Well, Well, Well...

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292584 wrote: And - pardon me - this resulted in a prosecution? A prison sentence?

Issie: The fact that you can be thrown in prison for mentioning someone's skin tone wouldn't have anything to do with the "appear" would it.?

spot: Perhaps you'd like to show me either an instance of that happening or alternatively the legislation which might permit it to happen.


Your missing the point entirely. IF the person you shout at is black and you call them a Piece of scum, you will get away with It because You are legally entitled to an opinion. If you call the person 'A black piece of scum' that then becomes a section 5 Public Order Offence. Depending on the Individual Police Officer, he could turn It Into Rascist abuse and Indeed get a prosecution.

[spot]

"Could" only turns into "has" if you have real-world examples to discuss and compare. It's only on a level which relates to reality that any of this has any impact on the world.

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292590 wrote: "Could" only turns into "has" if you have real-world examples to discuss and compare. It's only on a level which relates to reality that any of this has any impact on the world.
The only way you can get 'Proof' Is when a case hits the National Newspapers as well you know. I don't have enough hours In the day to google like you becuase you refuse to accept that any-one else on this forum may know slightly more In a subject than you do.

However, when I have time I will look for such a case. They happen regually.

[Ahso!]

I get the impression knowledge is imagining and imagining is knowledge in this thread. Either that or its gambling and playing the odds.

People should not make claims unless they have proof at their fingertips. There are many people in this forum that just say: Oh Really! when fed something, but there are also some here whom are critical thinkers and require evidence when certain claims are made. If the latter is difficult for some to fathom and become defensive, then perhaps they don't understand critical thinking and are ill prepared to converse with such individuals.

Either s#@t or get off the pot for gods sake!

[Oscar Namechange]

Ahso!;1292713 wrote: I get the impression knowledge is imagining and imagining is knowledge in this thread. Either that or its gambling and playing the odds.

People should not make claims unless they have proof at their fingertips. There are many people in this forum that just say: Oh Really! when fed something, but there are also some here whom are critical thinkers and require evidence when certain claims are made. If the latter is difficult for some to fathom and become defensive, then perhaps they don't understand critical thinking and are ill prepared to converse with such individuals.

Either s#@t or get off the pot for gods sake!
OK... As your an expert on our Political parties and you now seem to be an expert on our Criminal and Justice system, perhaps you could contribute with some Insight Into the section 5 public Order Offence.. The Inciting Racial Hatred Law and The Distribution of racially motivated Literature.

Unless you can, I suggest that you have no Idea of what this thread is about, what any of the posts are about and you are only posting In this thread to once again, Troll and Incite.

[gmc]

Ahso!;1292713 wrote: I get the impression knowledge is imagining and imagining is knowledge in this thread. Either that or its gambling and playing the odds.

People should not make claims unless they have proof at their fingertips. There are many people in this forum that just say: Oh Really! when fed something, but there are also some here whom are critical thinkers and require evidence when certain claims are made. If the latter is difficult for some to fathom and become defensive, then perhaps they don't understand critical thinking and are ill prepared to converse with such individuals.

Either s#@t or get off the pot for gods sake!


There are some people that spout nothing but bullshit and sadly suffer from verbal diarrhoea and sadly are convinced their utter nonsense smells of roses and throw their toys out the pram when challenged but that is the nature of political debate nowadays. Sadly religion seems to be coming back in to british politics which should be a source of despair for any rational voter.

There is only one party worth considering and that's the raving monster loony party. You know we're in trouble when they start seeming sensible.

http://www.omrlp.com/

We are reminded of Gordon Browns famous speech a while ago promising to end the economic cycle of "Boom and Bust

We in the Loony Party are quite happy to give credit, where credits due (unlike the banks), and we have to agree he has succeeded in ending the "Boom" bit.


