Sadiq Khan spent last week complaining about Zac Goldsmith labelling him as “radical” in his campaign literature. The Sunday Times reported the Labour Mayoral candidate’s reaction:

Khan said the leaflet branding him “radical” was “frankly offensive”. He said: “Calling someone divisive and radical, be very careful how that’s perceived. You’re playing with fire. When you say that about a candidate of Islamic faith, what are you implying? That will come back and bite you in the bum if you resort to that.”

When Zac responded accusing Sadiq of “playing the race card”, a Khan spokesman hit back even more stridently, accusing him of “dog-whistle” politics and racist campaigning:

“It was the Zac Goldsmith campaign which put out the infamous dog-whistle leaflet branding Sadiq as ‘radical’ just because he happens to be a Muslim.”

So it came as a surprise to Guido that Sadiq has used the word “radical” to favourably describe his and Labour’s policies no fewer than 19 times. As recently as December, Sadiq was calling for “radical solutions” to air pollution in London. Back in August he wrote how a “radical agenda” was required to win the Mayoral campaign. In April he tweeted that Labour were launching “the most radical plan to tackle race inequality in generations”. What’s wrong with Sadiq? Khan’t he read his own words?

He warned he would do it if he lost Bradford West, and today it’s confirmed:

I'm standing for Mayor of London 2016. If you can help in any way, write to me at galloway4london@gmail.com pic.twitter.com/UDX0KMZ2VO

— George Galloway (@georgegalloway) May 28, 2015

Will it turn out to be a “most unwise” move?