Extremists?

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:00 pm

Clodhopper;1176173 wrote: If you're going to do that, you might want to include these guys, who are also fairly local:

Why bother - there's none so blind as those who refuse to see.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:06 pm

According to the leaked membership list there are people of the names I've quoted listed as activists with addresses in the SE. So they all appear still to be members.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:41 pm

Clodhopper;1176185 wrote: According to the leaked membership list there are people of the names I've quoted listed as activists with addresses in the SE. So they all appear still to be members. Ditto with the list of MP's who fund and support the thug UAF only they got a little upset when a website printed their names...... Why?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:43 pm

Bryn Mawr;1176180 wrote: Why bother - there's none so blind as those who refuse to see. Do you believe then Bryn that in our suppossed Democratic country, it is right for a DPM to be admitting publically that Labour is sending 'Battlebuses to break up and disrupt meetings of a bono fide registered political party? What right has Labour to break up a BNP meeting any more than a Meeting of Torie's, green Party, SNP.... who-ever?

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:10 pm

Ditto with the list of MP's who fund and support the thug UAF only they got a little upset when a website printed their names...... Why?

No idea. Only just found out about the UAF - thanks to you! :wah:

I mention it just in case they try to say these people are no longer members.

There are thousands of names on the leaked membership list, and I've scrolled up and down them several times. Not found a single obviously non-white name so far. (doesn't mean there aren't any - I haven't read every single name - but if there are any non white members there are very, very few of them. Hundreds of Smiths, but not one Patel)

I have noticed that they put a note after the member's name and address if they:

Are HGV drivers

Have a degree (and what in)

Are a musician

Are ex-Services

Are hunters

Are pagan

That's about it. General jobs aren't mentioned. Interesting...

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:16 pm

Clodhopper;1176242 wrote: No idea. Only just found out about the UAF - thanks to you! :wah:

I mention it just in case they try to say these people are no longer members.

There are thousands of names on the leaked membership list, and I've scrolled up and down them several times. Not found a single obviously non-white name so far. (doesn't mean there aren't any - I haven't read every single name - but if there are any members there are very, very few of them. Hundreds of Smiths, but not one Patel)

I have noticed that they put a note after the member's name and address if they:

Are HGV drivers

Have a degree (and what in)

Are a musician

Are ex-Services

Are hunters

Are pagan

That's about it. General jobs aren't mentioned. Interesting...
You never heard of the UAF before me????

:eek:

Yes, the BNP do like to list job titles just to prove that members of all walks of life are involved. It's to dispel the myth that every member has to be 'tattoo'd skinhead F**wit' :wah:

As i said before...... you could walk past dozens of members in the street and you'd never give them a second glance the same as you would a Lib Dem.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:28 pm

the BNP do like to list job titles just to prove that members of all walks of life are involved

But they don't! It's just the categories I've mentioned. About 99 out of 100 have no job mentioned, and of the 1 in 100 that does pretty much all of them fall into the categories I've listed.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:35 pm

You never heard of the UAF before me????

Nope. Heard of things like the Anti-Fascist League, but I haven't really been paying attention to this whole area beyond keeping a vague eye on the BNP after encounters with members on other message boards a few years back.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:37 pm

Clodhopper;1176257 wrote: But they don't! It's just the categories I've mentioned. About 99 out of 100 have no job mentioned, and of the 1 in 100 that does pretty much all of them fall into the categories I've listed. I bet the police officers that are members arn't listed?

Can i just apologise to Lon here? We seem to have completely derailed his thread into British Politics.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 5:45 pm

I bet the police officers that are members arn't listed?

Haven't seen one yet.

Can i just apologise to Lon here? We seem to have completely derailed his thread into British Politics.

No need. This is a thread on extremists and there is nothing more extreme than Fascism.

The BNP are Fascists.

Nick Griffin said the BNP was:

"a strong, disciplined

organisation with the ability to back up its slogan ‘Defend Rights

for Whites’ with well directed boots and fists. When the crunch

comes, power is the product of force and will, not of rational

debate.

You can't get any more undemocratic than that! It's pure Fascism. Hitler used the same words (force and will) to describe Nazism. That is what you support.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Apr 16, 2009 6:03 pm

Clodhopper;1176331 wrote: Haven't seen one yet.

No need. This is a thread on extremists and there is nothing more extreme than Fascism.

The BNP are Fascists.

Nick Griffin said the BNP was:

You can't get any more undemocratic than that! It's pure Fascism. Hitler used the same words (force and will) to describe Nazism. That is what you support. I've lost count now of what i posted on what thread? As i said, i will take your quotes to my meeting with me and raise them. I will let you know the outcome.

What should i do then? Join the Lib Dems?

