BNP on Question Time: what would have been the point of banning Griffin?

October 24, 2009 at 5:30 pm (anti-fascism, Uncategorized, voltairespriest)

If, like me, you watched Thursday’s audience-record-breaking edition of Question Time, you’ll more than like have been as revolted by the odious chubby fascist’s performance as I was. Griffin spluttered implausible denials of his vile politics at points, and at others actually came out with them, for instance in the course of his bigoted comments about homosexuality. All the while he sat sweating, grinning inanely and laughing inappropriately, and generally looking like a man having a terrible time. Meanwhile, as Jim mentions in his previous post, the three mainstream politicians failed to land much of a punch on him, with particular dishonour going to Jack Straw for his impotent flailing when questioned about Labour policy (on immigration, although in reality the Labour Party’s culpability goes wider) and its role in the rise of the BNP. Like Jim, I believe that honours for the night go to Bonnie Greer for her extraordinary dignity, refusal to engage with Griffin on his level, and her forensic destruction of his laughable grasp of history.

There has been a debate within the media and political circles alike, about the rights and wrongs of the BBC’s decision to allow Griffin on to Question Time. The majority on the left and amongst centre-left liberals appear to believe that he should not have been invited in the first place. From liberals one tends to hear various statements to the effect that Griffin should not have been allowed on because of the odiousness of his views and the possibility of their inciting racial hatred. On the left, one hears various recitations of the old mantra, “no platform for fascists”.

But… what do these actually mean? The liberal argument is especially vacuous. Of course Griffin is a foul human being whose views would disgust most Tories, let alone liberals and left-wingers. Of course the vast majority of people from all classes and communities in the UK would refuse to associate themselves with this political gargoyle or anyone with views similar to his. However, there is something more than a little patronising about the idea that white working-class people in the UK would, at the mere sight of the BNP fuhrer grinning and sweating his way through an episode of QT, go out and attack the nearest person from a BME community that they happen to run into. Obviously he wouldn’t have the same hypnotic effect on a Guardian columnist/Comment is Free writer/other liberal pundit, because they’re far too right-on, not like them peasants on the estates. It is patronising and nonsensical – people who were racist before 10:35 pm last Thursday still will be, and people who were not are unlikely to have been persuaded by Griffin’s gibbering under the spotlight.

From the left as I say, it is the “no platform” argument which is heard. This is more serious, albeit in this case often distorted through the prism of calls on the state and the media to do a job which rightly belongs to working class people. The most obvious elephant in the room with the advocates of this form of no platform, is that it doesn’t work. The net result of shunning argument directly with the BNP has been to enable them to fester and grow in parts of the country where people do not follow the conventional political media, feel ignored by the main political parties, and are utterly divorced from mainstream political debate. As a consequence, a fascist party gained hundreds of thousands of votes at the June European elections, and now has 2 elected MEPs. That hardly sounds like a vote for more of the same.

It is only an opinion, but in my view the time has come to shine the light of publicity directly on the BNP. Whilst it is possible (at a decidedly large stretch) that some people may have watched Griffin on Thursday and been persuaded to the cause of fascism, it seems to me more likely that neutrals of all backgrounds will have been horrified. The long-term outcome of the BBC’s decision, it seems to me, will be to galvanise opposition to the BNP beyond its usual redoubts and into the population as a whole.

Ask yourself this: you probably know several people who would describe themselves as “non political”. Some of them probably have at least one opinion that would be seen as a bit off-colour in left-wing circles. Did any of those people come to you with outpourings of praise for Griffin’s performance, and say that they were now persuaded to vote BNP? My guess is that none of them did.

Where BNP candidates win and enter the spotlight, they fail quickly thereafter. It is precisely their shodowy existence and freedom from media scrutiny that allows them to grow on the basis of the perpetuation of myth, rumour and innuendo – and on the basis of the threat of violence as well.

Media lynch mobs attacking the BNP? Bring it on.

103 Comments

  1. voltairespriest said,

    Interestingly, fascist blogger “Sarah Maid of Albion” (previously mentioned on this site) appears to have no comment on Griffin’s appearance – which the BNP officially trumpeted as their big breakthrough opportunity.

  2. Freedom said,

    I think what a lot of the more informed white working class would have seen is an immense degree of hypocrisy from all involved in that carefully stage managed Stalinist-like show trial by TV.

    For instance, during QT Straw choose ethnicity to describe his ancestor’s arrival in Britain and his status as a” third generation Jewish émigré” rather then nationality, making an offensive mockery of his later stance that the English / British ethnic identity is somehow spurious and to be scoffed at.

    He is on record as describing “the English” as “potentially very aggressive, very violent” – so he clearly does have an opinion on who the English are as a distinct ethnicity (and a very negative one at that) but acted outraged on QT at the suggestion that there even was any such thing as an indigenous inhabitant of the UK let alone an English ethnicity.

    Straw is also credited with stating in a Falklands constuition document that the “English as a race are not worth saving” but the government Straw is a member of would not allow the ethnicity of English on the census form; and of course he says he is a “former communist” and so it is fine for him to change his extremist views but not Griffin

    As for Bonnie Greer getting on her high horse about there being no such as thing as the English people or indigenous Britons and guffawing at the suggestion that race could form the basis of an organization, she was a long term resident of the Black Theatre co-operative and clearly felt racial identity in organization was fine in that case.

    Sayeeda Warsi was rejected by the voters in Dewsbury and so was subsequently made a Baroness to bypass that annoying facet of democracy that ministers – even shadow ministers – should be elected in a real democratic society and so it was all very rich for her to be telling a man who has been democratically elected and has a mandate what people really think and act as she has some sort of mandate herself when she was rejected by the electorate.

    Whilst Chris Hunhe was attempting to say that there were not enough “Liberal-Democrats active” and that his party was the only party that can “stop the BNP” when clearly he is very much at odds with his own party and thinks that his leader “parrots Cameron” and is a “Tory twin” and has massive disdain for the Tories themselves deriding Hague as a “skinhead who has toured the beer cellars of central Europe, and has come up with the dregs” – in short a Nazi, and so Hunhe clearly thinks that the leader of his party shares at least some common ground with Nazis.

    And it was all presided over by a man who the license fee payers pay hundreds of thousands of pounds do a professional job, not to arbitrarily and spitefully change the format of the show for the first time in 30 years to ambush a guest, encourage the audience to be booing and jeering a guest and leading and initiating discriminatory attack on a person and a party he doesn’t happen to agree with.

    In short it all stank, and stank badly and if Griffin wasn’t so visibly nervous and shaken he could have easily have ripped them to pieces, or in the current buzz word parlance “exposed them.”

  3. Matt said,

    It does seeem the BNP has picked up a ‘bounce’ from Griffin’s QT appearance: they claim several thousand people contacted them about joining; a poll suggests 22% would now at least consider voting for them. I also think it’s not unlikely that the BNP’s complaint to the BBC about Griffin being ambushed by a ‘media lynch mob’ on QT will be upheld, perpetuating the idea that the poor fascists are victims of a liberal/left establishment conspiracy to misrepresent their views.

    The justification for ‘no platform’ – as a policy to be implemented by the labour movement not the State – is very simple: the more the far-right is allowed to grow, the greater the threat to its immediate targets – black, Asian and Jewish people – and ultimately the labour movement itself. Stopping Griffin recruiting one person to his fascist apparatus by appearing on TV is simple self-defence. Pity the guy from BECTU who was interviewed criticising the BBC’s decision didn’t get this. BECTU’s position was that they would represent any member disciplined for refusing to work on this week’s QT. Surely they could have sidestepped the anti-union laws by invoking health and safety to pull the plug on the whole thing.

  4. Rosie said,

    Well, Freedom, you are very ready to give us the dubious backgrounds of those opposing Griffin. But Griffin’s extremely creepy background eg as someone who addresses white nationalist conferences in the company of the likes of David Duke of the Ku Klux Klan and who has written Holocaust denial in Nazi publications like The Rune seems to have passed you by altogether. And when he is confronted with this past he starts shaking and trembling and telling stupid lies. Even David Duke is a bit cross with him for his ineptitude:-

    “When he said he met with me to save kids from being “led astray by David Duke,” that comment was transparently dishonest to every viewer. Not only did the comment not help him, it hurt him and made him seem disingenuous, as did a number of other things he said during the show.”
    .

    http://edmundstanding.wordpress.com/2009/10/23/david-duke-griffin-was-transparently-dishonest-on-question-time/

    Now you are in trouble when a white supremacist like Duke says that you are “transparently dishonest” when he is basically on your side. Griffin says one thing to a BBC audience, another to his Nazi chums but he is so stupid he doesn’t seem to realise that he may end up pissing them both off by his inept double dealing.

