London deserves Livingstone - it's populace either voted for him as Mayor, or failed to vote for anybody else. As for the Labour party, let's hope they take him back into the nest; with a bit of luck birds of a feather will themselves be doomed to extinction together - eventually.

Although I am a Labour-voting supporter of the congestion charge I do not want this man back in the party.True socialists should have supported the war.

Nicholas, you are so right. Ken Livingstone's comments are shameful. The world is an infintely better place without Saddam and the Baathist Nazi party. Left in peace, his Gestapo thugs would have carried on butchering a whole nation (and yes, lusting after weapons of terror).

Dr Barham Salih, leader of Northern Free Iraq, went to Rome in January and begged the Socialist International to support this US led intervention. As a result of it, there is now the possibility of democracy and change in Iraq - no thanks to people like Ken. Orwell, you should be here right now!

Jesse.

Ken Livingstone's election as mayor was partly as a result of Tony Blair's attempts to foist Labour's official candidate on Londoners against their will. So, it was largely a protest vote in favour of a rebellious 'cheeky chappie'...

Unfortunately, the voters seemed to think that 'Red Ken' had mellowed with age and moved away from the far left (and some of his statements and actions have indicated this to be the case) and they therefore 'forgot'(?) his chaotic reign over the GLC in the 1980s.

However, his extreme views and his shameless love of the spotlight combined with opportunism have not gone away...and he is now uttering the kind of ridiculous things that were commonplace from leading Labour figures in Labour-run London boroughs in the 1980s (anyone remember: Islington, Camden, Lambeth and Hammersmith to name but a few)...

It is funny that Red Ken had no problem with a London visit by 'humanitarians' such as Robert Mugabe and Bashar Assad. London should be ashamed of itself for having voted in this Stalinist idiot. Churchill must be turning over in his grave.

"The policies he is initiating will doom us to extinction."
So why does Ken bother?
Should be amusing reminding him of this in five years.

M Thatcher abolished the GLC because she could not stomach Ken Livingstone; Blair creates the GLA and gets Livingstone elected because he cannot stomach his politics and expels him from the New-New Labour Party.

Londoners seem to have chose the self-promoter just to irritate national government; one day he might actually deliver on some policies, but his self-absorption knows no bounds and the position is a bit like the Wizard of Oz; a big image with a little man pulling levers unable to affect anything substantive.

"Londoners seem to have chose the self-promoter just to irritate national government"

That is much nearer the mark. At the time of the Mayoral election for London, declared Tories were posting that they would be voting for Red Ken just to annoy Tony Blair and because they didn't regard the limited functions of the GLA, besides transport, as worth much anyway. Even with transport, the view was that central government would have the whip hand, as has proved to be the case in the protracted tussle over the London Tube.

Perhaps more to the point, London has a long historic tradition of popular radicalism and independence. It declared for Parliament against Charles I in the civil war of the 17th century when the north was for the king. As for the popular appeal of Ken, those who believe in the transmigration of souls or reincarnation might like to compare the several turbulent careers of John Wilkes (1725-97) in journalism and politics:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRwilkes.htm
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/terrace/adw03/c-eight/people/wilkes.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wilkes

He is not to be confused with one of those colonial types, John Wilkes Booth, the assassin of President Lincoln. London's John Wilkes was a mixed blessing. Besides being a practising libertine, along with some illustrious politicians of his times such as Dashwood, Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the Earl of Sandwich, he was a famed wit, pioneered the reporting of Parliament, and did much through his successive battles in the courts to defend individual rights against the abuses of executive power by government ministers. And he championed independence for the American colonies when it was unfashionable to do so. He was plainly a pain and Londoners and electorates loved him for it.

Anyone can learn from pain.

Any certainty is a delusion.

'Of course' is cyanide of the mind.