BNP members to be banned from the Church..

[max_tranmere]

I hear what people say but I cant understand how the BNP can legally exist yet it is taboo to join them and, for a lot of people, out of order to vote for them. Why doesn't the Establishment outlaw the party then? Why this half measure?

[Peter]

max_tranmere wrote:

> I hear what people say but I cant understand how the BNP can
> legally exist yet it is taboo to join them and, for a lot of
> people, out of order to vote for them. Why doesn't the
> Establishment outlaw the party then? Why this half measure?

probably legally they can't ban it, or at least ban it without having to ban other racist organisations. So they just want to make life a misery for anyone associated with it, so membership falls and it dies 'naturally'.

A bit like the ID won't be compulsory to carry, but life will be so impossible without one, that people will carry them by default.

[max_tranmere]

Allowing the BNP to stand for election, have them win seats, then ignore them when they do is the equivilant of vote-spoiling in my view. If you mess around with voting forms, pretend you have people living in your property that don't, spoil someone else's form after they've voted, get involved in postal vote scandals, etc, then you can be jailed. What's the difference between doing one of those things and seeing 120,000 Londoners vote for that BNP guy who now sits in City Hall, but then ignoring him when he does? Do people remember the night Boris Johnson won the Mayoral election? He made a speech, so did every person who won a seat on the Assembly, and every other person stayed and listenened. When the BNP guy got up to speak (after having just received nearly one-eighth of a million votes) Johnson and all the others marched off, totally blanking him, basically saying 'we want nothing to do with you, you should be isolated and ignored'.

So 120,000 votes can just be ignored? And someone will be up in Court if they mess around with a ballot form which means just one vote is invalidated. What makes it worse was that Johnson only received 100,000 votes more than Ken Livingstone did, meaning Johnson regards 100,000 votes as mattering and being very significiant - and he happily takes the job that those votes enable him to get - yet 120,000 votes that the BNP guys got Johnson sees as meaning diddly-squat! Surely if someone has a mandate from the people that has to be acknowledged and respected. And this applies to wider issues with the BNP aswell, as I've been saying. If they can solicit for votes, get votes, then it seems a legitimate thing to be able to vote for them. Not something I could ever see myself doing, and I often question the thinking going on inside the heads of those who do vote for them, but if people can and do vote for the BNP then that makes them a legitimate policital party who should be viewed, and treated, as such.

[videokim]

BNP people should not have any rights in society, inciting racism is a crime & these people do just that. They are the shit on our shoes & most people wouldn't even piss on them if they were on fire, being banned from church seems tame.

John

[dynatech]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJKRF2uB ... annel_page

Fuck the BNP. Fuck nulabour. In fact, fuck all so-called 'official' political parties eroding our natural rights worldwide, all the simpletons hiding behind the intellectually lazy wall of organized religion.
In the name of 'tolerance' all I see is nonsensical hatred & stupidity masquerading under the banner of 'global harmony'