    So whatever the other members of the panel have done or said in the past, the charge sheet against them is pretty feeble compared to Griffin’s.

    I assume you’re a Griffin supporter and that you are so embarrassed by the total pathetic fantasist he showed himself to be on Question Time that your only resource is blustering about his opponents.

  5. Rosie said,

    Oh, and that idle bugger Freedom has dumped the very same post over at HP! I call that insulting. He could have changed the wording a bit. I’m guessing BNP HQ have put this together to try and cover Griffin’s wobbly arse.

  6. voltairespriest said,

    Matt: as you rightly point out, the responsibility to stop the growth of fascism lies with the working class and not with the state, broadcasting corporations or other big media. It’s a misconception of the reasons for no platform to think that big powerful bodies will (or should) stop fascists on behalf of the populace. The problem is that public calls for the BBC to ban Griffin on the grounds that his views are offensive, merely serve to further that misconception.

    It’s our responsibility to stop fascism. And calling for the media to hold our hands and do it for us simply does not further that goal.

    Furthermore, I think that we are no longer in an age when it is possible to simply choke off fascism by denying it the oxygen of publicity. It is in working class communities in parts of country, and as such its ideas must be publicly confronted, not avoided.

  7. Curious Freedom said,

    Curious Freedom

    “Oh, and that idle bugger Freedom has dumped the very same post over at HP! I call that insulting.”

    Why do you find that “insulting” exactly? How bizarre.

    “He could have changed the wording a bit.”

    Why should I do that exactly? What difference would it make?

    What about the actual content of the comment? The array of hypocrites on the show?

  8. voltairespriest said,

    What she said was that you might at least have had the guts to engage in debate, rather than simply blanket-posting the same crap over more than one site.

  9. Curious Freedom said,

    “What she said was that you might at least have had the guts to engage in debate, rather than simply blanket-posting the same crap over more than one site.”

    Nope. She didn’t say that at all. What she actually said is above for everyone to see so I really don’t understand your ‘spin’ on it.

    And why is it “crap” when every single word is true? You might not like it, but it is all true. Is all inconvenient truth “crap”?

    You don’t get a debate by gratuitously insulting people either, now do you? But what is it you want to debate?

    Griffins past statements? Nothing to do with me but very well known to pretty much everyone, including the people of the North West who nevertheless voted for him in sufficient numbers to elect him as one of their MEP’s. Or Duke’s comments? A man who still has political aspirations denying that he leads “kids astray”? Hardly surprising.

    I think of a topic of more interest and relevance to debate would be the revelation that Labour ministers deliberately encouraged mass immigration to diversify Britain over the past decade and have covered it up. i.e: Lied.

    “Mass migration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural…I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if it wasn’t its main purpose – to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.” writes former Downing Street adviser Andrew Neather.

    And Straw had the front to call Griffin a “conspiracy theorist” on QT!! What a shower.
    As even Huhne had to admit: “If this is true it is deeply shocking that the Government can have taken such significant decisions without public debate and public consultation…The essence of good decision-making in a democracy seems to have been ignored.”

    Well of course democracy was ignored. We are governed by ideological fascists who care not for pettifogging details like the peoples will; Brown was not chosen by the people as their and didn’t dare ask them for a mandate and Mandelson, the real power behind the throne, has been elected by no one at all and booted out of government twice!!

  10. voltairespriest said,

    You actually have no real evidence, either in policy or statistics, to support your suggestion that the government is using immigration as a political tool to “multiculturalise” the UK. What I can produce in response is more or less any press statement that you may care to pick from Phil Woolas, the minister with responsibility for immigration policy, bashing immigrants.

    In short, this isn’t a “debate”, as Rosie and I aren saying, it’s just us looking rather perplexed and you spouting a stream of racially-motivated crap. Hence, one imagines, you’re not being taken seriously.

  11. Matt said,

    VP, I don’t think what I’m saying contradicts your point. ‘No platform’ obviously doesn’t just mean TV technicians refusing to broadcast Griffin, it also means postalworkers refusing to deliver BNP leaflets, the left and working class communities mobilising against fascist events. UAF/SWP are indeed playing a very foolish and dangerous game with their apolitical, ‘let’s all hold hands’ appeals to various bits of the State to ban the Nazis.

    Leaving them aside, I think there are two concepts of working-class anti-fascism here, or at least they way you present it tactically.

    One is the American Trotskyist one where you go out of your way to insist that the fascists have the right to free speech but that equally the working class has the right to counter-demonstrate and defend itself (effectively denying the fascists their ability to exercise their supposed right): the 1939 SWP demo in Madison Square or the Minneapolis Teamsters’ ‘defense squads’ are classic examples. I think they were clearly influenced by the need to defend the First Amendment in a country where their own right to free speech was often under attack.

    The other one is more European: this isn’t a game, if the Nazis came to power as they did in Germany in the early 30s, we’d all end up in camps. There is no absolute principle of ‘free speech’ that overides the need to defend black, Asian and Jewish communities or the labour movement. Nor is the bourgeois State an impartial referee who will stop the the Nazis once they revert to their usual tactics later on.

  12. Rosie said,

    Shorter response to Freedom:-

    Say what you like about the other panellists, at least they aren’t Nazis.

  13. Rosie said,

    Oh, and this appearance has caused a load of lousy publicity for the BNP:-

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/25/nick-griffin-question-time-bnp

    Griffin may lose his job over this.

  14. Curious Freedom said,

    “You actually have no real evidence, either in policy or statistics, to support your suggestion that the government is using immigration as a political tool to “multiculturalise” the UK.”

    As always with the loony left you fail to grasp that it was the “suggestion” of former Downing Street adviser Andrew Neather who was in on the meetings!! Were you in on the meetings? Tell me how you know more then a man who was?

    But as for evidence, how about this:

    “The “deliberate policy”, from late 2000 until “at least February last year”, when the new points based system was introduced, was to open up the UK to mass migration, he said.
    Some 2.3 million migrants have been added to the population since then, according to Whitehall estimates quietly slipped out last month.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

    Nearly half of the people in the British capital city “belong to groups other than white British.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_London

    “In short, this isn’t a “debate”, as Rosie and I aren saying, it’s just us looking rather perplexed and you spouting a stream of racially-motivated crap. Hence, one imagines, you’re not being taken seriously.”

    First you say that I “might at least have had the guts to engage in debate” and then when I do (as I was all along) you know flip flop to “this isn’t a “debate” and “you’re not being taken seriously”!!

    Wow you should have been on that QT panel, you have the right hypocritical credentials.

    And as for “not being taken seriously” that is exactly why as an indigenous English white working class heterosexual male I put my cross in the BNP box. People like you are the very reason for that. You are the fuel that spurs on the BNP. It is a party of your making.

    “Say what you like about the other panellists, at least they aren’t Nazis.”

    Just hypocrites and liars, with an unelected minister, an organiser on racial grounds, expense fiddling thieves and a war criminal amongst them.

    And a “former” communist who supported an ideology that murdered well over 100,000,000 people (far more then the Nazis) and failed to apologise for that or the Holodomor, a Holocaust ten years previous to and of greater magnitude then the Shoa.

    Straw is a “former” extremist and can change but Griffin cannot? Is that the idea here?

    And isn’t strange just how many “former” communist there are in “New Labour”?

    “Griffin may lose his job over this.”

    No, he wont.

    Just more student politic attempts at division and wishful thinking on the loony left.

    I’ll come back just before Xmas and say “I told you so”..

  15. Andrew Coates said,

    This debate was all about identity, and this is proof of it.

    Bonnie Greer was, despite all what has been said, way off the mark. Her references to genetics were less informed than Griffin. The BNP leader being an obessive about the genes of the ‘aboriginals’ is more than likely to have read the scientific stuff which says that, it is ‘genetically’ most of the UK and Irish population are linked to the immediate post-Ice age – pre-Celt – human beings’ genetic material.

