 |
The last 50 comments posted on Liberal Conspiracy
- DonaldS posted on British Blowjobs for British Johns
Profuse apologies for the irritating pedantry, but I just can't sit by and see "Saville Row" left up there unmolested. Unlike Jimmy, it's "Savile", one L. - Neil posted on What about homophobia?
@Costigan, What cjcjc said. - Mike Killingworth posted on British Blowjobs for British Johns
[7] ... as Max Mosley will tell you... - Laurie Penny posted on British Blowjobs for British Johns
I love you, Unity. 6.Matt- but the beating is the best part.... - Matt Munro posted on Tory social engineering is back!
Planeshift - thats just typical leftwing obsurfcation. The stats don't support my argument so I'll say the analysis is simplistic and the problem is really much more complicated than people realise, throw in a load of irrelavent/unmeasurable variables thereby making the problem unsolvable, thereby retaining a status quo that I approve of. "Complex" problems don't need complex solutions, the theory of relativity consits of 5 characters..... - Matt Munro posted on British Blowjobs for British Johns
You can't beat a british blow job in my experience. - Matt Munro posted on BNP Loses Membership List
I've always thought a usefull way to ditinguish between communists and fascists is by anaology to the cybermen and the daleks (bear with me) Cybermen - take human diversity and de-humanise it, remove emotion and replace it with a set of pre-determined, wholly logical and predicytable responses, turning everyone into identical automatons. The key point being that everyone becomes a cyberman eventually. Use all resources to benefit all cybermen. This is communism Daleks - Dominate the universe by force, don't bother to convert anyone, use technology and overwhelming force to either subvert into slavery or destroy any opposition. The key objective is that daleks become the only ruling class, with all resources used to perpetuate and spread dalek domination. This is facscism Obviously they overlap, and share many common features. The Nazis, for example, were pro-health, pro- ecology, pro-animal welfare and anti-smoking. A description of a group of people who have very much been in the ascendency in the UK since 1997............... - Newmania posted on British Blowjobs for British Johns
Would having a Pimp include handing over a section of earnings for lap dancing etc. In the biz( I `m told ) which money is paid for which service is far from clear. In effect the girls pay a rent for being in the place and get a profit from extras.They imagine its all "wanna Partay with ma beeches ". In real life the "Pimp" may be on a spectrum shading into legal activities . - Head of Legal posted on British Blowjobs for British Johns
The review cites both reasons for opting not to criminalise paying for sex generally: both the size of the "industry" and the state of public opinion. The size of the industry arguments makes little sense, of course, when on their own figures they propose criminalising 80% of the "industry" - they say (if I remember right) that 80% of prostitutes are "controlled" by someone else. Why not go to the full 100%? I love the "British blowjobs" line, but of course it doesn't quite work: under the plans, you can't avoid an offence by buying British - you can still get fined if she's got a pimp. - ukliberty posted on Having fun with the BNP list
Does thomas mean this and this? - Newmania posted on British Blowjobs for British Johns
Sadly I am now in effect banned from this site as Sunny scrambles all my comments no matter how glittering with erudition and wit they may be ... .I found that article interesting if torturous to read in the traditional Unity manner. Given that this is , apparently , a feminist plot , will gentleman who prefer gentlemen be banged up for paying for it too ? This message will self destruct when the thought police man sees it - cjcjc posted on What about homophobia?
In itself, no. However, having a well documented record of calling publicly for gays to be killed - yes. - Costigan Quist posted on What about homophobia?
Are you saying that merely being homophobic should be enough to prevent someone entering the country? - Andrew Adams posted on CIC paper: Can British citizens become 'active'?
