If people really want to get rid of any perceived threat from the BNP, (and I might suggest that all this is a fuss about nothing as they will never get any significant power here in the UK), here is where I think their opponents are going wrong.
Violent opposition, this plays right into their hands as the BNP are now saying "who are the violent fascists now?"
No Platform Policy, the idea is that by not debating them and merely attempting to shout them down is fatally flawed. If you want to defeat a political organisation you have to be prepared to debate them and win the debate, it is like any other argument or competition, you have to be in it to win it. If you really can't do that then leave it to someone who can, don't make an idiot of yourself because it will be shouted from the rooftops.
Disrupting legal activities, if what they are doing is not breaking any laws then FFS don't try and stop them. Firstly it brings them huge amounts of publicity, gives them some kind of moral highground, and could end up with you sitting in jail.
Also worth remembering is that MI5 and Special Branch are watching their every move, if they fuck up they will be busted. It also means that both of those very secretive and scary government agencies will notice you if you step into their sights. Ergo I believe yesterdays egging incident was a massive own goal.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
B N P
This is the kind of thing that a lot of people find hard to stomach.
Griffen was taken to court twice over the allegations. The second time he was aquited, and the Govt stated the laws must now be changed, which is great but..... many people also saw hate preachers outside Frindsbury Mosque, preaching openly I may add, race hatred towards the west.
Now from where I sit that is not equal policy. Griffen was captured on film at a secret meeting, whereby the likes of hooky Hamza were seen openly doing it on the streets of London, where there were many police officers present. And did nothing btw.
Now people see this and start to wonder how this can be allowed to happen. How can one group be charged and sent to court, and another group get off scott free. In fact no charges were ever brought against them for their rantings.
Seems a strange one to me and until we stop pussy footing around with extremists, just like the powers that be seem to with the BNP, they will gain strength, and more importantly ....sympathy.
The way a lot of Brits see things at the moment is that there are not equal boundaries, because if you protest they chuck the race card at the first opportunity, but others do it and are allowed it seems to get away with it.
Lets treat everyone the same, with the same laws and the same punishments. Only then will the BNP sympathy vote start to dwindle, for if the Govt do nothing then they will continue to gain support.
Griffen was taken to court twice over the allegations. The second time he was aquited, and the Govt stated the laws must now be changed, which is great but..... many people also saw hate preachers outside Frindsbury Mosque, preaching openly I may add, race hatred towards the west.
Now from where I sit that is not equal policy. Griffen was captured on film at a secret meeting, whereby the likes of hooky Hamza were seen openly doing it on the streets of London, where there were many police officers present. And did nothing btw.
Now people see this and start to wonder how this can be allowed to happen. How can one group be charged and sent to court, and another group get off scott free. In fact no charges were ever brought against them for their rantings.
Seems a strange one to me and until we stop pussy footing around with extremists, just like the powers that be seem to with the BNP, they will gain strength, and more importantly ....sympathy.
The way a lot of Brits see things at the moment is that there are not equal boundaries, because if you protest they chuck the race card at the first opportunity, but others do it and are allowed it seems to get away with it.
Lets treat everyone the same, with the same laws and the same punishments. Only then will the BNP sympathy vote start to dwindle, for if the Govt do nothing then they will continue to gain support.
Quote by kentswingers777
Griffen was taken to court twice over the allegations. The second time he was aquited, and the Govt stated the laws must now be changed, which is great but..... many people also saw hate preachers outside Frindsbury Mosque, preaching openly I may add, race hatred towards the west.
Now from where I sit that is not equal policy. Griffen was captured on film at a secret meeting, whereby the likes of hooky Hamza were seen openly doing it on the streets of London, where there were many police officers present. And did nothing btw.
Now people see this and start to wonder how this can be allowed to happen. How can one group be charged and sent to court, and another group get off scott free. In fact no charges were ever brought against them for their rantings.
So old hooky got away with it all?
Controversial Muslim cleric Abu Hamza al-Masri has been jailed for seven years after being found guilty of inciting murder and race hate.
Never let facts get in the way of a good rant
Dave_Notts
Quote by flower411
Seems funny that they would say that he got off scott free if it`s just the time factor.
Maybe they were biding their time to build a case or even to see who else would join in, sorta giving them enough rope kinda thing.
The fact of the matter, is that he was arrested and is in jail.
I agree. Some may think that having evidence to prosecute is just red tape
.Dave_Notts
Did not leave it five minutes before Griffin was arrested though?
Hooky was eventually arrested but NOT for his rantings outside that mosque!!