    But so what? What are the policies of the racial-cultural identity-for-whites BNPers in relation to this?

    What programme of putting the interests of the ‘aboriginal’ population of this country first is, a) going to work without causing massive oppression and misery, b) benefit anyone other than those in charge of the programme? For starters, how does anyone cut up human beings so finely that they can separate the population on the grounds of being truly indigeneous – or ‘tainted’ by (genetically) some element of later invidivduals (in waves: Northern European, Meditteranean, then all the later groups). Is someone going to make a genome register for everyone?

    And how could they possibly put genetic ‘Britons’ first without saying for what and how? Does this mean queue-jumping? Rights to extra-welfare benefits? Shoving someone else out of a job?

    Let’s take an example: the BNP has no policy for anyone to deal with mass unemployment other than a separating out good (indigeneous) from bad (foreign) unemployed,. In other words, splitting up people. Thus helping the Tories, New Labour, and the Employers by setting the poor at each other’s throats. Without any positive programme the BNP, like the Front National before them, will no doubt have a period of success, but the lack of anything serious to say about these problems will eventually drive them back out onto the fringes.

    As a Woodbridge School graduate and someone who’s spent his life on the far-right fringe, Griffin is no nearer the real issues – welfare, housing, jobs, wages – that stir ordinary non-public school educated people up than he was when he was interested in racist rubbish about the Holocaust.

  16. voltairespriest said,

    Matt: yes, we agree entirely. No platform – if we must use the term, and my worry is that it has been corrupted beyond usefulness by recent example – is about collective action by the class to prevent the growth of violent fascism, and not about appeals to higher powers to censor offensive views.

    Freedom: your whole argument is based on a “quote” which I haven’t bothered to source, from one person who apparently happened to previously advise the governement. So who cares? Where’s this “genocide” of which Fat Hitler did speak?

  17. Curious Freedom said,

    “your whole argument is based on a “quote”

    And, possibly the fact that millions and millions of people have been allowed into the UK since NuLabour took the reins.

    But tell me, why is the word quote in speech marks, exactly? Other then some sort of bizarre sign of contempt?

    “which I haven’t bothered to source”

    Because you are not really interested in whether it is actually true or not. You are only really interested in attacking people that say it is.

    When you do bother you will see it is not a “quote” but an article.

    “from one person who apparently happened to previously advise the governement.”

    And knows what was said in the meetings; whereas you do not.

    “So who cares?”

    Obviously not you, so why even bother attempting to deny its true?

    But I think you will find that many British people will care that they have been lied to by their government who has socially engineered them without their consent.

    “Where’s this “genocide” of which Fat Hitler did speak?”

    I do not speak for Griffin, but I think it would be fair to say that when you consider that nearly half the people in Britain’s capital city and biggest city “belong to groups other than white British” and that the birth rates of these different groups is much higher, that the white British have been effectively ethnically cleansed from just that one city already and will be in a minority very soon.

    Scream ‘racist’ as much as you want.

    It’s the truth and one that not many white people outside the loony left or self loathing Guardianistas will like. And where do they turn…

  18. voltairespriest said,

    Oooh, I’m under your skin aren’t I?

    So remind me. Why should I be worried if my neighbours are Sikh or whatever other religious/ethnic/cultural group? I like Sikh people, lots of them are nice and all that. Sikh weddings are the best, too. You’re missing out.

  19. Curious Freedom said,

    “Oooh, I’m under your skin aren’t I?”

    Hardly. Just amusing really with your very bizarre attempts at contemptuous flourish.

    “So remind me. Why should I be worried if my neighbours are Sikh or whatever other religious/ethnic/cultural group?”

    So you do now concede that what many, including the BNP have said was right all along: That there was a massive government conspiracy to change the character and identity of this country whilst lying about it and hysterical smearing anyone who dared point out the bleeding obvious as goose-steeping Nazis?

    And you have also conceded that you do not care. But you fail to understand why the BNP is raising so fast. How odd.

    “You’re missing out.”

    Hardly. I was ethnically cleansed from the East End but now live South of the river and trust me, I miss nothing. We will have permanent armed police patrolling here soon too whereas the rest of the UK gets by with the good old unarmed bobby.

  20. voltairespriest said,

    Well, actually no I don’t concede it at all. I live in a neighbourhood that happens to be urban, working class and by ethnic origin majority white, albeit with a significant non-white minority. I’ve also previously lived in very white neighbourhoods, and in very BME ones. It has never occurred to me to give the slightest toss what the colour of my neighbour’s skin was, and it still doesn’t.

    So I ask you again, why should I care about ethnic origins? And why do you? Be honest now, my little white nationalist plaything…

  21. Curious Freedom said,

    “Well, actually no I don’t concede it at all.”

    Well, considering you started off with this:

    “You actually have no real evidence, either in policy or statistics, to support your suggestion that the government is using immigration as a political tool to “multiculturalise” the UK. What I can produce in response is more or less any press statement that you may care to pick from Phil Woolas, the minister with responsibility for immigration policy, bashing immigrants”

    And can now only bleat that you “don’t care” when presented with such evidence, it is a natural conclusion.

    “I live in a neighbourhood that happens to be urban, working class and by ethnic origin majority white”

    Why don’t you go and live in one of those majority ‘enriched’ whose ‘diversity’ you love to ‘celebrate’ so much then? You are missing out, or so you told me. And also missing on a lot ‘diversity celebration.’

    “So I ask you again, why should I care about ethnic origins? And why do you? Be honest now, my little white nationalist plaything…”

    Well, lets just go back to one little facet of it that I pointed out and you brushed over.

    Why is it, do you think, that the specific areas of Brixton, Tottenham and Haringey need routinely armed police to patrol it? What is it about these areas that make it so different to the rest that it warrants such a dramatic change in the way we police? Why is it this is happening now, after countless years of a routinely British unarmed police force, after all, we have never needed it before? Who is behind the majority of this gun and knife crime?

    Go on, be honest now, my little Marxist plaything…

  22. voltairespriest said,

    What “evidence”? You’ve still come up with nothing beyond conspiracist innuendo, to suggest any plot on the part of the current government (of which I’m no fan) to ship millions of immigrants into the UK – still less any suggestion as to what their motive for doing so might be.

    Secondly, you’ve still to come up with any reason why I should give a toss whether I live in a majority-white, majority-BME, or big-old-smorgasbord-of-ethnicity area. It’s never made the slightest difference to me, and I’ve lived in all three.

    Do you like Jews, “Freedom”? Just curious…

  23. Curious Freedom said,

    I thought as much!!

    Your very transparent challenge to be honest backfires when an awkward question is raised does it not? Hypocritical, perhaps?

    Why can you not answer the question honestly? What is the problem? I think I might know why!

    But why is it, do you think, that the specific areas of Brixton, Tottenham and Haringey need routinely armed police to patrol it? What is it about these areas that make it so different to the rest that it warrants such a dramatic change in the way we police? Why is it this is happening now, after countless years of a routinely British unarmed police force, after all, we have never needed it before? Who is behind the majority of this gun and knife crime?

    Go on, be honest now, my little Marxist plaything…

  24. Jim Denham said,

    Curious:

    FACT: the present government operates a very strict policy of immigration control (which I oppose);

    FACT: there is no statistical evidence that areas of non-white population (and that’s what you’re on about, isn’t it?) have higher crime rates than predominantly “white” areas…the correlation is between crime and deprivation – an entirely different matter…

    I have lived for 37 years in ethnically and racially-mixed areas of Birmingham. I’ve been mugged twice and burgled twice. I don’t know who the burglars were, but the muggers were white on both occassions. I don’t draw any great conclusion from that personal experience…except not to racialise these matters.

  25. Curious Freedom said,

    @ Jim Denham:

    Here comes the honesty that was requested, lets see how it goes down:

    Fact:

    As revealed by the former government advisor Neather on the NuLabour ‘change the UK without asking anyone policy’:

    “The “deliberate policy”, from late 2000 until “at least February last year”, when the new points based system was introduced, was to open up the UK to mass migration, he said.

    Some 2.3 million migrants have been added to the population since then, according to Whitehall estimates quietly slipped out last month.”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

    So your “very strict policy of immigration control” is indeed very recent, and is indeed very spurious too.