David, Yes, I think that the work that Faithworks does is very valuable and if the white paper means that such organisations get more encouragement, support and assistance from local authorities, and help with funding, then that's a good thing. That strikes me though as being different from local authorities "commissioning services" from faith groups - I read that as councils using faith groups to provide front-line services, which I'm not conviced is such a good idea. Or am I just misunderstanding the proposal? - Unity posted on British Blowjobs for British Johns
That was the second reason given for not criminalising outright, the relative size of the UK industry compared to Sweden's being the first... - James O posted on BNP Loses Membership List
Do you an argument, Voltaire's priest, or just a penchant for writing evidence-free sentences. - Mike Killingworth posted on British Blowjobs for British Johns
In the Guardian yesterday Angela Smith was quoted as saying that the reason they didn't criminalise sex for cash outright was because their consultation exercise had suggested that public opinion "wasn't ready for it", not because of the size of the industry. - Unity posted on Having fun with the BNP list
The DPA offence of obtaining personal data isn't viral so once information gets into the wild no action can be taken - although if you have a copy you could face subject access requests, etc. Basically, the BNP has no case against anyone under DPA but the individual who leaked the info and set the ball rolling, all they have iopen are common law privacy suits a la Max Mosley. - septicisle posted on Having fun with the BNP list
thomas: Would perhaps help if you linked to it. - Sunny Hundal posted on The great public library scandal
huh? That's wasn't me above.. whatever it was. Anyway - this is a great project and I would encourage everyone to get involved. I would like to post updates here and start a campaign to 'free our libraries'...! - Voltaire's Priest posted on BNP Loses Membership List
Fascinating foray into SWP-taught history there... - James O posted on BNP Loses Membership List
'Any ideology that constrains itself from its own goals for the sake of not committing violent is stretching towards liberalism' Historically, liberal capitalism has been responsible for millions of deaths. In the 18-19th centuries it was imposed at bayonet-point on the non-European world, leading in some instances (such as the Tasmanian Aborigines or the California Indians) to total genocide. Later forcing the free market on agricultural economies, as in Ireland in the 1840s or India in the 1890s led to millions of deaths through famine. Later the Liberal democracies of Europe - Britain,France, Belgium, the Netherlands - sought to cling their colonies through massacre, torture and concentration camps. then the USA assumed the mantle of protecting the free world and murdered millions either directly (The Korean war, the Vietnam war, the sanctions on Iraq) or through their clients (Chang Kai-Shek, Pinochet, Somoza, Rios Mount, Diem, Park, Reza Shah, Duvalier) in the name of anti-communism. It would be very easy to produce a death count for liberal governments which easily matched or exceeded that of the USSR or Nazi Germany. - Charlieman posted on Having fun with the BNP list
Ace: "Griffin has to explain to the rank and file how their outing has happened" Griffin is required to explain, but he is not necessarily culpable. The full BNP membership list is held by a small number of individuals, who are legally Data Controllers. The list is never transmitted in clear text, according to their formal mechanisms. Local branches only receive a list of local members which is sent to them in encrypted format. Griffin can comfortably argue that he has employed mechanisms that protect the data. The attack on Griffin has to be about whether he placed too much trust in the people with lists. The same argument, no doubt, goes on in every corporate data centre. - thomas posted on Having fun with the BNP list
Does anyone here read the Waltham Forest Guardian? I think reports such as today's demonstrate why the BNP can't currently be accepted into the family of democratic politics and be given an equal seat at the negotiating table. In a different era their behaviour would be called treason and be punished accordingly, but we have evolved beyond those brutal times and no longer need to take recourse to extreme persecution because we have an institutional framework which enables us to prosecute our case more rationally. Until the BNP publically and unequivocally renounces violent and underhand methods and stops trying to subvert the political system for their narrow ends I think it is perfectly fair that the rest of us should be able to stand together in solidarity and make demands of them. And until they do so they will inevitably provoke a reaction from less restrained members of society, which I can neither condone or condemn. They are responsible to themselves for the way people respond to them, as are we all. - Charlieman posted on Having fun with the BNP list
Sunny H: "Are the roughly 10,000 people who expressly pay money to the BNP likely to be racist scum? In a majority, yes." The fact that 10,000+ people are willing to "join" the BNP (accepting those numbers) means very little. The number of donations from unique individuals would be more meaningful, and more comparable to donations to mainstream or minority political parties. But those figures only quantify bad thought, not activists. I wrote previously on my misgivings about analysing the leaked data. If I was a Searchlighter, the list might tell me that, (random percentage) 25% of fascist activists are allegedly members of the BNP, but that activist total would be tiny compared to the total number of BNP members. Most fascist/Nazi activists are not on that list. The list primarily defines passive racists who don't wear bomber jackets and who don't deliver excrement through letter boxes. There may be an outlier individual on the list who has not been previously spotted by Searchlight or the security services, but their use of the list comes under the "public interest" defence. - ace posted on Having fun with the BNP list