There were many other issues he was arrested for, charged and convicted for.I was talking about the Friday sessions outside Frindsbury, which had no bearing on his arrest, as there were others there ranting too.
Seems an easy thing to get evidence when it is in black and white, on tape as well. Did it easy with Griffin but seemed not anywhere near as easy for hooky.
I wonder why that is??
Hooky was eventually arrested but NOT for his rantings outside that mosque!!
There were many other issues he was arrested for, charged and convicted for.I was talking about the Friday sessions outside Frindsbury, which had no bearing on his arrest, as there were others there ranting too.
Seems an easy thing to get evidence when it is in black and white, on tape as well. Did it easy with Griffin but seemed not anywhere near as easy for hooky.
I wonder why that is??
Quote by kentswingers777
Did not leave it five minutes before Griffin was arrested though?
Hooky was eventually arrested but NOT for his rantings outside that mosque!!
There were many other issues he was arrested for, charged and convicted for.I was talking about the Friday sessions outside Frindsbury, which had no bearing on his arrest, as there were others there ranting too.
Seems an easy thing to get evidence when it is in black and white, on tape as well. Did it easy with Griffin but seemed not anywhere near as easy for hooky.
I wonder why that is??
So they both did the same thing.
Both went to court.
The Islamic hate race preacher went down for 7 years. Where 21 months was on three counts of incitement to racial hatred.
The white hate race preacher gets elected to be an MEP.
These are the facts as I see them, yet you are still angling with your rants that the islamic hate preachers get away with it.
You make me laugh
:lol: :lol: :lol: Quote by kentswingers777
I wonder why that is??
It is in your head that there is a conspiracy. Unless you can show substantiated facts.
Dave_Notts
Quote by Dave__Notts
Did not leave it five minutes before Griffin was arrested though?
Hooky was eventually arrested but NOT for his rantings outside that mosque!!
There were many other issues he was arrested for, charged and convicted for.I was talking about the Friday sessions outside Frindsbury, which had no bearing on his arrest, as there were others there ranting too.
Seems an easy thing to get evidence when it is in black and white, on tape as well. Did it easy with Griffin but seemed not anywhere near as easy for hooky.
I wonder why that is??
So they both did the same thing.
Both went to court.
The Islamic hate race preacher went down for 7 years. Where 21 months was on three counts of incitement to racial hatred.
The white hate race preacher gets elected to be an MEP.
These are the facts as I see them, yet you are still angling with your rants that the islamic hate preachers get away with it.
You make me laugh
:lol: :lol: :lol: Quote by kentswingers777
I wonder why that is??
It is in your head that there is a conspiracy. Unless you can show substantiated facts.
Dave_Notts
Hello Davey,
There are many instances of hate preachers being allowed to flout UK law.
They can get around it by using live video links from other countries. There are so many web sites dedicated to showing us this.
Davey I know that the Govt have to make sure all the facts are there for a criminal arrest, but it seemed to many that when Griffen was arrrested and charged, and then had to do two trials before being aquited.
It seems to many that with Muslim radicals the evidence has to be so much more substantial, before anything is done.
Remember the BNP list of members that was released via the internet? What was ever done about that many ask.
Take this as a prime example.
The police will only take action IF someone complains? They need someone to complain? Rubbish, they can take action IF a Brit had said this.
There are hundreds of such incidents I could post but cannot be bothered because at the end of the day, this is exactly what BNP supporters see, and it is what makes them vote for the BNP.
As I have already stated many times, the laws are clearly there, but they are not equal laws. Some apply to some and then others can flout them. Treat EVERYONE the same and peoples attitudes will change, treat some differently and people will always use that as a weapon.
Sex God
Kent, Abu Hamza was convicted, among other things, of 3 counts of 'using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour with the intention of stirring up racial hatred', which are offences under the Public Order Act 1986, the same offences Nick Griffin was charged with and acquitted of. That would most definitely include his rantings outside the mosque, presumably on 3 seperate occasions. Abu Hamza went down for it, Nick Griffin got off, so I'm struggling to follow your argument that Griffin was somehow treated differently or more harshly than Hamza? 
I take it it has occurred to you that the police were, in addition to watching Hamza's friday sermons at the mosque, also trying to gather sufficient evidence to make a more serious case under the Terrorism Act 2000, which may go some way towards explaining why Griffin's arrest was seemingly more immediate. Hasn't it?
:? Nick Griffin's case was maybe just a bit more cut and dried as far as his alleged offences went, and that's maybe the only explanation you need.
