So what do you lot make of this then?

[Peter]

one eyed jack wrote:


> So I guess by that rationale its all equal now that the BNP
> should gain power and oppress those who are not white.

Nope, just want to understand why its ok for one group to discriminate, in this case based on skin colour, but not another, and the argument used to justify their actions and inaction by the body involved.

[David Johnson]

Hi
Can't for the life of me understand why the BNP hasnt been banned already.

How on earth can you have a legal political party whose constitution states that non-whites cannot be a member? How can you have a legitimate political party when party membership bars you from being in the police force?

The BNP argument about defending an ethnic minority is ridiculous. So the Anglo-Saxons were the first human beings on this earth were they? I sort of think there were people from other parts of the world first who spread to islands such as ours.

In a way, victory for the BNP in the EU elections has brought to the fore what a load of toerags they are. All power to the British Legion who went public in the press about Griffin's refusal to stop wearing the poppy symbol during the campaign. Understandable from the point of view of the Legion in that the veterans fought the Fascists in the Second World War, not to see the symbol of their sacrifice worn by a holocaust denier like Griffin. All power to Churchill's family who said the use of Churchillian imagery in the BNP broadcasts was abhorent.

In short, the sooner this lot get banned the better.

[one eyed jack]

Lets not get lost on this issue Pete. I strongly suspect the BPA was symptomatic of the racism it was facing.

The BNP supporters say they feel like "second class citizens in their own country" and their reasons are symptomatic of that. The big difference is that the BNP are largely populated by inherent racists and the rest are disgruntled individuals who feel that the BNP has the answers to their problems.

If you are still unclear then you can understand that racism or a less confrontational term misunderstanding of cultural differences are down to fear, intolerance and ignorance. One is usually symptomatic of the other, therefore ethnic minorities can display reverse racism in terms of prejudice but the BNP, if they were to get into power would institute racism by way of law and policies whereas ethnics cannot make those laws.

This is why I find it laughable when the BNP use terms like "second class citizens in their own country"

Maybe they are and maybe we are all equal under a government that makes them feel this way.

[one eyed jack]

It might be controversial of me to say this but I think people have the right to not like whoever they see fit. Its one of the basic choices of being human ina so called free country.

I think the BNP supporters are entitled to have their say and it would be undemocratic and unethical to ban them. All those who oppose this should think very carefully about a time when certain minorities were not even allowed to have their say and sit at the back of the bus or not even allowed into certain drinking establishments. This is a white mans country, so why shouldnt they be allowed to say what they are upset about?

People should sit up and listen and recognise there is a problem that needs to be addressed here. I'm not white but I can see with my own eyes that the immigration problem is putting a strain on the UK resources such as welfare and housing.

The only problem I have with institutionalised racism is when it crosses the line of violence or obstructs another person from continuing their life as normal.

I'm against the BNP , not by default because I am black but because I know that they will send this countries public relations back to the 19th century with their attitudes.

Real patriotism is not about fucking up your country by alienating the rest of the world.

I've sat with so called racists and debated this but there we were, drinking beers in the same establishment and talking about it without glassing each other.

[JonnyHungwell]

Nothing I can disagree with there.

I have nothing against any individuals, but I don't like what is happening in this country when it comes to mass immigration, asylum seekers and benefits. I'm not sure some of the people we let in are civilised enough to be in a developed nation - that goes for whites, blacks and browns.

[davey]

this is an absolute non event.the BNP are an exempted organisation under Section 25 and Section 26 of the Race Relations Act which allow for exclusive ethnic organisations with a membership of 50 or more.

[David Johnson]

Hi

One Eyed Jack said,

It might be controversial of me to say this but I think people have the right to not like whoever they see fit. Its one of the basic choices of being human ina so called free country.........OEJ This is true up to a point but if I were to stand up at a meeting and say "Black people in London are guilty of all the rapes and drug dealing in the capital and the sooner we start attacking them prior to deporting the lot of them the better" this would be judged as an offence i.e. preaching racial hatred and in my opinion, quite right too.

OEJ said -- I think the BNP supporters are entitled to have their say and it would be undemocratic and unethical to ban them. All those who oppose this should think very carefully about a time when certain minorities were not even allowed to have their say and sit at the back of the bus or not even allowed into certain drinking establishments. This is a white mans country, so why shouldnt they be allowed to say what they are upset about?

OEJ I think you need to differentiate between people saying whats on their mind and on the other hand, preaching racial hatred. I draw your attention at the bottom of this message to part of the BNP constitution. I doubt you would be so tolerant towards the BNP if they got to power and decided to legally enforce your deportation because you do not fit in with the BNP's bizarre racial stereotyping.

Just like the individual racist at the meeting, the BNP as a whole is a party based on racial hatred that was formed out of the neo Nazi National Front. If it is an offence for an individual to incite violence by preaching racial hatred, which it is in this country, it should also be an offence for a party to do the same. Hence the BNP should be banned, I feel.

Cheers
D

The British National Party stands for the preservation of the national and ethnic character of the British people and is wholly opposed to any form of racial integration between British and non-European peoples. It is therefore committed to stemming and reversing the tide of non-white immigration and to restoring, by legal changes, negotiation and consent, the overwhelmingly white makeup of the British population that existed in Britain prior to 1948.

[David Johnson]

Hi,

I dont understand what you are talking about.

As usual I find your post illogical. You say Banning the party would achieve very little, it wouldn't alter the opinions of it's former members would it?
This is a bit like saying banning paedophilia is stupid because it won't change the views of the paedophiles.

Any posts that I do on the two forums are totally unconnected.

Nor did I have a clue what your recent reply to my post on the promo board was about, until you explained that it referenced some private feud you were having with Nikonman and some other person.

By these obscure, little feuds you have with a variety of people on this board which you assume that everyone should understand or they really know nothing, you give the impression of being a bit silly but I am sure you will disagree in your usual unpleasant, charmless, illogical way, lol!

So I imagine that this reply will produce another crude, stupid reply from yourself which given I have better things to do with my time I will not respond to.

I stand by my posts on the promo and ot forums.

Have a nice day

David