Sunny - couldn't agree more. Griffin has to explain to the rank and file how their outing has happened and judging from some of their message boards they are pretty angry with him. That in itself is a good thing. Yeah some members might not know the full history of the nazis sorry NF sorry i mean BNP but I guess they have more of an idea now. Same for potential new members who don't really know their real aims. You could say its beena bit of an education for some BNP members and I'm all for people getting more of a political education. To that end the leak is all good. - Sunny Hundal posted on Having fun with the BNP list
Nearly 200,000 people voted for the BNP at the last election. I'll grant that most of them are not racist scum. Are the roughly 10,000 people who expressly pay money to the BNP likely to be racist scum? In a majority, yes. That said, it doesn't mean I'm opposed to taking on the BNP's arguments and finding out ways to draw voters away from them. This post certainly does not go away from that. But it ridicules the BNP, and its leadership and makes ordinary people even less likely to put their faith in Nick Griffin. I am firmly in favour of that because to me undermining the BNP leadership is an important tactic against them. If you don't agree, fine. Everyone's got a right to their own opinion. - Charlieman posted on Having fun with the BNP list
I recommend reading the Out-Law briefing on the Data Protection Act at: http://www.out-law.com/page-413 Clearly, the leakers of the list of names (I decline to refer to it as a membership list) are in breach of the Act. But what about the compilers of mash-ups that access data which may be held in databases elsewhere? They may believe that they are innocent of breaking the law because they do not directly hold the data. But Out-Law's definition of a Data Controller ("A data controller is the person who determines the purposes for which, and the manner in which, any personal data is, or is likely to be, processed. In other words, you will be a data controller if the processing of personal data is undertaken for your benefit and you decide what personal data should be processed and why.") suggests that they are responsible. The act of creating a mash-up requires that they process data using a computer, and given that the individuals who provided the data did not consent, then those who process the data are on dodgy ground. One defence might be that they used anonymised data, but if they are using six digit post codes (which may identify a single household) that defence is very weak. [If you have a census record handy, note how the editors occasionally omit bits of data about non-white households in a small area that is predominantly white.] If I was looking to employ a webby, database sort of programmer, I would definitely try to identify the individuals who created the mash-ups. They don't understand the concepts of privacy or data protection, and thus cannot be trusted. The fact that data has leaked, against the wishes of the data subjects, does not mean that you can use it for entertainment, political research etc. My opinion of those who fail to understand this basic principle is diminished. As a liberal, I agree that there are times when the law should be ignored or deliberately broken, or when it is moral to breach a personal confidence, but this is not one of those times. Should you wish to know the identity of your political opponents, you can stay inside the law or conventional morals by traditional techniques: canvassing, attending public meetings, looking at who signs the nomination forms etc. You'll learn far more about the BNP that way. Note 1: My understanding of data protection law comes from being a sys admin, not a lawyer. Note 2: There are some cases where presence of a name on the list raises a public interest defence for disclosure. That excludes about 11,900 of them. - Aaron Heath posted on Having fun with the BNP list
I don't think "one conservatism" so much a bad thing. More to follow. http://tygerland.net/2007/07/02/on-chav-hatred/ - Newmania posted on Having fun with the BNP list
[troll] Sounds convincing Aaron but it is actually not s symmetrical position. The Labour movement ,as it once was , was always an alliance of working class economic interests and a Fabian or progressive element that occupied its commanding heights . Conservatives have never had that sort of fissure in the first place and David Cameron is more of a return to Conservatism than a departure from it . He will no6t call himself a one nation Conservative since Heath made the phrase a shameful one but he is a very traditional leader ( as Thatcher was not ) - Nick posted on BNP Loses Membership List
"Nick: While Stalin set out to exterminate certain groups, he didn’t tend to discriminate as the Nazis so did." I don't see whats so bad about "discrimination" when you are already talking about mass extermination. As if indiscriminate murder is somehow conceptually more defensible. But I think the outcome of this sort of discussion is that it doesn't matter why you want to kill people or whether your notional ideology is left or right, only the extent to which that ideology sanctions violence in pursuit of its aims. Any ideology that constrains itself from its own goals for the sake of not committing violent is stretching towards liberalism. Neither communism/socialism or fascism do that conceptually. - Planeshift posted on Tory social engineering is back!