N x x x ;)
I take it it has occurred to you that the police were, in addition to watching Hamza's friday sermons at the mosque, also trying to gather sufficient evidence to make a more serious case under the Terrorism Act 2000, which may go some way towards explaining why Griffin's arrest was seemingly more immediate. Hasn't it?
:? Nick Griffin's case was maybe just a bit more cut and dried as far as his alleged offences went, and that's maybe the only explanation you need. N x x x ;)
Quote by flower411
Kent, Abu Hamza was convicted, among other things, of 3 counts of 'using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour with the intention of stirring up racial hatred', which are offences under the Public Order Act 1986, the same offences Nick Griffin was charged with and acquitted of. That would most definitely include his rantings outside the mosque, presumably on 3 seperate occasions. Abu Hamza went down for it, Nick Griffin got off, so I'm struggling to follow your argument that Griffin was somehow treated differently or more harshly than Hamza?
I take it it has occurred to you that the police were, in addition to watching Hamza's friday sermons at the mosque, also trying to gather sufficient evidence to make a more serious case under the Terrorism Act 2000, which may go some way towards explaining why Griffin's arrest was seemingly more immediate. Hasn't it?
N x x x ;)
I think 777 is saying that Griffin should have been jailed as well ..... :dunno:
But, as has already been mentioned, the courts have to deal with evidence and if there wasn`t enough evidence, maybe the police should have spent a bit more time gathering some so that they could make a case.
Exactly.
Both were deemed to have been ranting racial hatred, all be it that Griffen done his in private.
Had the BNP been ranting on the streets like Hooky had done, then am sure that the police would have taken action more quickly than they did with Hooky, regardless of what evidence they were trying to put together for an arrest.
The public are quick enough to condemn the BNP and turn up in numbers if the BNP are about but....I never saw one demonstrator when Hooky and his ilk, were doing it on a weekly basis outside that Mosque. That to me is a strange one. Maybe people in power are too scared to act if it is a fundamentalist preacher, but seem to be ok if it is a member of the BNP. That IS how a lot of people see it.
Inciting racial hatred is one thing but, Hooky was also ranting and preaching about others commiting terrorist acts. Different thing entirely.
I think ANY act of inciting racial hatred or inciting others to commit acts of terrorism or praising those that have, should be locked away for a minimum of five years.
Quote by jajeblues
Quite frankly it is simple.
Everyone gets the politicians they do not vote for.
All those people who stayed at home and did not vote be proud of yourself
you helped the BNP get in
perhaps not...whats saying they were not thinking of voting for the BNP themselves,then decided just to not vote at all...and even if they had voted...i saw at least 15 different candidates on my ballot form, that wouldn't have made much difference on the BNP votes anyway!
Quote by Mr-Powers
and even if they had voted...i saw at least 15 different candidates on my ballot form, that wouldn't have made much difference on the BNP votes anyway!
The candidates that were elected had a certain percentage of the vote. The more votes for anyone but the BNP, the more difficult the bnp would have found it to be elected.
In the NW they needed 8% of the total vote to get 1 seat. Had the turnout been bigger, the BNP, with the the same number of votes, would not have got a seat.
Behind the suits and the smiles the BNP is still a rather nasty group of racist, fascist people and I am embarrassed to think that one of them represents me in the European Parliament.
Sex God
Quote by kentswingers777
Whether we like it or not, the BNP have democratically won two seats, the questions are...how and why?
I guess you answered your own question in an earlier post:
Quote by kentswingers777
I have never voted in the European elections as I do not like European politics, so no doubt will abstain again.
If more people had voted (even protest votes) for more "appropriate" parties, they wouldn't have got the seats.
The fact is we are part of European politics whether we like it or not. The only way to change things is to get up off our proverbials and have our say.
I'm not sticking up for Griffin, and this is nothing to do with his missing eye or the fact that a fully out homosexual former national front leader says they had a gay affair. Can't hold a chap's disability or sexual preference against him.
But the Abu Hamza thing was much worse a case, he was publicly telling his people to murder gays and Jews. All Griffin did was call Islam a wicked and evil faith, not nice but not as bad methinks.
But the Abu Hamza thing was much worse a case, he was publicly telling his people to murder gays and Jews. All Griffin did was call Islam a wicked and evil faith, not nice but not as bad methinks.
Quote by BrightonGeezer
I'm not sticking up for Griffin, and this is nothing to do with his missing eye or the fact that a fully out homosexual former national front leader says they had a gay affair. Can't hold a chap's disability or sexual preference against him.
