Motions voted against were either targetted for having too much detail (read, too little room for SWP interpretation) or for setting up focus groups (too cumbersome, read, too difficult to find enough SWP cronies to fill). SWP control freakery was ever present throughout.

The lone member of National Committee from the loony party that is the CPGB was voted off and seemed to imply he was off to found an english versio of the Scottish Socialist Party. Good luck to him, but I doubt he's the person for the job considering what a prat he looked like throughout.

One motion which might have caught Indymedia readers eyes was a motion to include and open-borders policy in the manifesto. Apparently this one motion would have been seized upon by the mainstream media and used to prove RESPECT was unelectable. This in turn, given the opposing speakers response, would have led to a BNP goverment. Or simply, to more blackmail from above, perhaps? Also, apparently this would have been a banner statement and not something we would ever be able to carry out, purely because

The conference rightly welcomed speeches from Moslems (soceities new Jews?) and Kurds and even saw George Galloway stand up for the British aid worker being held on the basis that she is "one of their kind and not Blair's kind". The only vaguely mainstream press in the building were Arab News Network and Al-Jazeera, who seemed delighted to tape Galloway's statements. According to him, the whole of the middle east was looking to RESPECT. They're obviously desparate.