 October: “as a teenager [Kaminski] did join an organisation in Polish known as NOP which is unfortunately openly anti-semitic and neo-nazi. He also quit that organisation as a teenager.”

The questions to Schudrich are important because, as I said before, if the Tories did lean on Schudrich it would reflect a desire to deflect attention away from the wider problems with the ECR that I mention above.

“Labour MP Denis MacShane has indeed claimed that this morning’s interview changes nothing and that the chief rabbi “does not clear Kaminski”, adding: “until Mr Kaminski expresses full and unreserved regret over what he said and did in relation to the Jedwabne massacres I will continue to criticise the Tory alliance with him.”

Fair, Miliband remarks may have always centred on Kaminski’s “anti-semitic, neo Nazi past”. However, clearly it is wrong to brand Kaminski as an anti-semite (which is the effect of Miliband’s intervention, irrespective of the fact he has only referred to his past). Given that this clearly reflects on the Tories, I would think it understandable that they would want to do whatever they can to refute the allegations.

Finally, I’m not so sure you’ve hit upon the most important point. On a day when we have found out that Britain is the major global economy still in recession, many in the press still seem to be focussing on this comparatively minor issue – an attempt to deflect attention?

The transcript is just the answer to the first question on Todat. Listen on the BBC website if you want the rest. We are under-resourced so have to make a decision about how much to transcribe – hope you understand.

The question we asked was how Schudrich could square his comments to the New Statesman with those to Policy Exchange. He was essentially saying today that yes Kaminski had been in an “anti-semitic and neo-Nazi” group but that was roughly 20 years ago and Kaminski is no longer an anti-Semite. We accept that this is a reasonable position.

Miliband’s remarks have always centred on Kaminski’s “anti-semitic, neo Nazi past”. These comments are entirely consistent with what Schudrich said today.

It’s important to know why Schudrich has chosen to wait until now to clarify the remarks he made to the New Statesman in July. If it is due to pressure from Conservative party politicians or associates it would, presumably, reflect their attempts to deflect attention away from the other serious allegations made against Kaminski and other members of the ECR which this website and others have highlighted.

The important point is that the Tories actively split from the EPP, actively
sought out new partners, and actively appointed Kaminski as chair of their group.

Will

Of your questions that remain “unanswered,” it seems you largely accept the position put forward by the Rabbi in defence of Kaminski – i.e. the substance of the argument, that the Rabbi does not consider Kaminski be anti-semitic?

Whether anybody asked the Rabbi to clarify his statement doesn’t appear to be terribly relevant. Its clear that despite the fact that the Rabbi disagrees with a number of the positions taken by Kaminski (and from this, you can fairly assume that he hasn’t been pressured into taking a particular line), he fundamentally disagrees with the assertion that he is anti-semitic.

It seems that the likes of Milliband have become so entrenched in their position that nothing the Rabbi might say will cause them to change their position – partisan politics at its worst in my view.

NOP was anti-communist; so was General Franco. NOP considered itself patriotic or nationalist; so did Franco. Those two things don’t mean that the rest of a group’s policies aren’t repulsive.

It is, of course, possible that the NOP started off as a bunch of anti-Semites, briefly weren’t while Kaminski happened to be a member, and then became ant-Semitic again. It’s also possible that it’s something being said for “the pettiest of partisan reasons”.

Just to clarify, Guido – are you saying that the emails published on the NS website are a forgery?