But the Abu Hamza thing was much worse a case, he was publicly telling his people to murder gays and Jews. All Griffin did was call Islam a wicked and evil faith, not nice but not as bad methinks.
I would say that is like comparing murder and manslaughter and saying one is not as bad as the other. If both break the law then they are tried under the same law.........the only difference should be the punishment. If it is "not as bad" then the sentance should be more lenient
Dave_Notts
Quote by kentswingers777
This artical from Max Hastings of the Daily Mail, is the best response so far as to why the BNP are where they are.
A brilliant artical.
I have only skimmed your article. However, this 'fact' caught my eye.
Today, there are 300 primary schools in England where more than 70 per cent of pupils - nearly half a million children - use English only as a second language.
Those figures are bollocks.
500,000 divided by 300 = 1,666.
I wonder if Mr Hastings could name the 300 primary schools that average 1,666 pupils each, or maybe you could throw some light on it. To have 1666 pupils, averaging 30 pupils per class would be about 55 classes. Allow 8 year groups for a school, that's a 7 class entry. Name me more than 10 primary schools in the country with numbers like that and I would be extremely surprised. In fact name me 1 and I would be surprised - the biggest in Manchester is 4 class entry.
If you find that level of reporting as 'brilliant' it does actually explain a lot.
(statutory wink) 
Sex God
Quote by northwest-cpl
This artical from Max Hastings of the Daily Mail, is the best response so far as to why the BNP are where they are.
A brilliant artical.
I have only skimmed your article. However, this 'fact' caught my eye.
Today, there are 300 primary schools in England where more than 70 per cent of pupils - nearly half a million children - use English only as a second language.
Those figures are bollocks.
500,000 divided by 300 = 1,666.
I wonder if Mr Hastings could name the 300 primary schools that average 1,666 pupils each, or maybe you could throw some light on it. To have 1666 pupils, averaging 30 pupils per class would be about 55 classes. Allow 8 year groups for a school, that's a 7 class entry. Name me more than 10 primary schools in the country with numbers like that and I would be extremely surprised. In fact name me 1 and I would be surprised - the biggest in Manchester is 4 class entry.
If you find that level of reporting as 'brilliant' it does actually explain a lot.
(statutory wink)And the half a million is only 70% of the entry. So there would actually be more children in those primary schools. I don't think there's even one primary school that large.
Quote by Freckledbird
And the half a million is only 70% of the entry. So there would actually be more children in those primary schools. I don't think there's even one primary school that large.
I was allowing for Mr Hastings get out clause of 'nearly' half a million.
I noted that there were more 'statistics' in the article but couldn't be bothered to read any further, assuming that they were equally as valid as the preposterous claims about primary schools.
It's this totally misinformed ranting by the sleazier end of the media that causes dissent and prejudice within society and benefits no-one but a few right wing extremists and even fewer newspaper magnates.
Northwest.....to be honest I did not notice that claim as the main reason for posting it was his reasons why people were voting for the BNP.
I am not an expert on schools or their numbers, but the artical had a lot of valid points, in my opinion.
Sometimes I really can see why people, new members that is, would even bother to post on this forum.
Everything is scrutinised and nit picked. Maybe I do it as well:
In any artical that long anyone could nit pick on anything, the point was the reasons why it seemed people voted for the BNP, hence the thread subject.
A lot of people make silly claims, once again sometimes me included, but the mere fact that you could not be bothered with ALL the artical, sums it up for me.
Some here will read the first paragraph, fear it is from a right wing activist and not go any further, and then slag off the person that posted it...usually me.
As somebody said to me only a couple of days ago... " when we have over 70 million people living here, and our infrastructure has collapsed with the weight of mass immigration, only then will people realise the mistake of it all "....un quote.
Read all of the artical and then make your mind up, not just bits that you deem not be be right. That is like reading half of a book, and making the assumption the whole book is bollocks.
As always the stat :wink:
I am not an expert on schools or their numbers, but the artical had a lot of valid points, in my opinion.
Sometimes I really can see why people, new members that is, would even bother to post on this forum.
Everything is scrutinised and nit picked. Maybe I do it as well
: In any artical that long anyone could nit pick on anything, the point was the reasons why it seemed people voted for the BNP, hence the thread subject.
A lot of people make silly claims, once again sometimes me included, but the mere fact that you could not be bothered with ALL the artical, sums it up for me.
Some here will read the first paragraph, fear it is from a right wing activist and not go any further, and then slag off the person that posted it...usually me.
As somebody said to me only a couple of days ago... " when we have over 70 million people living here, and our infrastructure has collapsed with the weight of mass immigration, only then will people realise the mistake of it all "....un quote.