    Fact:

    Over 70 per cent of London’s gun suspects are black. 73% of those charged with knife crime are non-white.

    http://www.itv.com/PressCentre/InTheLineOfFire/Ep1Wk07/default.html

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1036833/Over-half-young-knife-suspects-black-Scotland-Yard-figures-reveal.html

    Fact:

    In 80% of gang rape cases in 1998, the defendants were black. There are five times more young blacks in prison then whites.

    http://www.newstatesman.com/199811200011

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/1xtra/tx/black_crime.shtml

    Fact:

    In 2007, the most PC PM the UK has ever had said this:

    “Tony Blair yesterday claimed the spate of knife and gun murders in London was not being caused by poverty, but a distinctive black culture… Mr Blair said the recent violence should not be treated as part of a general crime wave, but as specific to black youth. He said people had to drop their political correctness and recognise that the violence would not be stopped “by pretending it is not young black kids doing it”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/apr/12/ukcrime.race

    Fact:

    Operation Trident is a permanent police unit set up to deal exclusively with black gun crime.

    There is no white equivalent of this police unit.

    Fact:

    The areas that the police are to now patrol routinely armed: Brixton, Tottenham and Haringey are all made up very large ethnic and black, communities.

  26. voltairespriest said,

    Freedom’s obsessed with race, though. I’m betting that there isn’t one major political issue in the UK today, which he doesn’t see through that prism.

  27. Seán said,

    Curious Freedom is indeed a curious little blighter. However, all he ever does is recite his one-note song over and over again. And I think I’ve seen all those links spammed continually at other blogs – including my own – when Curious Freedom was operating under a different pseudonym.

    Of course this something he will deny.

    Also he never comments on areas of the country, Liverpool for example, where there are armed police patrolling areas where gun crime and gang wars over drugs/territory are carried out by young men who happen to be white. The gangs involved in the Rees Jones murder, for example, were/are all working class lads who happen to be white. Indeed I know people who live in these areas, working class families, whose lives have been ruined and blighted by shootings and killings. All those involved were white – victims and perpetrators.

    But Curiouser and Curiouser believes we should ignore this inconvenient truth, and the socio-economic issues that give rise to such acts, and concentrate on reductionist shite like ‘race’ and ‘ethnicity’.

  28. Curious Freedom said,

    @ voltairespriest

    You asked for honesty and I gave you honesty.

    @ Seán

    I love the loony left ‘denial’ syndrome as some sort of preemptive smear device and defensive creating ‘backfooter.’

    Of course ‘Curious Freedom’ is pseudonym and not my real name; no real prizes there Sean. But I am now supposed to deny some sort of far-reaching internet ‘conspiracy’ by posting comments on here, Liberal Conspiracy and Harry’s place simultaneously? Whoever is posting this stuff on your blog may have copied these comments but those links are all over the internet, friend, and I have no idea who you or your blog are and I couldn’t care less what you believe in that regard quite frankly. It’s all just an odd distraction from the facts in any case, a deliberate one too at my guess. Posting on 3 blogs at the same time is enough for me.

    And I didn’t spam those links, Sean, I was asked for honesty and why VP, or anyone should “give the slightest toss what the color of my neighbor’s skin” and that was just one legitimate response.

    As for the rest of your comment Sean: The police in Liverpool are not routinely armed; in fact they are not routinely armed anywhere else on the street in the UK, that is why that the news made such a big splash this week, albeit in the typically disjointed left wing liberal elite way. Of course there are white criminals, as it ever was thus, but their extreme violent criminality is far outstripped by the non-white variety as just those figures show.

    You say that the “Liverpool gun crime and gang wars over drugs/territory are carried out by young men who happen to be white” but offer not as shred of proof for that bold contention (one shooting is not proof of your contention at all) whereas I have fully backed up my position with the links that you seem to hate and fear Sean.

    And if we want to list UK cities one by one, what about Manchester? Or Nottingham (known as Shottingham)? Or Birmingham? Is the gun and gang crime there “carried out by young men who happen to be white” Sean?

    Why is there no white equivalent of Operation Trident, Sean?

    And why is it that these expensively dressed black men, most of whom are at least second generation in the UK, so markedly different from the rest of the UK when it comes to shooting and stabbing people Sean? It is not ‘poverty’ we know; but even if it was, these areas were far more destitute just after the war, let alone before it without any such eruption. What is the problem Sean? And it’s not just in the UK, is it, Sean?

    As much as you would like believe we should ignore this inconvenient truth, it is not going away Sean.

  29. martin ohr said,

    this debate is like something from my O level sociology course 25 years ago. I suspect there is a chapter in http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sociology-Themes-Perspectives-Student-Handbook/dp/0007310722 dedicated to dissecting the stats and giving the real story under the headlines. No doubt it’s an interesting debate to have again, however.

    The modus operandi of the modern online fascist seems to be to raisea series of questions, highlight some supposed ‘facts’ and then never venture an actual solution.

    So ‘curious freedom’ what is your solution to gun crime in brixton? What is your problem with immigration, and what is your solution to it?

    Me, I love immigration, emmigration, holidays, years abroad, overseas postings, studying in foreign countries, working your way round the world. I see increased migration and mobility as part of a solution to a lot of the worlds problems, in fact a pre-condition to socialism is the free movement of labour.

  30. skidmarx said,

    I was ethnically cleansed from the East End
    Really?

    But why is it, do you think, that the specific areas of Brixton, Tottenham and Haringey need routinely armed police to patrol it?
    They don’t. Ten years ago I suffered 30 attempted muggings in a 9 month period, all by black teenagers, and having the police armed wouldn’t have prevented any of it. And my experience didn’t make me blame black people or the blackness of the kids involved.

  31. Curious Freedom said,

    @ martin ohr

    Go ahead, ‘dissect’ these figures then. Don’t just talk about it, do it.

    And I love how its ‘fascist’ to produce facts!

    The solution to gun crime in Brixton? Remove the guns for a start.

    @ skidmarx

    “They don’t.”

    Ah, but they do and they are.

    http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23759786-armed-police-to-patrol-britains-streets-to-fight-gun-gangs.do

    Did you really not know that before commenting?

    And do you understand the differene bewteen muggings and out of control gun crime, the reason for the armed patrols?

    @ www

    There is only one Daily Mail link actually!! But I love how that one link works you up into a frothing rage!

    And there is no parnoia here, just facts. And thats what you hate. If you can prove they are not facts, go ahead. Otherwise you just come over as a demented, free speech hating loon, who violently opposes the truth being spoken and any political dissent.

    As for the rest of your poisonous hate-filled thuggish comments, you call yourself an “antifascist!” Dont make me laugh.

  32. SOCIALIST UNITY » AROUND THE BLOGS - THE NO PLATFORM DEBATE said,

    [...] Priest at Shiraz Socialistasks a very good question “What would have been the point of banning Griffin?” He [...]

  33. Seán said,

    “The police in Liverpool are not routinely armed…”

    Yes they are. Your ignorance on the matter shows you are not to be trusted on any other assertions you make. Since the gang wars of mid to late 1990s, police in Liverpool have been openly armed. I used to see the officers patrolling myself on a near daily basis. Operation Reassurance Merseyside it was called at the time.

    And the high profile murder of an eleven year old merely alerted the rest of the country to the dire state of affairs in the overwhelmingly white districts of Norris Green and Croxteth. Here gangs of white teenagers have been involved in a long-standing feud. The shootings had become so routine that it was only with the murder of an innocent by-stander (of such a young age) that there seemed to be a concerted effort to remedy the situation. Unemployment and deprivation in these areas is now generational and most of the local industry has disappeared.

    Poverty not race is the fundamental factor in crime. Why is it that as the recession took hold, police and politicians began to worry about an inevitable rise in crime?

  34. martin ohr said,

    Curious Freedom -okay so what’s stopping the police from ‘removing the guns’ already?

    Again what is your solution here, why don’t you just tell us what it is and why you see race as so important; since we all disagree with you we would actually like to know what you’re getting at. Stop wasting our time and say what you think so that we can actually have a debate.

  35. Curious Freedom said,

    @ martin ohr

    –“Curious Freedom -okay so what’s stopping the police from ‘removing the guns’ already?”–

    Why do you need me to speculate on that for you? Do you not have any idea yourself?