YouTube - Protest Monster NOT For The BNP

You know it makes sense :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292590 wrote: "Could" only turns into "has" if you have real-world examples to discuss and compare. It's only on a level which relates to reality that any of this has any impact on the world.


Even though this case Is an Asian calling some-one a 'White bastard' and even though the case did not result In a conviction, It is however, A classic example that you can be arrested and charged for using the words 'Black' or 'White' In your Insult.

BNP: Asian Man Accused Of Shouting Racial Abuse At Nick Griffin Cleared At Preston Crown Court | UK News | Sky News

[Oscar Namechange]

gmc;1292733 wrote: There are some people that spout nothing but bullshit and sadly suffer from verbal diarrhoea and sadly are convinced their utter nonsense smells of roses and throw their toys out the pram when challenged but that is the nature of political debate nowadays. Sadly religion seems to be coming back in to british politics which should be a source of despair for any rational voter.

There is only one party worth considering and that's the raving monster loony party. You know we're in trouble when they start seeming sensible.

http://www.omrlp.com/



YouTube - Protest Monster NOT For The BNP

You know it makes sense :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl
Haven't you got anything new to say?

It's glaringly obvious, that you are slipping the 'Religious' theme back Into any thread you can.

[Ahso!]

oscar;1292734 wrote: Even though this case Is an Asian calling some-one a 'White bastard' and even though the case did not result In a conviction, It is however, A classic example that you can be arrested and charged for using the words 'Black' or 'White' In your Insult.

BNP: Asian Man Accused Of Shouting Racial Abuse At Nick Griffin Cleared At Preston Crown Court | UK News | Sky NewsTauriq Khalid, 23, denied shouting "white b*******" at a group of far-right demonstrators in his home town of Burnley, Lancashire, in November 2008.

A jury of five women and seven men cleared Khalid of one count of using racially abusive threatening behaviour.He wasn't arrested for saying "white bastards", he was arrested for "racially abusive threatening behavior". It was more that Griffin felt threatened physically.

[gmc]

oscar;1292735 wrote: Haven't you got anything new to say?

It's glaringly obvious, that you are slipping the 'Religious' theme back Into any thread you can.


Typical I try and introduce some levity and you try and pick a fight.

It was an aside but I wasn't actually making it up. It's something I don't like to see. don't tell me you think religion isn't an issue for the BNP?

Murphy’s Pope invitation ‘just political stunt’ - Times Online

So what would your raving monster loony name be? All the suggestion I have for you are slightly offensive-funny-but slightly offensive. I have this disturbing image of your election poster with you in leather, nazi jackboots and carrying a whip with the tag-line-"who are you calling a white bastard"

[Oscar Namechange]

Ahso!;1292739 wrote: He wasn't arrested for saying "white bastards", he was arrested for "racially abusive threatening behavior". It was more that Griffin felt threatened physically.
I beg your pardon Ahso... I did not know you were In the courtroom for the full trial or Indeed that you have a transcript of that trial. :yh_rotfl

Why don't you try answering the Questions put to you In this thread rather than just tediously agree with anything Spot says? You can't answer those questions can you?

[Ahso!]

There you go employing those bullying tactics again.

It was your article, not mine. If you can't defend your own evidence, perhaps its better not to use it.

You'll have to choose to get over the smarting, you know.

[Issie]

Originally Posted by Ahso!

I get the impression knowledge is imagining and imagining is knowledge in this thread. Either that or its gambling and playing the odds.

People should not make claims unless they have proof at their fingertips. There are many people in this forum that just say: Oh Really! when fed something, but there are also some here whom are critical thinkers and require evidence when certain claims are made. If the latter is difficult for some to fathom and become defensive, then perhaps they don't understand critical thinking and are ill prepared to converse with such individuals.

Either s#@t or get off the pot for gods sake!


