Fire extinguisher for the teaboy!
The subject under discussion was an event at which both Khan and Imam Suliman Gani spoke, and Khan is quoted thus: “Nick, you will know this because you’re a pro. You turn up at these events, often they’re two, three, four hours long. You’re the seventeenth speaker, there are three more after you”. That is the basis of Wickham’s attack, and my responses to his claims are based on what is quoted.
“This is demonstrably untrue. The photo below shows Khan and Gani together, side by side”. Was that at the event under discussion? If not, it’s irrelevant.
“There weren’t seventeen other speakers between Khan and Gani”. Khan does not say there were.
“There wasn’t a four hour time difference”. Khan does not say there was.
“They stood right next to each other”. See previous observation.
“There is no way Khan wouldn’t have seen Gani, and there is no way he wouldn’t have known who Gani is”. Khan does not make that claim.
“To suggest to listeners he has only ever shared a platform with Gani unknowingly is a blatant and deliberate untruth”. He still does not make that claim.
“Sadiq Khan, bang to rights fibbing to voters about his links to an al-Qaeda sympathising Islamic extremist”. Wrong. Let me correct you there: it should read “Alex Wickham, bang to rights lying to readers of the Fawkes blog about Sadiq Khan’s links to a local Imam”.
Wickham then Tweeted out the post with the claim “Khan says he never knowingly shared a platform with Suliman Gani. The picture that shows he's not telling the truth”. Again, see above, and again, he did not make that claim in the quote shown.
Alex Wickham is once more full value for his nickname. Another fine mess, once again.