    –“Again what is your solution here”–

    I told you my first and obvious solution. What else is it that you seem to want to hear?

    I answered your question, so quid pro quo and answer mine: Why is that blacks are massively and disproportionately behind gang rape? And what is your solution to the issue?

    –“and why you see race as so important”–

    I already have.

    And the figures speak for themselves. Like I said, it is hardly contained to the UK; I can produce many more for many more ‘western’ countries if you would like.

    –“since we all disagree with you”–

    You’re not really disagreeing with me but actual crime figures that show a massive and disproportionate dominance of violent crime by blacks within the UK.

    It’s a fact.

    —“Stop wasting our time and say what you think so that we can actually have a debate.”–

    I have already quite clearly said what exactly what I think, and I don’t think anyone could reasonably disagree that I haven’t. Whereas you have made a claim that these statistics could be ‘dissected’ by you and failed to do so, or even venture why you had that opinion or what it was based upon, when challenged.

    I think you are wasting your own time, everyone else’s and mine when you make claims that you cannot back up.

    What is it you really want to debate?

  36. martin ohr said,

    Curious Freedom- you are starting to become tedious. You are not actually saying anything very much.

    Factually you are wrong on this: “You’re not really disagreeing with me but actual crime figures that show a massive and disproportionate dominance of violent crime by blacks within the UK.”

    The crime figures show a disprortionate amount of suspects, arrests, charges and convictions for black men wrt violent crime. But certainly not a dominance. This sort of language slippage lets you down.

    One obvious answer as my sociology teacher was fond of saying is that the police disproportionately suspect black men of committing crimes and that the criminal justice system puts a disproporionate amount of resources into investigating and trying cases where black men are the suspects.

    The crime figures don’t even reflect the reality of crimes committed in any case- but you already know that.

    But even assuming just the raw figures reflect reality and that the police investigate all crimes equally, and are equally suspicious regardless of race; there are myriad reasons why black men might be more likely be involved in violent crime; here’s the 3 most obvious ones I can think of class, poverty and education.

    But even so -my answer to you is largely so what? Why do you keep telling us all these bad things about black men- what is the point of what you are saying. There are lots of things bad in the world- the point is however to change it.

    Don’t pretend you don’t understand what I’m saying here.

    WRT to removing guns, I can’t guess what you think the reasons are that the police can’t just remove them, but I doubt they are the same as mine, since I’ve thought long and hard about my reasons and they’re based on a marxist understanding of society. My view is that the police haven’t already removed the guns for 2 reasons, 1 because it’s actually not all that easy to obtain a gun in britain so criminals are careful about not making it easy for the police to find them- although the police in britain are spectactuarly thick and have very little understanding of the communities they police. 2) because materially the guns serve some purpose, so even when the police do remove them it is necessary for the criminals to replace them in order to continue their activities.

    I think you’re obsessed with race because you are a racist, all stuff about crime figures is simply you finding ‘facts’ to back up your prejudice; you don’t dare tell us your solutions because they are too unpalatable for you to admit- perhaps even to yourself. I love the fact that I live in a multi-cultural society which functions really pretty well, I love the fact that racists like you barely dare to speak out- you are an ever decreasing minority and you know it.

  37. Curious Freedom said,

    @ martin ohr

    –“Curious Freedom- you are starting to become tedious. You are not actually saying anything very much.”—

    Whereas you are saying plenty but providing no substance for it at all.

    Are you going to back up your claim that you could ‘dissect’ these figures are was it all just typically empty lefty hot air?

    –“The crime figures show a disprortionate amount of suspects, arrests, charges and convictions for black men wrt violent crime. But certainly not a dominance. This sort of language slippage lets you down.”—

    Are you for real?

    Is it so far beyond your grasp to understand that the statistics that show:

    1) Over 70 per cent of London’s gun suspects are black
    2) 73% of those charged with knife crime are non-white
    3) That in 80% of gang rape cases in 1998, the defendants were black

    are obviously quite clear in that this represents a dominance of blacks in violent crime as well as a massively disproportionate presence?

    Are you serious that you do not understand the implication of “over 70%”?

    –“The crime figures don’t even reflect the reality of crimes committed in any case- but you already know that.”–

    That’s right; the actual problem with the out of control problem of the dominance of violent crimes by the black community will be far, far higher then these figures show.
    –“here’s the 3 most obvious ones I can think of class, poverty and education.”–

    1) So you are saying that the working class are violent gun-tooting, knife-wielding gang raping criminals? And that this has been a new emergence in the UK? And one that is massively and disproportionately effecting the black community?

    2) As already pointed out, these areas have never been as affluent as they now; never. Just after WW2 these areas were devastated, in real poverty and access to guns much easier but they never experienced these out of control levels of crime.

    I don’t know if you have ever seen a street gang in your life but the first thing that will strike you is the top of the range, latest fashion, expensive clothing and trainers and the fact they are dripping with gold. Also everyone in this country has the same access to social security, at the worst case scenario, the poorest black is only as poor as the poorest white and yet blacks still manage to dominate the crime rate in massive disproportion.

    And lastly, there is no real poverty in this country anymore; not real poverty. Not being able to eat T-Bone steak every night, jet of to Spain twice a year and wear the latest fashions is not poverty.

    2) Blacks have the same access to education as whites so that does not compute at all.

    –“But even so -my answer to you is largely so what?”–

    Of course your approach is “so what” because I’ll wager a bet you don’t have to live around it for one, and that is the required response of your ideology for two.

    But if we go along with your “who cares” that crime is so out of control in black areas that they require a permanent armed police patrol for the first time in British history and that it will not end there, what about all of the whining and crying that blacks are stopped by police more often then whites?

    Wouldn’t that make perfect policing sense because we know that blacks are committing far more violent crimes then anyone else?

    –“because it’s actually not all that easy to obtain a gun in britain”—

    Now I know for sure that you do not live around this serious problem; you haven’t actually got the first idea of what you are talking about.

    –“the police in britain are spectactuarly thick”—

    You do know that you managed to spell ‘spectacularly’ wrong and leave out the capital ‘B’ in ‘Britain’ in your challenge of the intelligence of others?

    But to what other countries superior police force do you compare the British police to draw this conclusion?

    –“I think you’re obsessed with race because you are a racist”—

    Of course you do; it’s your pre-programmed knee-jerk response to anyone who ‘dares’ to mention race and factual evidence in the same sentence. Its what you do, its what your whole political spectrum does and it’s backfiring enormously.

    –“all stuff about crime figures is simply you finding ‘facts’ to back up your prejudice;”—

    Why are ‘facts’ in quotation marks, exactly? You have ample opportunity to back up your empty claim that you could ‘dissect’ these figures and have failed to so.

    Even if I had these prejudices you claim, I could not back them up with facts if these facts were not there to be found. In other words, if I had these prejudices you claim, then the facts would back them up.

    –“you don’t dare tell us your solutions because they are too unpalatable for you to admit- perhaps even to yourself.”–

    You like this word ‘dare’ don’t you?

    Like I will be burned at the stake for political heresy. Crucified for speaking against the extreme left ideology.

    Which is of course, what you have done to many decent people for speaking their minds. But you have thrown your hate labels around with so much wanton abandon that they are losing their noxious effect on people day by day.

    I have told my first solution, I answered your question. You didn’t answer mine:

    Why is that blacks are massively and disproportionately behind gang rape? And what is your solution to the issue?

    –“I love the fact that racists like you”—

    You see? You have decided to smear me with your hate label and proceed on the basis that it is a fact when nothing I have posted here constitutes racism at all. Do you even know what the word really means?

    –“you are an ever decreasing minority and you know it.”—

    The broad nationalist vote took around 22% of the vote at the last election and is predicated to rise even further. So this is yet something else you are wrong about.

  38. Curious Freedom said,

    @ www

    –“Carry on laughing, you sub-human racist ape”—

    A lot of Nazi terminology in there, friend.

    I think you are very confused at to what you actually are here: If it talks like a fascist, acts like a fascist then by God, it’s a fascist.

    This comment reveals that not only would you at the very least imprison me (after all animals are put in cages) for my political dissent but you don’t even view me as human for it and so presumably would have no compunction torturing or murdering me for it.

    –“One of your compatriots”—

    So you are not British then?