Well thank you for those words of wisdom Ahso!, but maybe you shouldn't go near the pot in the first place. :rolleyes:

I'll remind you that I gave some reputable links regarding the BBC and you dissed them down, you then proceeded to carry on with your knowledge of the BBC, but you didn't know that here in the UK, if you have a TV in your home or any other means of receiving the BBC transmission, regardless whether or not you watch the BBC, you have to pay £139 per year for a licence, or face a fine or prison.

Not exactly inspiring to discuss the great British Broadcasting Corporation, when you have no idea how they are funded.:rolleyes:

[Snowfire]

While I agree this thread is crying out for a little levity, I'm still aching to find out the economics of some of the earlier posts. Who gets top qualify for the £300,000 repatriation incentive and how we as a country get to pay for the possibility of a million people - conservatively speaking - taking up the offer. A million x 300,000 comes to £300,000,000,000 unless I've got my noughts wrong. That'll take one or two bankers bonuses to pay for that lot

[Issie]

Here, chew on this.....I'm very busy at the moment

Racial slur as man calls Welsh woman English | Top News | Reuters

[Ahso!]

Issie;1292748 wrote: Here, chew on this.....I'm very busy at the moment

Racial slur as man calls Welsh woman English | Top News | ReutersHave you read the article? If you're too busy to do this now, why not wait until you have time to be serious?

[Issie]

Have you read the article?
What do you think??????????????????????????????????????????

[Oscar Namechange]

Issie;1292748 wrote: Here, chew on this.....I'm very busy at the moment

Racial slur as man calls Welsh woman English | Top News | Reuters
Issie... The run In I had with four scroats outside my house I mentioned earlier In the thread was found Un-acceptable to the Investigating Police Officer because one of the black youths called me ' A WHITE' ---------. The Officer spent 5 weeks tracking the youth down as IT WAS Racial abuse. As I told the police In my Interview, I don't mind him calling me 'A ----- as every-one Is entitled to an opinion In the legal sense, I do however Object to being called 'A White -----' He totally agreed with me and put a lot of work into tracking him down because of It.

Very close to Spot's home In Bristol, one of my Immediate family pounds the beat as a Beat Officer as we speak. If She tells me that Some-one can be arrested and charged for using the term 'Black' In an Insult, under a section 5, Public Order Offence, then I believe her any day over Spots reclusive opinion.

[Ahso!]

Its often a good habit to include the most relevant quote from the article and give a summary of your point.

Although its a short article with not much detail, it seems the driver called the lady an "English Bitch". And my guess is (though its not stated in the article) that it must have gotten fairly loud and probably disruptive.Michael Forsythe was sentenced to 10 weeks in jail, suspended for 12 months, after being found guilty of racially aggravated disorderly behaviour, a court official said One again the word behavior is used, which indicates to me it was more than just "mentioning" something.

[Oscar Namechange]

Ahso!;1292742 wrote: There you go employing those bullying tactics again.

It was your article, not mine. If you can't defend your own evidence, perhaps its better not to use it.

You'll have to choose to get over the smarting, you know. As usual, you have missed the point entirely.

There was not enough evidence to charge the man with threats to kill Nick Griffin. However, he was arrested and charged for calling him a WHITE bastard. That was what the case enitially rested on... Racial Abuse as the headlines of the article should tell you.

[Ahso!]

Snowfire;1292745 wrote: While I agree this thread is crying out for a little levity, I'm still aching to find out the economics of some of the earlier posts. Who gets top qualify for the £300,000 repatriation incentive and how we as a country get to pay for the possibility of a million people - conservatively speaking - taking up the offer. A million x 300,000 comes to £300,000,000,000 unless I've got my noughts wrong. That'll take one or two bankers bonuses to pay for that lotSorry they are preoccupied with me. I'd just assume they got around to offering you what you've asked for.

[Oscar Namechange]

Ahso!;1292758 wrote: Its often a good habit to include the most relevant quote from the article and give a summary of your point.

