Whites only?

[bitwrx]

Just found the following on Bloomberg.

Article]...support to their party[BNP said:

-- whose constitution bars all but “Indigenous Caucasian” people...

I didn't think this was the case. I even thought they had a British Asian candidate at one point.

Could someone tell me where exactly I lost the plot?

[AlexKP]

Seriously, when you pay attention to them, you give them tacit credibility.

[Oily Fingernails]

bitwrx said:

I even thought they had a British Asian candidate at one point.

You sure you didn't see a BNP funded Community Play depicting 'Parasites Stealing British Jobs' with BNP members dressed up as Black n White Minstrels?

[BigLepton]

It doesn't mater what their policies are, they are odious and unpleasant and only gaining support because people are feeling rightly or wrongly that the current disease of political correctness that pervades every level of government favours immigrants.

If we kill PC, we kill the BNP.

[bitwrx]

I know all that. I was just trying to figure out whether I'd lost the plot or the chappy at Bloomberg had his facts wrong.

[deckster]

bitwrx said:

I know all that. I was just trying to figure out whether I'd lost the plot or the chappy at Bloomberg had his facts wrong.

Apparently not. According to their constitution:

BNP said:

Membership of the BNP is strictly defined within the terms of, and our members also self define themselves within, the legal ambit of a defined ‘racial group’ this being ‘Indigenous Caucasian’ and defined ‘ethnic groups’ emanating from that Race as specified in law in the House of Lords case of Mandla V Dowell Lee

I hope you're happy now. I had to go onto their website and download stuff and everything. I feel dirty

[longblackcoat]

So, to summarise: the BNP isn't racist, no way, not at all.

It just excludes people who aren't white.

[bitwrx]

Ta. To be fair I should've just realised that me mis-remembering something was far more likely than a journo getting his facts wrong.

[Jasandjules]

longblackcoat said:

So, to summarise: the BNP isn't racist, no way, not at all.

It just excludes people who aren't white.

They are entitled to their views. Odious/offensive as they are.

[loafer123]

Jasandjules said:

longblackcoat said:

So, to summarise: the BNP isn't racist, no way, not at all.

It just excludes people who aren't white.

They are entitled to their views. Odious/offensive as they are.

I thought that too, until last night, when I saw the Islamist fundamentalists spewing hate at our returning soldiers.

That made me think that we, as a society, might be better off without extremists like the BNP and Islamic fundamentalists.

[Jasandjules]

I am afraid that the Islamic Fundamentalists are equally entitled to spew out odious and offensive racist and hate filled bile. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech and I don't think we should censor those things with which we disagree, for when do we draw the line?

I mean, I hate those MMGW fools who appear more brainwashed that members of a suicide cult, should I (if within my power to do so) ban them/censor them? No. Much as I'd like to shut them up....

[him_over_there]

If you yourself want the right to freedom of speech, that means that you have to let the other guy speak. No matter how much you disagree with his views.

[funk odyssey]

loafer123 said:

Jasandjules said:

longblackcoat said:

So, to summarise: the BNP isn't racist, no way, not at all.

It just excludes people who aren't white.

They are entitled to their views. Odious/offensive as they are.

I thought that too, until last night, when I saw the Islamist fundamentalists spewing hate at our returning soldiers.

That made me think that we, as a society, might be better off without extremists like the BNP and Islamic fundamentalists.

who decides who the extremists are?

slippery slope IMHO

[loafer123]

funk odyssey said:

loafer123 said:

Jasandjules said:

longblackcoat said:

So, to summarise: the BNP isn't racist, no way, not at all.

It just excludes people who aren't white.

They are entitled to their views. Odious/offensive as they are.

I thought that too, until last night, when I saw the Islamist fundamentalists spewing hate at our returning soldiers.

That made me think that we, as a society, might be better off without extremists like the BNP and Islamic fundamentalists.

who decides who the extremists are?

slippery slope IMHO

• sigh*

I know.

I just wish that this country used a bit more common sense in dealing with issues like this, and less lowest common denominator decision making.

[cmsapms]

Jasandjules said:

longblackcoat said:

So, to summarise: the BNP isn't racist, no way, not at all.

It just excludes people who aren't white.

They are entitled to their views. Odious/offensive as they are.

The BNP may or may not exclude non-whites (whatever they are) - I refuse to give them the attention they crave by finding out. However, I doubt they are any more odious/offensive than new labour. After all, whilst new labour may not discriminate on skin colour*, they certainly discriminate between people willing to do an honest day's work and scrotes, with the former coming off worst!

* positive discrimination is still negative discrimination - merely viewed from a different angle.

Edited by cmsapms on Wednesday 11th March 11:17

[funk odyssey]

cmsapms said:

Jasandjules said:

longblackcoat said:

So, to summarise: the BNP isn't racist, no way, not at all.

It just excludes people who aren't white.

They are entitled to their views. Odious/offensive as they are.

The BNP may or may not exclude non-whites (whatever they are) - I refuse to give them the attention they crave by finding out. However, I doubt they are any more odious/offensive than new labour. After all, whilst new labour may not discriminate on skin colour, they certainly discriminate between people willing to do an honest day's work and scrotes, with the former coming off worst!

there is no comparison between the parties and you are sadly deluded or shallow if you think so

[Nolar Dog]

Thought this was going to be a laundry advice thread for us girls.

[cmsapms]

funk odyssey said:

cmsapms said:

Jasandjules said:

longblackcoat said:

So, to summarise: the BNP isn't racist, no way, not at all.

It just excludes people who aren't white.

They are entitled to their views. Odious/offensive as they are.

The BNP may or may not exclude non-whites (whatever they are) - I refuse to give them the attention they crave by finding out. However, I doubt they are any more odious/offensive than new labour. After all, whilst new labour may not discriminate on skin colour, they certainly discriminate between people willing to do an honest day's work and scrotes, with the former coming off worst!

there is no comparison between the parties and you are sadly deluded or shallow if you think so

1. How fast do you type!!!?
2. In your opinion

[longblackcoat]

funk odyssey said:

loafer123 said:

Jasandjules said:

longblackcoat said:

So, to summarise: the BNP isn't racist, no way, not at all.

It just excludes people who aren't white.

They are entitled to their views. Odious/offensive as they are.

I thought that too, until last night, when I saw the Islamist fundamentalists spewing hate at our returning soldiers.

That made me think that we, as a society, might be better off without extremists like the BNP and Islamic fundamentalists.

who decides who the extremists are?

slippery slope IMHO

Oh no, they are absolutely entitled to their views. It offends me when they protest that they're not racist, that's all. They should stand up for their views; the very fact that they seek to deny their racism makes me think that either they're a bit ashamed of it, or perhaps they know that if they were absolutely open they'd have zero support from the general population.

[G_T]

him_over_there said:

If you yourself want the right to freedom of speech, that means that you have to let the other guy speak. No matter how much you disagree with his views.

Wiser words have never been spoken. Whilst I find these hateful creatures detestable, they do have a fundamental right to their opinions.

In my opinion no one has the right to draw a line where "freedom of speech" should end. Unfortunately though this allows for the indoctrination of the more impressionable and weak minded. But could it ever be any different?

It's a real double edged sword I reckon...