    –“David Copeland, set off three bombs in London a few years ago”—

    Yes and he was diagnosed as mentally and locked up as such but four perfectly sane British Muslims bridled with so much hate for fellow Britons that they become the first suicide bombers in British history blowing themselves up on public transport 4 years ago.

    –“He was a member of your party”–

    Actually he wasn’t at that time but in any case, the gay serial killer Dennis Neilson was a member of the SWP and an adherent of your politics does that make your party / politics culpable?

    –“Then there’s Nick Griffin’s mate, Tony Lecomber, the mad bomber who almost blew himself to kingdom come”–

    Then there are over120,000,000 million people in this world murdered by socialists for political dissent and the worst genocide known to man, the Holodomor, having been carried out by communists too.

    You guys are the biggest, the worst and the most blood thirsty mass murderers in history.

    If any ideology needs preventing from taking power again on the basis of history, it is socialism.

    –“Or the BNP councillor who says that being raped is enjoyable for women”—

    He wasn’t a councilor (note the spelling) and was sacked immediately for his comments.

    You haven’t really got a clue of what you are saying, have you

    –“I’m glad you find me ‘thuggish’ for recalling what happened to Mussolini. Just remember, something similar may happen to you one day. Here’s hoping.”–

    So you are openly advoacting violence and murder of all political dissent using the same methods as Mussolini and his fascists!!

    Like I said you are the real fascist here and you openly and gloatingly admit to it!

    –“Rather than staging ‘debates’ with fascist scum, the left should be seeking to unify its forces and mobilise all the BNP’s intended victims to crush it”–

    But using violence to silence all political dissent. Fascist.

    But my suspicion here is that, in common with all the fascist thugs I have met, you couldn’t crush a grape on your own let alone ‘smash’ a party of people.

    –“We need to mobilise a counterforce, and to develop the strategies to get that rolling, not engage in polite chit-chat with Nazi trolls.”–

    But using violence to silence all political dissent. Fascist.

    And I am no “Nazi” but you are most certainly a Fascist.

  39. Jim Denham said,

    “Incidentally, where are all the foul mouthed supporters of Shiraz Socialist who usually scream the vilest abuse against others on the left who disagree with their views on the Middle East, now that an obvious fascist is posting lengthy screed on this site?”

    Everyone involved in Shriaz Socialist has made their attitude to fascism absolutely clear. Sometimes it pays to just let the scum condemn themselves out of their own mouths. People who claim to be on the “left” who hold misguided (even disgusting) views are worth arguing with on a forum like this; my view is that fascists aren’t. I am personally in favour of blocking their comments once they’ve exposed themselves as the filthy bastards they are.

  40. AndyB said,

    There is a disproportionate number of ex-army vets who are involved in crime – they make up 10% of the prison population – but no one in the BNP (and I hope no one on the left) would make the argument that joining the army suggests your predilicted to crime, the same way the BNP accuses or at least subtly hints that being black does.

    The same arguments about ethnic groups and crime was used against catholics in scotland, a large majority of which came from Ireland. They are disproportionately convicted of crimes as well – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/359039.stm

    “An Observer article in 1989 quoted statistics which showed that although Catholics made up 16% of the population in Scotland, they accounted for 35% of the prison population. If it was merely a question of class, how did this happen?”

  41. Curious Freedom said,

    @ www

    –“Yes, its called “be done by as you did”—

    Expect for the fact, of course, that you are the only one advocating violence and the murder of anyone, let alone people that that are merely of differing political views.

    You are a fascist in every sense of the word and a psychopathic criminal.

    In short you are a disgusting disgrace to humanity and all that awaits is you and your demented hate is a cell, and probably a padded one at that.

    You missed your day: The NKVD would have loved you, especially during the Holodomor where you could have carried out the genocidal murder you so obviously long for to your twisted hearts content.

    @ Jim Denham

    I’d be very interested to know how exactly I have ‘exposed’ myself as a fascist here?

    And also why you remain living in a country with a democracy that ostensibly supports free speech?

    If censorship and suppression are your thing, like they are for so very many socialists (as is the mass murder of political opponents as openly espoused by your comrade above) what higher moral ground do think that you occupy?

    Free speech means, and can only ever mean, free speech for all.

    But is interesting to note that you were prepared to debate me with your spurious facts, and only then decided I was ‘a fascist’ to be ignored when I demolished those spurious facts so easily!

    That’s the real issue here. Inconvenient facts and truths.

    @ Andy B

    –“There is a disproportionate number of ex-army vets who are involved in crime – they make up 10% of the prison population”–

    It’s actually 8.5% and as such is a lower representative of the levels of numbers of people who have served in the UK armed forces, regular or TA; refer to the SSAFA website for a confirmation of this: “Around 10 million people in the UK could qualify for our help.”

    So the figure of 8.5% ex-service in prison is not disproportionate at all; in fact if anything, given the 10 million ex-service people there are in the UK the ex-service community is actually under represented in prison populations.

    But the black crime rate and imprisonment rate is grossly, vastly disproportionate and without even any possibly legitimate caveat such as some ex-forces personnel might have.

    “The same arguments about ethnic groups and crime was used against catholics in scotland, a large majority of which came from Ireland.”

    You are confusing religion with ethnicity here.

  42. Curious Freedom said,

    @ www

    You are clearly mentally ill; sick; deranged. A wannabe extremely violent psychopath.

    And incidentally threatening to murder people is a criminal offence however and though whatever medium it is expressed, if in your very limited intelligence and tenuous grasp on reality, you didn’t know that.

    You could try explaining in court that Primo Levi says it’s OK but I’d wager a bet it would only hold any water if you said he appeared before you in visions and was a constant voice in your head.

    If you cannot understand that murdering people that have differing political views to you is not just criminal, but morally repugnant to anyone who posses any shred of sanity and decency then you really do need a very long visit to the secure unit.

    When you use the methods and language of the fascists, amazingly enough, you are a Fascist yourself.

    You are quite clearly Fascist scum and a disgrace to humanity.

    But like I have already said, the Fascists like you that I have met over the years, and I have met many, are overwhelming just hate-filled blow-hard cowards that couldn’t crush a grape without outnumbering it 100 to 1 first.

    Tell me nutcase, if you really do believe what you say and you feel so morally justified in it, why haven’t you put your money where your mouth is? The BNP membership list is out there for anyone to obtain and on it you have around 10,000 people you could select for murder. Why haven’t you practiced what you preach and performed any “throat cuts” instead of just spouting your insanity online?

    Why haven’t you attempted to murder Nick Griffin? Why haven’t you actually committed any of these murders you claim to be involved in?

    Why are you just mouthing off about it on the internet?

    I’ll bet your socialist buddies are really happy with you and your very revealing Fascist attitude to political opponents, sweetheart.

  43. AndyB said,

    Curious what source have you got for 8.5% of the British population serving in the army?

    And my point re catholics was they are still disproportionately represented in jails, but no one points to catholicism as being the reason why they are jailed, unlike many accusations that blackness or ‘black culture’ is why black men are disproportionately represented in prisons. For example read an article by Rod Liddle blaming gangsta rap as part of the reason for knife crime.

  44. AndyB said,

    Also the SSAFA website includes dependants as people it can help, so includes families of army vets alongside vets themselves.

  45. Curious Freedom said,

    @ Andy B

    –“Curious what source have you got for 8.5% of the British population serving in the army?”–

    If you re-read the comment I didn’t say 8.5% of the British population served in the army. What I actually said was that your figure of 10% of the prison population being ex-service was in accurate, it is actually 8.5%. There are actually dozens of articles that confirm that:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6848238.ece

    But again, if you re-read the comment you will see that I clearly explained that SSAFA estimates that there are around 10 million in the ex-service community that qualify for their help.

    –“And my point re catholics was they are still disproportionately represented in jails”–

    And out of curiosity what source do you have for this?

    –“but no one points to catholicism as being the reason why they are jailed, unlike many accusations that blackness or ‘black culture”–

    Again you seem to be confusing what religion is: It is neither an ethnicity nor a culture
    .
    –“For example read an article by Rod Liddle blaming gangsta rap as part of the reason for knife crime.”–

    And Tony Blair said the same thing, albeit without the gangsta rap part, and I have quoted that above.