Although its a short article with not much detail, it seems the driver called the lady an "English Bitch". And my guess is (though its not stated in the article) that it must have gotten fairly loud and probably disruptive.One again the word behavior is used, which indicates to me it was more than just "mentioning" something.
I stated earlier In this thread that a Section 5 Public Order Offence covers a whole host of Unpleastness. The word 'behaviour' is an English descriptive term used for the offence that occured under the section 5. In any Court case Involving a Section 5, the Judge or Magistrates In summing up will refer to the accussed's act as 'behaviour'. I suggest you get a grasp of English legal Terminology before you make a fool of yourself yet again.

Now... Pehaps you'd like to answer the questions put to you?

[Ahso!]

oscar;1292759 wrote: As usual, you have missed the point entirely.

There was not enough evidence to charge the man with threats to kill Nick Griffin. However, he was arrested and charged for calling him a WHITE bastard. That was what the case enitially rested on... Racial Abuse as the headlines of the article should tell you.Yes, but Griffin claimed falsely that he did threaten him. You might try reading the article

[Oscar Namechange]

Snowfire;1292745 wrote: While I agree this thread is crying out for a little levity, I'm still aching to find out the economics of some of the earlier posts. Who gets top qualify for the £300,000 repatriation incentive and how we as a country get to pay for the possibility of a million people - conservatively speaking - taking up the offer. A million x 300,000 comes to £300,000,000,000 unless I've got my noughts wrong. That'll take one or two bankers bonuses to pay for that lot
You have a good point. Imagine the savings If we Immediately deported every Immigrant In our Prisons or any Immigrant charged with an offence?

Britain, a United Nations of crime: Offenders from 160 countries are in our crowded prisons... one in seven inmates | Mail Online

[Oscar Namechange]

Ahso!;1292764 wrote: Yes, but Griffin claimed falsely that he did threaten him. You might try reading the article
In what way did he claim he was 'falsly' threatened?

What part of the headline 'Racial Abuse to Nick Griffin' do you not Understand?

[Ahso!]

oscar;1292769 wrote: In what way did he claim he was 'falsly' threatened?

What part of the headline 'Racial Abuse to Nick Griffin' do you not Understand?Is that all you've read, the headline?

[Ahso!]

Here you go.Mr Griffin, giving evidence on the first day of the trial, claimed he was called a "white b******" by a young Asian man in a silver Astra.

He said the man "leaned out of the car and pointed at me and made a gun and gang gesture".

Mr Griffin also claimed the defendant threatened him by shouting "I'm going to...".

He said that although he did not hear the words, he interpreted them as a threat to kill or shoot him, prompting him to leave the demonstration fearing for his safety.

[Oscar Namechange]

Ahso!;1292773 wrote: Is that all you've read, the headline? It seems that you Omitted It to find anything that agree's with Spot.

Instead of contining to make a fool of yourself trolling every thread that Spot contributes to and agreeing with him, why don't you answer the Questions put to you?

Or, try explaining your statement In this thread that US Illegals pick up the economy In the US? You Can't can you?

Your hear for one reason only and your not only making It obvious, your making a fool of yourself.

You know nothing of British Politics, nothing of the British Legal system and nothing of Nick Griffin or the BNP. You contribute nothing to this thread In the way of debate.

I'm actually going to put you on Ignore now because you have nothing to offer and It Is my legal right to say 'I believe' you are an Idiot' just here to stir the pot.

The differnece between you and I is that when I contribute to US threads I actually only do so when I am sure I know what I am talking about. That's why In another thread, I quoted you every failure of the US military between 1960 and 1980. I could go back further should you wish.

[Oscar Namechange]

Ahso!;1292774 wrote: Here you go.
So how Is that 'Falsley' accussing him of threatening him as you stated?

So.. By that section, your statement is wholly In-accurate. You have just totally contridicted yourself. Mr Griffin told police from the first Instance that he did not hear the man making threats to kill. So how exactly did he 'Falsly' accuse him? Or are you just talking shyte again?

