He has no policies. The evidence of this is the absence of any policies. HTH

Fair point. Perhaps Geoffrey Levy and "The Cowardly Lion" Dacre would be able to answer that one. After all, they're the ones who, in publishing the articles, decided that RM hated Britain, when the evidence seems to be somewhat opposite to that.

Perhaps the Britain he hated was the one he foresaw, when a dead man's reputation could be smeared and, when his family complain, the person smearing could respond by refusing to apologise and repeating the claim. I know I find that pretty hateful.

For the [iDaily Mail[/i to define "Britain" in that way (if it does) is utterly vacuous.
To label someone, purely on the on the basis of having different views, as a hater of Britain is indefensible.

I happen to loathe the [iDaily Mail[/i, the concept of monarchy, unelected peers, the class system and many aspects of Parliament.
I also dislike the Church of England, Association football, reality television and the Conservative party's values.
Does that mean I hate Britain?
No, of course it doesn't.

North Korea isn't a Marxist state whether they have posters of him on the walls or not. Do some research and you will find that out.



Not only do you not understand what libel is, you don't have any understanding of R Milibands views on Marxism either. For example he was against revolutionary Marxism and was against dictatorships despising the Soviet version of it (Marxist-Leninism) and was very much for tolerance and free speech. He gave money to Czechoslovakian freedom fighters resisting Russian oppression. From one of my earlier linksThe Times also published a series of letters from Ralph Miliband to the newspaper which undermined the Mail's claim that he opposed free speech and failed to stand up to repression in the Warsaw Pact. In one letter he spoke out in favour of Czech dissidents.
[/i

The information is all there that shows R Milliband did not hate Britain and could not be accused of supporting anything like the kind of Marxism the Mail (and you!) assert he did.

If you have any interest at all in educating yourself on R Miliband rather than believing the drivel written in the Mail read thishttp://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/oct/01/daily-mail-distorted-book-ralph-milibandrl

If you do you may even conclude if Ed Miliband [ihas[/i been influenced by his Father, it might be a very good thing. R Miliband was clearly not only a towering intellect but also an extremely fair and just man.



Cambell had the guy on the ropes. When repeatedly pressed about the assertion R Miliband "hated Britain". He was reduced to repeating the rather pathetic phrase that Milibands Marxists views made him "antipathetic to the views and values of other British people".

Antipathetic means strongly disagrees with by the way. Now saying he hated Britain because he strongly disagreed with the views and values of other British is like saying Norman Tebbit "hates Britain" because he hates the Trade Unions. There is no connection between being a socialist and hating Britain any more than there is being a right wing Tory.

He "shouted him down" by asking him to answer the question put (similar to Paxo and Michael Howard). He wasn't in position to let the guy on Newsnight answer as he had no intention whatsoever of answering. He won the argument because the "opponent" couldn't/wouldn't answer or explain why he had been sent in in place of the person who is ultimately responsible and who is STILL hiding away, sending out minions by the bucketload to speak for him.

Campbell by plenty.