I don’t accept that ‘all the evidence’ points to marriage being better for children. In a strict statistical sense it may be the case that there are better outcomes for the group of kids in families categorised as ‘married’ versus the kids brought up in families categorised as ‘non-married’, but this is such a simplistic picture that it should hardly be used as the basis for a selection of measures that will have the effect on penalising people for removing themselves from unhappy relationships. The idea that meaningful conclusions can be draw from tables that categorise all family structures as either ‘married’ or ‘non-married’ seems to me to be absurd. Off the top of my head there are several different categories of relationship that a child could be brought up in. 1. Happy Marriage 2. Married couple staying together for the children 3. Married couple who hate each other and are always rowing 4. Married but relationship is abusive with violence. 5. Cohabiting couple in love 6. Cohabiting couple but spark is gone from the relationship 7. Cohabiting couple always arguing 8. Cohabiting couple in abusive relationship 9. Single parent, but the other parent maintains contact with child and both parents have cordial relationship with each other 10. Single parent, other parent is on scene but they don’t get on with each other. 11. Single parent on their own. This is before I’ve added other variables that are clearly relevant; is there an extended family involved in raising the child? Are the people involved the child’s natural parents (for example: what about adopted children being raised by a married couple)?, Step-parents?, What if the couple concerned are swingers? What about whether the marriage is an arranged one? In fact we must also consider other factors involved – socio-economic status, the age of parents, religiosity, education level etc, etc, etc. Does the conservative party really believe the evidence is that a child will be better off being raised by married parents in an abusive relationship than raised by a single parent who has their extended family around to help out? Does it really believe that a young married couple living in a poor area are going to do a better job than a wealthy cohabiting couple who love each other but lack the legal recognition of this love? Because whenever they come out with measures that simplistically value marriage as the magic potion to repair social breakdown then that is what they are saying. At the very least they should probably go back to their copies of SPSS and allow than 2 categories of relationship status for their cross tabs. - Aaron Heath posted on Having fun with the BNP list
Not sure I agree with this. I’ll concede that not all those who vote BNP are necessarily racists, but there’s a pretty big difference between just voting for a party and actually joining that party. Membership of an organisation implies you’re signed up to that organisation’s ideology/politics/hate-fest/call it what you will, so it’s a much stronger statement of support than simply ticking a box on a voting slip. ~ Cath Elliot That depends on how those members contribute. Are they members or event-attending kool-aid drinkers? Not every Labour member has attended a local party meeting. I suspect many BNP members are similarly dis-connected with the party en masse. I have relatives who didn't join UKIP simply because they thought they were an off-shoot of the BNP. I explained that UKIP were not the BNP (merely a comedy Tory off-shoot) and they were surprised. Not everyone is as politically savvy as us. Many of the BNP membership may well have bought into the increasingly inclusive, value-based policies of the modern BNP. We should be careful of any sort of organised attack against BNP 'members'. - David Keen posted on CIC paper: Can British citizens become 'active'?
Everyone else: Faithworks are cited in the White Paper, and one of their documents highlights the kind of things faith groups are currently doing. Ethos and Effectiveness (available via the Faithworks website) includes job training, youth services, addiction services and counselling, all done by Christian agencies. The Faithworks charter is a Christian statement of good practice in social welfare work, and the opening paragraph reads: "We will provide an inclusive service to our community by: 1. Serving and respecting all people regardless of their gender, marital status, race, ethnic origin, religion, age, sexual orientation or physical and mental capability." I would imagine there are groups with conservative views on sexuality who can happily sign up to this. If Christians are helping out addicts, prostitutes, ex-offenders etc. they seem to be able to do that without condoning their lifestyle, but at the same time without it affecting the amount of compassion and help they can offer. Unfortunately the 2 groups with most airtime at the moment are Christian Voice (enough said) and the National Secular Society (who want everyone to think that all Christians are like Christian Voice). Those doing the good work are normally too busy to play at being rentaquote. - Cath Elliott posted on Having fun with the BNP list
Aaron - "Being a member of the BNP does not make you a racist." Not sure I agree with this. I'll concede that not all those who vote BNP are necessarily racists, but there's a pretty big difference between just voting for a party and actually joining that party. Membership of an organisation implies you're signed up to that organisation's ideology/politics/hate-fest/call it what you will, so it's a much stronger statement of support than simply ticking a box on a voting slip. - David Keen posted on CIC paper: Can British citizens become 'active'?