The man was Initially arrested for Racial Abuse to Mr Griffin. The section Of threats to kill were merely added Imformation that came out during the trial.

I suggest you learn to read also.

[Ahso!]

:wah:

[Oscar Namechange]

Ahso!;1292778 wrote: :wah:
yep... that's about the level of your IQ.

:yh_cowboy:yh_cowboy



:yh_chickn:yh_chickn



:yh_ttth:yh_ttth



:yh_loser:yh_loser

[spot]

oscar;1292706 wrote: The only way you can get 'Proof' Is when a case hits the National Newspapers as well you know. I don't have enough hours In the day to google like you becuase you refuse to accept that any-one else on this forum may know slightly more In a subject than you do.

However, when I have time I will look for such a case. They happen regually.


I guarantee that every single case of anyone ever going to prison for expressing racial hatred will have had national press coverage. What we're disputing is the level of racial hatred needed for a prosecution to result in a prison sentence. If they happen regularly, as you claim, then it ought to be a simple enough matter for you to bring some instances into the thread at which point we can compare your claims with actuality.

Perhaps you have trouble seeing both sides of any particular disagreement. Perhaps you have trouble seeking out the middle ground and looking for the areas where agreement can be reached. It would be more engaging to manage both, like what I do.

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292808 wrote: , like what I do. Blimey !!! Your grammar is appalling.

[gmc]

Issie;1292748 wrote: Here, chew on this.....I'm very busy at the moment

Racial slur as man calls Welsh woman English | Top News | Reuters


Well it is deeply offensive to be called english:eek:-especially by an irishman but if she had responded by telling him to **** off back to his home bog at least they could have kept the dialogue going.

He should probably have been charged with using threatening behaviour rather than racially aggravated disorderly behaviour. Think of the precedent set-it means they will have to stop all international football matches and events like the six nations cup in case somebody calls an Englishman a bad name.

posted by oscar

You know nothing of British Politics, nothing of the British Legal system and nothing of Nick Griffin or the BNP. You contribute nothing to this thread In the way of debate.


Em Oscar, you could do with reading up bit yourself.

Law of the United Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are three distinct legal jurisdictions in the United Kingdom: England and Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland.[3] Each has its own legal system.


British and English are not synonymous.

[Oscar Namechange]

gmc;1292810 wrote: . Think of the precedent set-it means they will have to stop all international football matches and events like the six nations cup in case somebody calls an Englishman a bad name.



I was always a Lady when attending the Football Terraces In the 70's. Where as the oppossing fans would shout 'ooo are yer.. oo are yer', I would ask 'And you are whom?

[gmc]

oscar;1292813 wrote: I was always a Lady when attending the Football Terraces In the 70's. Where as the oppossing fans would shout 'ooo are yer.. oo are yer', I would ask 'And you are whom?


So even then you wouldn't answer a question but just try and change the subject.

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292808 wrote: I guarantee that every single case of anyone ever going to prison for expressing racial hatred will have had national press coverage. What we're disputing is the level of racial hatred needed for a prosecution to result in a prison sentence. If they happen regularly, as you claim, then it ought to be a simple enough matter for you to bring some instances into the thread at which point we can compare your claims with actuality.

Perhaps you have trouble seeing both sides of any particular disagreement. Perhaps you have trouble seeking out the middle ground and looking for the areas where agreement can be reached. It would be more engaging to manage both, like what I do.
I would have thought Griffins case was a perfect example. Griffin always told police from the beginning he did not exactly hear the threat to kill and took the hand gesture to mean that. The accussed was charged with racial abuse for calling him a 'White Bastard' however.

I would have thought that Issie's example of the 'Welsh' case of racial abuse was perfect also.

You however just won't accept It. I do not have any problem seeing both sides of an argument, you, on the other hand, do. It's a pity you do not practice what you preach and look for area's where agreement can be reached. You have a self-Imposed Importance on this forum where you believe you are the Oracle of all wisdom. As I said In an earlier post. If an actual Police Officer tells me something, then I would much rather believe their experience than you finding the cut and paste function.