BTW...... Your up very late for a British person

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:26 am

Trouble sleeping.

Not as bad as last week though.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:02 am

oscar;1176263 wrote: I bet the police officers that are members arn't listed?

Can i just apologise to Lon here? We seem to have completely derailed his thread into British Politics.

His first post was a general one

I hope none of our members are violently to the right.

There is a member standing for the british fascist party so we do do have a member that is violently to the right.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:43 am

oscar;1176207 wrote: Ditto with the list of MP's who fund and support the thug UAF only they got a little upset when a website printed their names...... Why?

I dont like violence or prejudice wherever it comes from. But how does proving how nasty and horrible the UAF are, make the BNP any better? We could all say oh yes thats terrible we agree,, its not right,,, it should be dealt with,, etc etc,,, but it does not change the BNP or make them any more acceptable

farmer giles · Post by **farmer giles** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:54 am

i hate extremists and thick fogs

:)

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:36 am

I dont like violence or prejudice wherever it comes from. But how does proving how nasty and horrible the UAF are, make the BNP any better? We could all say oh yes thats terrible we agree,, its not right,,, it should be dealt with,, etc etc,,, but it does not change the BNP or make them any more acceptable

Well said. Very true.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 7:53 am

Clodhopper;1176463 wrote: Well said. Very true. Yes It was well said by Kaz however Clod..... let's ask again. Why is it legal for our government, the Labour Party to send out 'battlebuses' to a bono fide registered Parties meetings with the sole intention to disrupt and make no mistake, if possible, incite the BNP members to re-act violently to meet their own ends? With the recent up-roar over the Labour Partie's smear campaign, what do you think would happen if the government also sent out 'Battlebuses' to disrupt Tory meetings?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 7:58 am

kazalala;1176452 wrote: I dont like violence or prejudice wherever it comes from. But how does proving how nasty and horrible the UAF are, make the BNP any better? We could all say oh yes thats terrible we agree,, its not right,,, it should be dealt with,, etc etc,,, but it does not change the BNP or make them any more acceptable

The difference is Kaz that the UAF is supported and funded by prominent MP's from the three mainstream partie's....... MP's that you the tax payer pay for. Sorry to have to keep repeating this, but weather anyone agrees or not, the BNP is a registered political party the same as the Tories or the Green party. Anyone has the right to vote for them or attend a meeting. MP's do not have the right to back an organisation that sends out thugs to incite the BNP into violence.

Here's the thing....... Have you actually seen any article in the papers, on the tv, radio etc about a BNP member getting violent at one of their meetings when faced with the UAF?????

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 8:07 am

oscar;1176492 wrote: The difference is Kaz that the UAF is supported and funded by prominent MP's from the three mainstream partie's....... MP's that you the tax payer pay for. Sorry to have to keep repeating this, but weather anyone agrees or not, the BNP is a registered political party the same as the Tories or the Green party. Anyone has the right to vote for them or attend a meeting. MP's do not have the right to back an organisation that sends out thugs to incite the BNP into violence.

Here's the thing....... Have you actually seen any article in the papers, on the tv, radio etc about a BNP member getting violent at one of their meetings when faced with the UAF?????

Oscar i have already said that i dont think i have seen anyone dispute the fact that BNP is a registered political party,,,and anyone has a right to disagree with BNP policies regardless of that fact. I dont know much about UAF,, but this thread is called Extremists,, maybe UAF are extremists,, but in my opinion so are BNP.

So are you saying that the 3 main party's have got together to fund and supposrt some organisation that is just as violent and single minded in its views as BNP to go to BNP meetinmgs and disrupt and attack their members?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 8:21 am

kazalala;1176496 wrote: Oscar i have already said that i dont think i have seen anyone dispute the fact that BNP is a registered political party,,,and anyone has a right to disagree with BNP policies regardless of that fact. I dont know much about UAF,, but this thread is called Extremists,, maybe UAF are extremists,, but in my opinion so are BNP.

So are you saying that the 3 main party's have got together to fund and supposrt some organisation that is just as violent and single minded in its views as BNP to go to BNP meetinmgs and disrupt and attack their members? In the article i posted on the thread 'Labour warn the BNP are gaining power', in my opening post there is a link that tells us that the DPM Harriot Harmen has announced that Labour is sending out 'Battlebuses' to disrupt BNP meetings. I will try to find the link for you as to what these 'battlebuses' do to disrupt but i short of time today. The whole part i object to is our government and Tory and Lib Dem Mp's who are on the list of supporters of the UAF, telling you and i how we can vote. that is not a Democratic society, that is bully boy tactics by prominent MP's to stop people votong as they wish. It's hypocritical and i would imagine illegal exactly the same as the Labour smear campaign on the Tories.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 8:59 am

Sorry - big cleaning day today. All the chores I've been putting off.