    The problem with that is the black community in the UK comes from enormously varied backgrounds and countries across the Caribbean and Africa, from Antigua to Zimbabwe, that each has dramatically different cultures, attitudes and outlooks and so to attempt to morph that into one “black culture” by way of an explanation is clearly erroneous.

  46. Curious Freedom said,

    –“Also the SSAFA website includes dependants as people it can help, so includes families of army vets alongside vets themselves.”–

    At what ratio?

    But given that National Service was compulsory from 1949 to 1960 and the vast numbers of people that served in that time and that the Armed Forces as a whole stood at 425,500 in 2006 and has maintained similar levels since the end of National Service in 1960 with a continual turnover it is not too hard to imagine that the figure of ten million (or figure close to it) of ex-service people is highly likely to be the case.

  47. Curious Freedom said,

    @ www

    Predictably, like the internet gobshite Fascist coward you and those you represent are, you now try to back away from your very open threats and incitement for the murder of a million political opponents, that is innocent people, and the torture and murder of myself when confronted with just the legal ramifications of what you are threatening and inciting. How cowardly.

    Of course, it’s quite easy to prove what an idiotic liar you are, as well as the whimpering coward you are too:

    You now say:

    –“I do not advocate random individual acts of violence against individual BNPers”–

    But just a few comments ago you said this:

    “You may want to sucker people into ‘debating’ with you, but you’ll only get abuse from me. Abuse is all your kind deserve. Or perhaps having your throat cut.”

    At least have the balls to stand by your threats and incitements, you disgraceful coward.

    –“It is not illegal to say this.”–

    I think you’ll find it is. And I think you’ll find inciting murder is a very serious criminal offence. And you will find out much sooner then you might think.

    The rest of your demented comments inciting murder are at the bottom of this post for all to see, along with more of your comments inciting murder in your last post.

    But on top of your mentally ill ramblings you fail to even understand even the most basic details what you talking about. BNP policy on all British citizens is that they can apply for grants to VOLUNTARILY return to their ancestral homeland if they WISH to. No more, no less. That is the real policy of the BNP membership and the policy of the million who voted BNP in the last election. No more, no less.

    It is in fact Fascist socialists like yourself who have proved to be the bloodiest mass murderers in history and have perpetrated the biggest Genocide in history: The Holodomor.

    In all, 110,000,000 innocent people, merely political opponents, are estimated to have been murdered by socialist communists and the boogey man of Stalin is only responsible for half of that horrifying figure. The rest are other socialists.

    So given this, if contemporary political parties are to be judged by some spurious process of ‘past history’ and action taken against them on that basis then clearly the case for banning all socialist parties is the strongest, given that they have proved to be the biggest tyrants and mass murderers in history. You call for the murder of political opponents and base it upon ‘past history’ and so your most passionate murderous rage should be applied to your very own people, lest they do it again.

    But the truth, reason and logic are alien to you, that much is clear, as every criminally insane and logically absurd statement you have made has revealed.

    Like I said, you are just a gobshite internet coward spouting off criminal insanity in a nice safe room somewhere and inciting others to commit murders that you don’t have the bollocks for.

    Come on then hero, why don’t you tell us all who you really are?

    Reveal your identity if you are really so proud of your threats and incitement to murder and think that you are so justified in it.

    After all, you are a man of principle are you not? And no one is threatening or inciting your murder or the murder of your family.

    Prove you are not just an idiotic faeces throwing internet monkey that has a big mouth and small balls.

    You want to threaten to murder me and incite the murder of a million others then crawl out of the sewer and present yourself to the world, sweetheart.

    You cowardly, Fascist disgrace to humanity and you cowardly Fascist disgrace to genuine socialists.

    —–
    —–

    “I’m glad you find me ‘thuggish’ for recalling what happened to Mussolini. Just remember, something similar may happen to you one day.”

    “Our BNP friend thinks that a desire to kill fascists is a sign of criminality…“Its not a crime to kill a fascist”… A desire to see fascist scum wiped out is a sign of ‘fascism’!!!”

    “Carry on laughing, you sub-human racist ape”

    “…to crush it with whatever force proves to be necessary”

    “I’m actively in favour of using ‘Nazi’ measures against Nazi scum. Personally, I would have kept the gas chambers running at the end of WWII and used them to exterminate every last supporter of Adolf Hitler. If it were up to me.”

  48. ace said,

    Thought I would just jump in to all this BNP malarkey.
    First off, the BNP have been found to have a colour bar and now have to change who they let in – therefore it follows that he shouldn’t have been allowed on QT until they had made that change. The beeb should not let a party on that has a colour bar.

    Second – as I am from West Indian decent (fathers side), and as we can trace our family back to the two original brothers (white English) who set sail from Cornwall to Jamaica, then that makes me one of those English aborigines doesn’t it? My mother is English (white) anyway so I reckon I am probably really English! Now following that line of thinking, many West Indians can trace their family back to the original slave masters, who at the time were White English, so……doesn’t that make most West Indians English by origin, and isn’t that what Nick Griffin was going on about??
    Now if I’m right on this and I join them because, well lets face it, who does represent the working class now, then how can I be sure about those white BNP members that they are really english??? I mean god forbid that I am sat next to some white BNP member who’s family actually originate in Finland or Germany or some such place – that would not be on at all. I mean I’m English and its for us not them!

    Finally, myself and a few friends, who are also from West Indian descent which as you now know are all true English, have decided that we will join the BNP in our local town. We are then planning to take over and rename it the Black Nationalist Party. Black becasue well we all actually originate from Africa, Nationalist because we are the true English aboriginies, and Party because……., well its going to be one hell of a party when we take over!

  49. skidmarx said,

    the gay serial killer Dennis Neilson was a member of the SWP and an adherent of your politics does that make your party / politics culpable?
    Actually he wasn’t a member of the SWP,and as Armstrong and Miller say in their only decent sketch, just because he was a serial killer who happened to be gay doesn’t mean he was a gay serial killer.

  50. Seán said,

    This Nazi prick is as evasive as his fat Fuhrer. He will only address points that he can stick a dubious internet link to and make some essentialist and racist observation from the data. Pointless trying to pin him down, he slithers away like a typical slimy fash.

    And yes that paragraph above does contain argumentum ad hominem, Nazi scum.

  51. Curious Freedom said,

    @ Sean

    What the hell are you on about in your latest silly, angry little hate-filled waffle? Really? Its just absolute nonsense from a lowlife lying piece of thick scum who advocates the mass murder of political opponents.

    I guess your latest angry hate outburst is a result of the fact that I easily exposed just how ignorant and dishonest you were with the armed police issue and that your absurd suggestion about me “your ignorance on the matter shows you are not to be trusted on any other assertions you make” really applied to you.

    That and the fact I have easily exposed that your whole Marxist ideology is based upon a fallacy and that not only did Marx recognize race as a reality, he also called those races he thought were inferior ‘racial trash’ to be ‘destroyed’ and said on these races he deemed inferior “The chief mission of all other races and peoples, large and small, is to perish in the revolutionary holocaust.” He also made a racist rant about Jews that could have been written by the Nazis.

    I can imagine why that would enrage you. Your whole ideology being based upon the misunderstanding of a man who was really a genocidal racist.

    And I don’t suppose the fact that one of you Marxists posting here has posted anything at all that has stood up to reality and been easily exposed, demolished for the absurd rubbish it really is.

    But I think the real flavor of you Sean, you disgusting piece of hate-filled lying scum, is that you bizarrely cry that “And yes that paragraph above does contain argumentum ad hominem” (What?!!) but are not in the least bit bothered by your comrades criminal incitement to murder, to cut the throats, of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, merely political dissenters.

    Clearly you are in agreement with the mass murder of people you don’t agree with Sean and that reveals that you really are scum. Low life dirty scum.

  52. Rosie said,

    Griffin’s appearance on QT inspired me to write something which might amuse some of you.

    http://rosiebell.typepad.com/rosiebell/2009/10/the-griffin-encounter-an-airport-novel-for-short-haul-flights.html

    There’s not much point in talking to Freedom re crime etc. I was glancing at the Glasgow Herald today – violent crime is on the up here, and of course Glasgow has always been a violent city with gangs and stabbings. Also until recently a fairly white city. Also a deprived city. But I would say whatever the ills of the UK, Nazi Griff of the one eye-dea isn’t one to sort them. But enough of that.