Again, going back to the incident with the scroats outside my house. I actually told one of them that he was a waste of sperm, and I told the Police I said It. I told them that had I of called him a Black waste of sperm, It would no doubt be an Offence. The Officer said I was correct. So, some-times, experience of life Is far more valuable. You do not know It all and you certainly never will.

[Oscar Namechange]

gmc;1292890 wrote: So even then you wouldn't answer a question but just try and change the subject. Answer what question?

I told Ahso he knew nothing of the British Legal system based on his failure to contribute any-thing of fact to this thread and his false statement that Griffin had 'Falsly' accused the Asian of threats to kill. Having asked him where he got this from and his continued failure to answer any question put to him, I came to the conclusion that he knew nothing of the British Legal and Judicial system.

Where-as I never proffessed to knowing the legal system Inside out. Show me where I stated that I knew all there was to know about anything to do with Britain?

[gmc]

oscar;1292896 wrote: Answer what question?

I told Ahso he knew nothing of the British Legal system based on his failure to contribute any-thing of fact to this thread and his false statement that Griffin had 'Falsly' accused the Asian of threats to kill. Having asked him where he got this from and his continued failure to answer any question put to him, I came to the conclusion that he knew nothing of the British Legal and Judicial system.

Where-as I never proffessed to knowing the legal system Inside out. Show me where I stated that I knew all there was to know about anything to do with Britain?


I've come to the conclusion you tend not to read things properly before you respond, and indeed you don't read your own links never mind anybodyelses.

[Oscar Namechange]

gmc;1292901 wrote: I've come to the conclusion you tend not to read things properly before you respond, and indeed you don't read your own links never mind anybodyelses.
Sorry, Did you say some-thing.?

[gmc]

oscar;1292916 wrote: Sorry, Did you say some-thing.?


and your spelling is terrible-or as you would have it terr-ible.

[Oscar Namechange]

gmc;1292938 wrote: and your spelling is terrible-or as you would have it terr-ible.
But the question Is... Does my face look bovverred?

You tend to find that those with perfect spelling are regular visitors to Mr spellchecks house. Me... I prefer to bang one off quick and get the hell out of here. ( Post).

At least I have the curtesy to give our PM capital letters when refering to him my little kilt lifter.

[Issie]

Spot said:

I'm only guilty of an offence if either I intend thereby to stir up racial hatred, or having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.

Those are the words. The offence is in the intent or the effect. Which is why I asked whether you had any instances which had resulted in someone being thrown into prison for it. What you wrote makes it appear that I've committed a crime in mentioning Floella Benjamin's skin tone. I'm sure you know perfectly well it's not true
I would have thought that most intelligent people understood what I meant, and we didn’t need your example of Floella Benjamin to explain where using certain terms are descriptive, otherwise we wouldn’t have the Black Police Association, or Black History month would we.?

When do you become guilty of racial harassment then.?

Criminal Justice & Public Order Act 1994

This defines a criminal offence of intentional harassment, which covers all forms of harassment, including sexual. A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, s/he:-

uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour; or

displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting, thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.
What we're disputing is the level of racial hatred needed for a prosecution to result in a prison sentence.
No we're not, only you.!

I'm making the point that if you mention anything that is considered racist, your crime is changed to racial harrassment, and your sentence is increased from what would normally be disruptive behaviour and a sentence ranging from a fine/discharge, or 6 months in prison, changed to anything up to 2 years imprisonment. (of course depending on the circumstances)

Take the scenario of the link I posted…..

Two cars get bumped and both drivers are not very pleased about it, they both feel the other one is to blame and tempers flare, they both give each other a load of insults.