Yes It was well said by Kaz however Clod..... let's ask again. Why is it legal for our government, the Labour Party to send out 'battlebuses' to a bono fide registered Parties meetings with the sole intention to disrupt and make no mistake, if possible, incite the BNP members to re-act violently to meet their own ends? With the recent up-roar over the Labour Partie's smear campaign, what do you think would happen if the government also sent out 'Battlebuses' to disrupt Tory meetings?

I think you missed my post on battlebus:

As to the phrase "battlebus" all parties use the term when talking about the coaches they travel around in during election campaigns when the parties do battle politically for the votes of the electors - it is a commonly used term by all parties and political journalists and has been used for decades. It started as a joke and has gone into the language of everyday use.

I do not condone the violence you report, and as I said, I've only just become aware of the UAF; but I do approve of people turning up to oppose the BNP peacefully (unless attacked by them, when self defence is permissable). As you know I don't consider the BNP to be a "normal" political party, and the fact that all three mainstream parties have combined on this says they don't think they are normal either. I consider them to be Nazis and so do the main three parties.

Anyway, I've just starting cleaning my cooker and I'd better get back to it. Won't be making detailed posts or doing any research today, I'm afraid.

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:09 am

oscar;1176503 wrote: In the article i posted on the thread 'Labour warn the BNP are gaining power', in my opening post there is a link that tells us that the DPM Harriot Harmen has announced that Labour is sending out 'Battlebuses' to disrupt BNP meetings. I will try to find the link for you as to what these 'battlebuses' do to disrupt but i short of time today. The whole part i object to is our government and Tory and Lib Dem Mp's who are on the list of supporters of the UAF, telling you and i how we can vote. that is not a Democratic society, that is bully boy tactics by prominent MP's to stop people votong as they wish. It's hypocritical and i would imagine illegal exactly the same as the Labour smear campaign on the Tories.

they are not telling me how to vote, and i dont feel like i am being told how to vote,, i would'nt listen to the BNP anyway, even more so now since i have looked in to them a bit more since entering in to these debates:) whenever i have read anything they have had to say,, local representatives in local press or leaflet drops,, near local elections etc,, all they ever do is slag off the other party's, If they do tell you anything about themselves its about how they will deal with immigration:rolleyes:

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:17 pm

kazalala;1176519 wrote: they are not telling me how to vote, and i dont feel like i am being told how to vote,, i would'nt listen to the BNP anyway, even more so now since i have looked in to them a bit more since entering in to these debates:) whenever i have read anything they have had to say,, local representatives in local press or leaflet drops,, near local elections etc,, all they ever do is slag off the other party's, If they do tell you anything about themselves its about how they will deal with immigration:rolleyes: Trust me Kaz, as a member of the Labour Party for years, slagging off other parties is the norm :wah: First rule of defence that... destroy your enemy first. You only have to look at what the Home Office has done to 'Damian Green' and the latest smear campaign that GB has just had to publicly apologise for. As a general election looms nearer, it will get far more nasty than that.

It's a shame the the people you have spoken to only concentrated on immigration policey. They do have excellent proposals on health and education that they could of spoken of also.

Lets just have a look at one of the members of the UAF. One fine upstanding citizen of this country that is listed with prominent MP's who support the UAF. Good old Pete Doherty. Ex prison convict and alleged heroin addict.

We regret to announce - Pete Doherty is indisposed! : The British National Party

Fine company out Mp's are keeping (not) :wah:

kazalala · Post by **kazalala** » Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:36 am

oscar;1176736 wrote: Trust me Kaz, as a member of the Labour Party for years, slagging off other parties is the norm :wah: First rule of defence that... destroy your enemy first. You only have to look at what the Home Office has done to 'Damian Green' and the latest smear campaign that GB has just had to publicly apologise for. As a general election looms nearer, it will get far more nasty than that.

It's a shame the the people you have spoken to only concentrated on immigration policey. They do have excellent proposals on health and education that they could of spoken of also.

Lets just have a look at one of the members of the UAF. One fine upstanding citizen of this country that is listed with prominent MP's who support the UAF. Good old Pete Doherty. Ex prison convict and alleged heroin addict.

We regret to announce - Pete Doherty is indisposed! : The British National Party

Fine company out Mp's are keeping (not) :wah:

when i have to listen to a politician slagging off other party's here are my thoughts:

well i dont want to hear how stupid/nasty/greedy/wrong,, other parties are ,, i want to know why YOUR PARTY should be in power,, not why other party's shouldnt. I have stoppped listening because you obviously dont have any positive things to say about your party, just negatives about others. Bye:)