... Everyone else: Faithworks are cited in the White Paper, and one of their documents highlights the kind of things faith groups are currently doing. Ethos and Effectiveness (http://www.faithworks.info/uploads/documents/Ethos&Effectiveness.pdf) describes job training, youth services, addiction services and counselling, all done by Christian agencies. These might be the things the Paper has in mind. The Faithworks charter ( http://www.faithworks.info/Standard.asp?id=7432) is a Christian statement of good practice in social welfare work, and the opening paragraph reads: "We will provide an inclusive service to our community by: 1. Serving and respecting all people regardless of their gender, marital status, race, ethnic origin, religion, age, sexual orientation or physical and mental capability." I would imagine there are groups with conservative views on sexuality who can happily sign up to this. Christians help out all sorts of people whose lifestyles they don't endorse, without it affecting the amount of compassion and help they can offer. Unfortunately the 2 groups with most airtime at the moment are Christian Voice (enough said) and the National Secular Society (who want everyone to think that all Christians are like Christian Voice). The ones doing the good work tend to be too busy to play at media tarts. - David Keen posted on CIC paper: Can British citizens become 'active'?
ukliberty: can't quibble with the stuff you cite, though I would think that increased mobility will reduce ties to social groups. The days when grandfather, father and son all worked at the same factory, were members of the same union and drank at the same WMC are pretty much over, and increased mobility means that we opt into social groups, rather than inherit them as part of our makeup. Mike: lots of faith groups already use Lottery funding etc., which requires a statement of inclusion and agreeing to certain strings on how the money is spent. So the state already has some safeguards in place. The main problem for faith groups is that the whole process of getting state funding and help is so lengthy and complicated that it puts them off. part 2 follows... - David Keen posted on CIC paper: Can British citizens become 'active'?
aha, right, here we go: ukliberty: can't quibble with the stuff you cite, though I would think that increased mobility will reduce ties to social groups. The days when grandfather, father and son all worked at the same factory, were members of the same union and drank at the same WMC are pretty much over, and increased mobility means that we opt into social groups, rather than inherit them as part of our makeup. Everyone else: Faithworks are cited in the White Paper, and one of their documents highlights the kind of things faith groups are currently doing. Ethos and Effectiveness (http://www.faithworks.info/uploads/documents/Ethos&Effectiveness.pdf) includes job training, youth services, addiction services and counselling, all done by Christian agencies. The Faithworks charter ( http://www.faithworks.info/Standard.asp?id=7432) is a Christian statement of good practice in social welfare work, and the opening paragraph reads: "We will provide an inclusive service to our community by: 1. Serving and respecting all people regardless of their gender, marital status, race, ethnic origin, religion, age, sexual orientation or physical and mental capability." I would imagine there are groups with conservative views on sexuality who can happily sign up to this. If Christians are helping out addicts, prostitutes, ex-offenders etc. they seem to be able to do that without condoning their lifestyle, but at the same time without it affecting the amount of compassion and help they can offer. Mike: lots of faith groups already use Lottery funding etc., which requires a statement of inclusion and agreeing to certain strings on how the money is spent. So the state already has some safeguards in place. The main problem for faith groups is that the whole process of getting state funding and help is so lengthy and complicated that it puts them off. Unfortunately the 2 groups with most airtime at the moment are Christian Voice (enough said) and the National Secular Society (who want everyone to think that all Christians are like Chrisitan Voice). - David Keen posted on CIC paper: Can British citizens become 'active'?
have been trying to get a comment on here but it's not appearing. If this one works, I'll try again! - Aaron Heath posted on Having fun with the BNP list
newmania, You're right in some aspects. But it's not only Labour that have abandoned their base for a mad dash to the centre. Tories have too abandoned their base in the search for the dwindling political oxygen in the middle ground. Such is the perceived need for middle class voters, all parties have vacated a holistic approach to politics for a desperate race to capture the rump. Those marginalised will always seek comfort with radical elements. It is this partisan divide that separates us. I have no party. - Aaron Heath posted on The great public library scandal
Kate, Dealing with morons is the cost of success, I guess. - Nina posted on Having fun with the BNP list
Being a member of the BNP does not make you a racist.