It would be classed as a simple case of disruptive behaviour until a word considered racist is spoken, it doesn’t matter if the word is ‘Welsh’ ‘white’ ‘black’ or whatever because then it’s a different ball game, and the person is prosecuted for racially aggravated disorderly behaviour, so, I will still say that you can be thrown in prison for mentioning the colour of someone’s skin….in the context of what we were discussing and the ‘appear’ acceptance by the British public.

Today it is considered racist to say “bloody tourists” if you have a disagreement with someone and that will change your crime/sentence, so living in this soft totalitarian state will silence the population.

Never has the term ‘watch your P’s and Q’s’ been more relevant that it is today, and the link I posted is a perfect example of the situation.

[G#Gill]

Is there a 'White Police Association' ? ........................................ Just sayin'

[Oscar Namechange]

G#Gill;1293008 wrote: Is there a 'White Police Association' ? ........................................ Just sayin' Do you really expect there to be one?

[Bruv]

G#Gill;1293008 wrote: Is there a 'White Police Association' ? ........................................ Just sayin'


I believe there is............it's called the Met.



I know the comment was made in jest, but if there were no need for a Black Police Association, do you think it would exist ?

It can be seen the same as Unions, there was a need for like minded people to join together to gain things they are denied. The fact that the power can be misused by later entrants to said bodies does not detract from the original need.



Now then.......the reverse has happened with the BNP.

A group of racists joined together bound by their hatred of blacks, they cobbled together some policies that make a lot of sense and were joined by middle of the road non racist people with genuine concerns.

That popularity caused alarm bells to ring in the corridors of power, and a deal was struck.............the BNP would shift toward inclusion of non Aryan membership to placate the law makers. The core beliefs of the founders remain unchanged, the general membership has altered, because even a racist organisation can have some good policies. As long as the membership can control the founders, and are not duped by their apparent change of heart everything should be OK...............but I don't believe they can.

[Issie]

Originally Posted by G#Gill

Is there a 'White Police Association' ? ........................................ Just sayin'
I believe there is............it's called the Met.
Absolutely not, the Met Police 'control' the City of London, Outer London (Greater London)

There are something like 40 odd Police forces in England & Wales, they are all accountable to the Police Commissioner, who is accountable to the Home Secretary.

The Black Police Association is racist and one of its founder members is currently in Prison for playing the race card just once too often.

White police officers can join the BPA, but why would they want to, when the aims of the BPA is geared towards its black and ethnic members only, and any white officer is there as a token gesture.? That's like joining the Kennel Club when you haven't got a dog....totally futile.

If racism is still running through the corridors of the people who are supposed to be upholding the law regarding racism....it stinks.!

Sorry, IMO:We don't need a black police association, anymore than we would need a black lawyers association, a black doctors association and a quango group representing the black members of the British Army...where does it stop ? and it goes against the ethos of multiculturalism and one big happy family all getting along in Utopia.

Change of heart.? If I look back 10, 15, 20 years ago, I said some really stupid things that I believed in at the time, which today I would be thoroughly ashamed of and if you want to scrutinize people in power who have changed their minds or changed their views, you'd have a lot of work on your hands.

That popularity caused alarm bells to ring in the corridors of power, and a deal was struck.............
That is exactly what is happening and the lying, thieving, traitors in Westminster are shyting themselves because they think they have dumbed down the population with their experimental social engineering, but some of the population from ALL WALKS OF LIFE can see through their lies and deceit, but there is NO DEAL STRUCK.

They are frightened of being ousted out of their cosy little pig troughs and they are using every trick in the book to get rid of the BNP, they have manipulated the law for their own agenda, they have created a quango court in the Equalities Commission, and they are now trying to financially ruin the democratically elected party.

I couldn't give a monkey's which party people vote for, but if you are so frightened of the BNP, just don't vote for them (what's so hard about that?) because if you believe in democracy, which is for the people, by the people and on behalf of the people, then the people will decide with that X on the ballot form, and if the election results don't go your way, then either suffer it, shut up or emigrate.