Read all of the artical and then make your mind up, not just bits that you deem not be be right. That is like reading half of a book, and making the assumption the whole book is bollocks.
As always the stat
:wink: If you write an article in the newspaper that is based on statistics then it is best to get your statistics right unless you want to be accused of scaremongering. He also claims we are the most densely populated country in Europe after Malta. Check the statistics for Holland and Belgium.
It is hardly nitpicking to check on outrageous claims. You don't need to be an expert on primary schools to realise his printed figures were ridiculous. You just need to exercise a little common sense and not believe all that you read merely because it panders to your prejudices.
If people new to the forum post unsubstantiated bollocks claiming it as fact then they can expect to be challenged.
Can you explain why I should need to read all of an article that has been found to be fundamentally flawed in its statistics, when, without those statistics it is merely personal opinion. If Mr Hastings could produce some facts to back his arguments then I might be prepared to spend some time reading it. The article is in a Sunday paper. He's had a week to write it, check his facts and have it proof read. Something so glaringly wrong slipping through suggests not a mistake but lies.
Edited to add that our infrastructure might collapse if we removed all immigrants from this country - the NHS, transport networks and kebab takeaways to name three areas.
It is hardly nitpicking to check on outrageous claims. You don't need to be an expert on primary schools to realise his printed figures were ridiculous. You just need to exercise a little common sense and not believe all that you read merely because it panders to your prejudices.
If people new to the forum post unsubstantiated bollocks claiming it as fact then they can expect to be challenged.
Can you explain why I should need to read all of an article that has been found to be fundamentally flawed in its statistics, when, without those statistics it is merely personal opinion. If Mr Hastings could produce some facts to back his arguments then I might be prepared to spend some time reading it. The article is in a Sunday paper. He's had a week to write it, check his facts and have it proof read. Something so glaringly wrong slipping through suggests not a mistake but lies.
Edited to add that our infrastructure might collapse if we removed all immigrants from this country - the NHS, transport networks and kebab takeaways to name three areas.
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: 
Sex God
3 reasons why we have fascist M.E.P,s...ignorance,bigotry,stupidity.....all readily available in a newsagent near you.
Yes, I can remember when he was an elected MP.
I cannot, for the life of me, remember voting for all those faceless people who run the civil service. They seem to be able to "get" to elected people and get minds changed: But who are they ?
I also do not remember voting for chief police officers, yet they seem to be able to refuse to comply with directions from high courts with impunity.
I cannot, for the life of me, remember voting for all those faceless people who run the civil service. They seem to be able to "get" to elected people and get minds changed: But who are they ?
I also do not remember voting for chief police officers, yet they seem to be able to refuse to comply with directions from high courts with impunity.
Quote by JTS
Yes, I can remember when he was an elected MP.
I cannot, for the life of me, remember voting for all those faceless people who run the civil service. They seem to be able to "get" to elected people and get minds changed: But who are they ?
I also do not remember voting for chief police officers, yet they seem to be able to refuse to comply with directions from high courts with impunity.
Are you then advocating a US style system where the Police Chiefs are elected?
Do you have a view on how the Civil Service should be controlled other than by the Government of the day?
One of my customers today made a valid point about the BNP.
He does not seem to get the public anger as to why there are two BNP members now MEP's.
I asked him why and he said " all this fuss over two members of a racist party, and yet nobody says anything about two IRA members being actual MP's,in the greatest democracy on the planet, being the house of commons ".
He was of course talking about Adams and Mcguiness, who represent the " political wing ", of the IRA.
A terrorist organisation that killed many people, and two of it's members are actually MP's. They have of course
never stepped foot into Parliament as MP's as they will not swear the Queens thingy, cannot remember what it is now.
He I suppose has some kind of point really. None of them should be MP'S of any sort, but they ARE and all of them democratically elected, whether we like it or not.
He does not seem to get the public anger as to why there are two BNP members now MEP's.
I asked him why and he said " all this fuss over two members of a racist party, and yet nobody says anything about two IRA members being actual MP's,in the greatest democracy on the planet, being the house of commons ".
He was of course talking about Adams and Mcguiness, who represent the " political wing ", of the IRA.
A terrorist organisation that killed many people, and two of it's members are actually MP's. They have of course
never stepped foot into Parliament as MP's as they will not swear the Queens thingy, cannot remember what it is now.
He I suppose has some kind of point really. None of them should be MP'S of any sort, but they ARE and all of them democratically elected, whether we like it or not.
