Labour don’t have a coherent economic policy since they are saddling us with a trillion pound public debt.
They are in government. The BNP never will be.
villa was referencing ‘racist’ Margaret Thatcher and I was pointing out that his own backyard was not exactly squeaky clean.
Or are you going to attribute a racism to her as well ?
villa is an English expat, so you probably won’t be scoring any points by referencing his backyard.
Anyway, nobody called Thatcher a racist. He accused her of instituting racist policies, which is unarguable. Her immigration policies were so strict they actually drew voters away from the National Front.
I think as an English teacher you should practice reading for comprehension a little more…
Try reading what Really Not All That Bright has said. Though, to be honest, I was also referring to her despicable crocodile tear filled speech before she came to power about her culture being swamped.
Egg attack on BNP leader Griffin
I quite enjoyed that I have to say.
Well an egg isn’t quite a brick, but it’s a start.
And I forgot Griffin is a freaking tab.
I’m not sure how it helps the overall cause to chase away a Nazi by using brownshirt tactics - but you can make your own call on that.
‘Nobody called her a racist … he accused her of instituting racist policies.’
- How … indeed why would you draft racist policies if you were not racist ?
Furthermore how do you become an english expat in country that was garnered by the exact same methods of invasion and displacement that the palestinians protest about to this day ? If that is not hypocrisy what is it ? - Sorry but I grew up listening to the argument of irish americans that we didn’t belong in Ireland, and therefore that justified the fundraising and bombing.
Stealing the Emerald Isle and colonising it is a great crime, but shuffling Native Americans onto reservations so they do not impede the westward expansion of the white man, is regrettable but necessary.
========
Villa you quote but do not answer the bulk of my post 58, about the racism that pervades E Europe to this day, and which, as I pointed out, preceded any influence of Reagan - Thatcher.
========
As regards the eggs thrown at Nick Griffin, had this been done by anyone opposed to Abu Hamza, the Danish Cartoon protests, or during the abuse of the Anglian Regt in Luton, those responsible would have been arrested and charged with breach of the peace and / or assault.
========
I have no time for the BNP. They will never achieve their aims.
In fact if Nick Griffin were ever to stand on the brink of entering No10, he would be found slumped in the same patch of woodland Dr Kelly was found in, some years ago after going for an afternoon stroll.
To win votes. Why does a politician draft any policy?
If you translate this into English I’ll do my best to answer.
Possibly because neither he nor anyone else accused Reagan, Thatcher or even the Easter Bunny of being responsible for global racism.
Read the story again. A spokesperson for the Met said they would prosecute if anyone filed a complaint. Presumably that means nobody has (yet).
Well if you were a power crazed bitch who thought that coopting a racist agenda might make your election more likely…
I don’t understand what you are saying here. I became an expat here by marrying (then divorcing) an American. This country was not garnered by “the exact same methods” as those the palestinians protest of. I might listen to you if you said similar, but it is pretty silly to claim they are the exact smae methods.
Now I am utterly lost. What possible relevance does the pros and cons of Irish history have to do with the current BNP or Thatcher’s cooption of NF policies? And how does US treatment of the native population here have anything to do with anything I have said?
I quoted it because I was too lazy to cut it out. You want to know why I did not answer it? Because it was absolutely, irrevocably, totally, definitively, appallingly irrelevant to anything I had said. I never said that all racists are conservative. I said that Thatcher coopted the National Front. And she did. Yes, there are racists in Eastern Europe. There are also trees in Australia. But they aren’t relevant to my argument either.
I think I missed the bit where Abu Hamza was running for public office. Nick Griffin is perfectly free to stand on street corners and spout lunacy all he likes; it’s when he purports to represent me that I object most strenuously.
And I’d be interested in hearing any recent cites of anyone (or at least anyone who isn’t a complete nutjob) claiming that the slaughter and displacement of Native Americans was “regrettable but necessary”. I think that viewpoint died out a generation ago.
A person doesn’t have to be running for office to be guilty of an offence of incitement. The law of the land is quite clear on the subject, so not sure why you threw in the red herring of elected to office ?
As regards the Native American issue - it may have died out, but it doesn’t make it right does it ? After all if we wait long enough the palestinian demand for a recognised, sovereign state will become old hat, right ? And should all those jews who still want their grandathers money out of the swiss banks just shut up ? Or the black people who claim restitution for slavery which ended well over a century ago …
Well, in order to be guilty of the offence of incitement, you have to incite something. Omar Bakri, for all his Al-Quaeda cheerleading, has never gotten anyone to break any law.
Maybe littering when his “followers” dump the pamphlets nobody wants to take from them.
The central arguments for pursuing their agenda are :
-
The ‘illegal’ state of Israel.
-
Western support for Israel.
These issues are proferred as 'judtification ’ for the 9/11 attacks, the 7/7 bombing, and so on.
None of you seem the least bit phased by the references made to Hamza, Bakri, Izzadeen, et al justifying shooting, bombing, beheading, and or threatening more of the same.
The fact they are not ‘in office’ is irrelevant. It is an offence. Just the same as the NF / BNP / now defunct British Movement calling for attacks on ‘pakis’ ‘blacks’ ‘yids’ etc.
I believe they are equally criminal, it is you who continually try to single out the BNP as somehow more serious.
To me - they are both opposite yet equally contemptible ends of the same polarised view.
As regards your choice of words on the comparison of the colonisation of Ireland and America - I don’t see why you are confused. Both involved an invasion, both resulted in substantial loss of life, the only difference being that irish americans sit on land that was stolen from indians, and raise money to ‘liberate’ land stolen from the irish.
OK so Abu Hamza currently serving 7 years for inciting murder is not something you picked up on … or not something you consider important ?
Ummmmmm. I think this is your problem. Have I even talked about Islamic fundamentalism, or any problems with that in the UK at the moment? Or do you really expect me to have to critique everyone else whose views I may or may not find abhorrent in order to comment on the BNP?
I’m quite capable of holding a discussion about the BNP without talking about Islamicists. Or Israel, Ireland, Iceland, Igloos, Iguanas or Illegitimacy. Why aren’t you?
I am.
My question, was why the BNP receive such bile, yet the others are apparently free to preach the exact same hatred from the opposite perspective, and indeed why many who condemn the BNP, have tried to downplay or mitigate for the opposite view.
You can indeed pit the BNP for their prejudice. Likewise I can ask why them and not others.
Sorry you know that because … ?
My God telebox - why haven’t you in this thread pitted the treatment of Prisoners of War in Japanese camps in World War Two. It must be because you think the abuse heaped upon brave Allied soldiers by their brutal captors is acceptable, or at least isn’t as bad as the things you have criticized.
I also have not noticed you decry the cover up of child abuse by certain parts of the heirarchy of the Catholic Church. Is pedophilia, in your mind, something that is less worthy of contempt than the BNP or Islamicists?
Get this through your skull. I didn’t mention Islamicists anywhere as being less or more worthy of blame than the BNP. I never responded to one of your little tirades about them, except to answer points made to me, and when I did, I tried to answer the points that addressed my arguments. You want to accuse people fo downplaying Islamicism, that’s fine. But it is pretty stupid to try to paint me with that brush for discussing responses to the BNP in a threat about the freaking BNP.
Hardly. I’ve never heard of him.
However, since your argument seems to be that the BNP gets slammed for preaching intolerance, while Islamic radicals can say whatever they like, I’m not quite sure why you’d bring him up.
Abu Hamza did cross the line, and he’s in choky. What more do you want?
To borrow villa’s line, get the following through your thick skull: condemning the BNP doesn’t preclude condemnation of other dangerous loons. They just get their own threads.