But, you cannot scream for democracy when the other political parties won't even enter into dialogue with them to expose their policies etc, and let the people decide, and you have a government that is making the rules up as it goes along for its own agenda, that is fascism, and if you condone what the establishment are doing to this elected political party, chose how much you hate the BNP......it's hypocrisy of the highest order and IMO you deserve to live in a totalitarian state....which if you haven't notice, you are already living in a soft version of a totalitarian state.

[Oscar Namechange]

Bruv;1293038 wrote: I believe there is............it's called the Met.



I know the comment was made in jest, but if there were no need for a Black Police Association, do you think it would exist ?

It can be seen the same as Unions, there was a need for like minded people to join together to gain things they are denied. The fact that the power can be misused by later entrants to said bodies does not detract from the original need.



Now then.......the reverse has happened with the BNP.

A group of racists joined together bound by their hatred of blacks, they cobbled together some policies that make a lot of sense and were joined by middle of the road non racist people with genuine concerns.

That popularity caused alarm bells to ring in the corridors of power, and a deal was struck.............the BNP would shift toward inclusion of non Aryan membership to placate the law makers. The core beliefs of the founders remain unchanged, the general membership has altered, because even a racist organisation can have some good policies. As long as the membership can control the founders, and are not duped by their apparent change of heart everything should be OK...............but I don't believe they can.
I comend you for this Post actually Bruv. It's a welcome change from the usual bigoted claptrap every time we have a thread on the BNP. At least you recognise that the Party has come a long way since 1982. You recognise that all BNP members are not aging Neo-Nazi Skinheads holing on to some kind of dream. The Party has changed much since 1982. New People coming Into the Party do so because they see the Party has some-thing to offer other than the corrupt shysters we already have running our Country. New people joining the Party do not join because they suddenly woke up one morning and decided to become a rascist. As Issie said, most of the members of the BNP now are actually folk who are Intelligent enough to realise we are already living In a facist state with corruption rife. The Opposition offers nothing but more corruption and lie's. Past Governments have tried to shut down the BNP but this Government has gone Into a serious epi over Brons and Griffin being returned as MEP's democraticaly. Then, I believe another turning point for them was when Paul Golding comfortably won the Council seat for the BNP In sunny Surburbia of Sevenoaks In Kent last year. He was the first council seat to be won In the South of England where Immigration Is not so much an Issue as the North of England. Even more shocking to the Government and the UAF was that he won comfortably even following a smear campaign by his local and National Media stating that he was actaully an expelled member of the BNP for allegedly physically attacking a member of the Council from an Ethnic Minority. I would Imagine the alram bells were ringing loud and clear In Westminster that day. The last I looked, the BNP had 109 Elected Council seats.. something I am sure causes much worry to the UAF and our Government.

Something that gave me great mirth of late was the deluded Nick Clegg prosposing that as It was only certain Cities that were crowded due to Immigration, the Lib Dems would be directing future Immigrabts to less crowded area's of the country. Instead Of them having the freedom of choice to join their families where-ever they liked, Under the Lib dems, they would have to go and live in Frimpton-On-Sea for example. Yeah, that'll work won't It??? Instead of them living In the Cities where there Is work, put them all out In the sticks and force them to claim Benifit. Wonder how long It took for them to think that one through? For one, I believe It Is rascist, for two, I believe In breaches their Human Rights, for three, I believe It breaches their Act of Freedom but don't worry, because according to Clodhopper, It is merely a proposal and nothing else.

[Bruv]

Please don't rail at me Issie, I understand everything you are saying.

I would have the BNP on Question Time every week. I would not ban them or stifle their message, because anybody with an ounce of nous can see their agenda, and I believe most Brits are not inclined that way.

I also believe most people are racially biased, while claiming to be non racist.

[Ahso!]

Bruv;1293146 wrote: I also believe most people are racially biased, while claiming to be non racist.I agree with this!