Oddly I have always found people who mutter darkly about immigrants taking jobs and benefits and houses fit very well into the definition of racism. I do not think that every member of the BNP is fundamentally nasty but I do think that they are all racist. - Private Library « Ten Percent posted on The great public library scandal
[...] 20 November, 2008 — RickB There is an excellent post @LC by James Bridle about our public libraries, the catalogue and database is outsourced to a private corporation, [...] - Cabalamat posted on BNP Loses Membership List
@77: If you seriously think that Nazis were socialists then you obviously haven’t even the slightest knowledge of what happened in Germany during their reign. They called themselves Socialists. That you assert that they were not implies that you believe you are the owner of the English language and that you have the right to define what words mean and how they are used. Clearly this is not the case. A word means what people use it to mean. If you look at all the people who ever called themselves "socialists" , you will realise that the interestion of all the policies they stood for is the empty set. In other words, "socialism" has been used to mean so many different and contradictory things that it is meaningless. For that reason I do not use the word. - chris strange posted on Voters still don't trust Tories on economy
This poll wasn't voters shifting from Conservative to Labour. There Conservatives are still where they have been for months, solidly in the low 40s. Labour have jumped from the low 30s to the mid 30s because the Liberal Democrat vote share collapsed to 12%. This poll shows a major shift from Lib-Dem to Labour rather than from Conservative to Labour. Unfortunately for Labour low Lib-Dem scores are to be expected at the mid point in the electoral cycle, the Lib-Dems always pick up vote share as the elections get closer and people start to remember they exist. 18% is a much more likely number, like in the earlier ICM poll (who are always better at forecasting the Lib-Dems' eventual result according to Mr Smithson) where the Labour result was a rather less impressive 30%. - Darrell posted on Having fun with the BNP list
Shameless self-promotion time....i submitted the below to LC but it was rejected on the grounds it was felt that it didn't merit a seprate thread...so, I am going to use this one to shamelessly promote the reply I penned to some of the points Sunny raised here over at my blog ;)...link is http://momentsofc.blogspot.com/2008/11/privacy-and-left-reply-to-sunny-hundal.html - septicisle posted on BNP Loses Membership List
If you seriously think that Nazis were socialists then you obviously haven't even the slightest knowledge of what happened in Germany during their reign. - chavscum posted on Having fun with the BNP list
Newmania, your desription of the attitude of so-called liberals is correct. There are a lot of white middle-class so called liberals in my locality, who pay lip-service to diversity and multi-culturalism and wet their pants when anyone criticises mass immigration poliices. However, they practise the old liberal mantra of "do as I say, not as I do". They segregate themselves in their own little oasis and ensure their children avoid the multi-cultural schools (no GCSE in Somalian for their little Johnny). For them, mass immigration is an opportunity to exploit. As long as they can avoid the associated problems, stuff the rest. - David Keen posted on CIC paper: Can British citizens become 'active'?
Drat, the comment I put in this morning didn't send. Here we go again.... ukliberty: can't quibble with the stuff you cite, though I would think that increased mobility will reduce ties to social groups. The days when grandfather, father and son all worked at the same factory, were members of the same union and drank at the same WMC are pretty much over, and increased mobility means that we opt into social groups, rather than inherit them as part of our makeup. Everyone else: Faithworks are cited in the White Paper, and one of their documents highlights the kind of things faith groups are currently doing. Ethos and Effectiveness (http://www.faithworks.info/uploads/documents/Ethos&Effectiveness.pdf) includes job training, youth services, addiction services and counselling, all done by Christian agencies. The Faithworks charter ( http://www.faithworks.info/Standard.asp?id=7432) is a Christian statement of good practice in social welfare work, and the opening paragraph reads: "We will provide an inclusive service to our community by: 1. Serving and respecting all people regardless of their gender, marital status, race, ethnic origin, religion, age, sexual orientation or physical and mental capability." I would imagine there are groups with conservative views on sexuality who can happily sign up to this. If Christians are helping out addicts, prostitutes, ex-offenders etc. they seem to be able to do that without condoning their lifestyle, but at the same time without it affecting the amount of compassion and help they can offer. Mike: lots of faith groups already use Lottery funding etc., which requires a statement of inclusion and agreeing to certain strings on how the money is spent. So the state already has some safeguards in place. The main problem for faith groups is that the whole process of getting state funding and help is so lengthy and complicated that it puts them off. Unfortunately the 2 groups with most airtime at the moment are Christian Voice (enough said) and the National Secular Society (who want everyone to think that all Christians are like Chrisitan Voice). - ace posted on Having fun with the BNP list
Newmania- I see you are at it again. "Surely there must be a level of disquiet when privileged people gleefully make working class people unemployed for their political views" Their views on race mean they cannot do their job. Period. How can a copper do his job when he is a member of an organisation that given half a chance would have all non white english sent out of the country??? If a copper was found to be a member of the Nation of Islam do you think his position would be tenable? Hell no. And if this truly is a democracy then why have succesive governments stopped Louis Farakhan coming into the country? Because his views may stoke racial trouble. A bit like Griffin, but oh hang on he is english so his freedom of speech neds defending. And it is only coppers that could lose their job NO ONE else. And anyway if not all BNP members are racist then at least now they have a damn good idea about what their party is really all about. That was hard to type as I don't believe a word of it!
Last 50 comments