    The Nazi ‘n’ Fash bit. As everyone says, those words have been devalued by being used to describe conservatives, free marketeers, reactionaries, army officers, headmasters who give kids too much detention. But Griffin is the real deal. He is a white supremacist Nazi with crazy ideas on history and biology and a crazy believer in the Jewish hidden hand. He’s out of Mein Kampf. So however crappy his opponents are, at least they aren’t Nazis. Anyone who supports Griffin is either a Nazi sympathiser or so stupid they don’t know who they’re supporting. Flying Rodent has pretty much said it for me:- http://flyingrodent.blogspot.com/

    ace@55 – you & your mates trying to join the BNP is an entertaining idea. As you are only partially white, perhaps they will let you pay a reduced membership fee?

    Question anyone – the BNP are against the war in Afghanistan – do they ever turn up on Stop the War marches? Unlikely I suppose.

  53. Curious Freedom said,

    @ rosie

    “There’s not much point in talking to Freedom re crime etc.”–

    Of course not, because you are a hiding to nothing with it.

    Not only is violent black crime massively disproportionate, but it is dominant.

    It’s a fact.

    –“ I was glancing at the Glasgow Herald today – violent crime is on the up here, and of course Glasgow has always been a violent city with gangs and stabbings. Also until recently a fairly white city.”–

    First off, where’s your source for this.

    Secondly, it’s very interesting that you note that violent crime is on the up just as the city moves away from becoming “fairly white.”

    –“The Nazi ‘n’ Fash bit. As everyone says, those words have been devalued…”–

    By Fascists like the ones here using it every two seconds to shout down anyone they disagree with.

    Face it: You have devalued the words so far it means very little to anyone anymore and that was the whole crutch of your power to silence dissent.

    –“But Griffin is the real deal.”–

    He has renounced his former statements.

    Straw, Mandelson, Reed, Ainworth and so on and so used to be members of that extremely intolerant, violent and mass murdering cult, the Communists, with its basis in the ideology of Marx, the genocidal racist. That ideology has killed more innocent people then any other on this earth and also produced the biggest genocide this earth has ever seen.

    They are no longer members of that disgusting cult and claim to have reformed. Do you believe they really have?

    –“you & your mates trying to join the BNP is an entertaining idea.”—

    Hilarious.

    They, as with all new members after the constuition change, will have to pay for membership and for at least five years before being allowed to vote.

    And all members will have to agree to the constitution, its goals and its aims as well as the party’s mission statement and code of conduct or be expelled.

    So if the plan is to join to wreck some sort of anti-democratic Fascist damage upon the will of the membership, the end result will be lots of money in party coffers and then adios troublemakers!

    Sounds like a great deal to me!

    –“Question anyone – the BNP are against the war in Afghanistan – do they ever turn up on Stop the War marches? Unlikely I suppose.”—

    The BNP doesn’t engage in useless student politics and smug feel good gestures.

    Your silly little marches will not stop the war. Only those with political power can.

    Get it?

    A question for you now then, Rosie:

    Do you agree that all BNP members, voters and supporters should be murdered like your friend ‘www’?

  54. Voltaire's Priest said,

    Finally, myself and a few friends, who are also from West Indian descent which as you now know are all true English, have decided that we will join the BNP in our local town. We are then planning to take over and rename it the Black Nationalist Party. Black becasue well we all actually originate from Africa, Nationalist because we are the true English aboriginies, and Party because……., well its going to be one hell of a party when we take over!

    Now that is one CLASS idea!

  55. Curious Freedom said,

    –“Now that is one CLASS idea!”–

    It is certainly a very revealing anti-democratic, typically underhanded and quite frankly Fascistic fantasy that to even attempt will only result in more money in BNP coffers and the expulsion of the fifth columnists.

    Now THAT’S a class idea! Bring it on!

    But it would seem that you are all really just engaged in fantasies here; wallowing in them in fact. You haven’t been able to produce a single tangible idea or rebuttal that stands up to 2 seconds of truth and logic.

    Instead you have just have some demented criminal ranting about cutting the throats of hundreds of thousands of political dissenters in the true path and history of Socialist tyranny; assorted feeble excuses and some pretty bizarre hate speech.

    You guys didn’t even seem to know that your Marxist god was really just a genocidal racist, and a racialist who classified peoples in terms of race, and attributed to these races hierarchical properties that determined whether they were to be in ascendancy or whether they were to be destroyed. “Racial trash” as he called them whose only duty was “to perish in the revolutionary holocaust.”

    Does the horrifyingly blood thirsty, sadistic and mass murdering practice of Socialism that we have seen throughout history surprise anyone now in that light? Is it really a surprise that in this light, Socialist have committed not only the biggest slaughter of people in the history of the world, ordinary workers in the main, but also the greatest genocide this world has ever seen?

    Are you dangerous extremists now ready to renounce your disgusting creed and turn your back on you truly deplorable blood soaked history? Or are you all just working towards it again, undercover of a more moderate cloak?

  56. Voltaire's Priest said,

    “Expulsion of the fifth columnists” on what grounds, precisely? Racial? That would be illegal, me old goose stepper.

  57. Curious Freedom said,

    –“Expulsion of the fifth columnists” on what grounds, precisely? Racial? That would be illegal, me old goose stepper.”–

    It’s already been intricately (albeit slowly and simply) explained to you all already and it’s all perfectly legal, me old bloody mass murderer of the workers.

    “They, as with all new members after the constuition change, will have to pay for membership and for at least five years before being allowed to vote.

    And all members will have to agree to the constitution, its goals and its aims as well as the party’s mission statement and code of conduct or be expelled.

    So if the plan is to join to wreck some sort of anti-democratic Fascist damage upon the will of the membership, the end result will be lots of money in party coffers and then adios troublemakers!

    Sounds like a great deal to me!”

    Sinking in now, me old genocidal racist worshiper?

    And so, what of it: Are you dangerous extremists now ready to renounce your disgusting creed and turn your back on you truly deplorable blood soaked history? Or are you all just working towards it again, undercover of a more moderate cloak?

    Do you look to the mass murder of political dissenters too?

  58. Voltaire's Priest said,

    Ah, the mask slips, and the angry ranting weirdo within comes out… see, this is why I like letting you people condemn yourselves in your own words, as Jim put it.

    And no, you haven’t “explained” how you can legally operate a colour bar on party membership, mainly because it is illegal.

  59. ace said,

    to Curious Freedom – fact of the matter is we ARE joining up – simple as that mate. Some of my white friends are too.
    The thing is, there really aren’t that many in the crappy BNP round our way.
    Of course I’m going to pay and I don’t mind waiting to vote – frankly we have been waiting for something like this since the late 70s. Do you honestly think that we can’t wait a little longer? And just how many BNP members are absolute racists – seems like the BNP itself would suggest not all.
    I’m looking forward to it. In the late 70s & early 80s we had actual fisticuffs with skinhead morons wearing nazi symbols and NF tags. Now we don’t even have to resort to fighting, we just turn up, join and let democratic party politics do the rest. What a result. Better than we could ever have hoped for.

    Once this gets round the west indian community there are going to be bloody loads of us joining up. And of course we will be happy to see the parties coffers increasing as we will see the benefit further down the line once we have taken over.

    You might want to start the NF up again so you and your type can have your own little party.

    By the way, are you really English? I mean, have you really traced your ancestry back, because we will be demanding that all you white members prove that you are indeed really English. We don’t want any johnny come latelys whose ancestry only goes back a couple of hundred years you know. The BNP will be for English people only. My friends and I know we are – how about you? I mean Prince Phillip isn’t as English as we are. And that white skin you have proves nothing mate – show us the proof or get back to your own country sunshine. We are England – this is England mate. Now go to the back of the class, shut up, sit down and work out who and what exactly you are.

    Damn, these white foreigners claiming to be English when they haven’t got a bloody clue where they come from. Its disgusting and someone should do something about them………………….oh yeah, we will once we oust them.
    lol, lol, lol, :)

  60. Curious Freedom said,

    @ Voltaire’s Priest

    –“Ah, the mask slips, and the angry ranting weirdo within comes out…”–

    Like I said, you people just wallow in pure fantasy! It’s all you have.

    I have perfectly calmly, with truth and logic and explained what the reality is. Sean has given a good angry rant here really, as have others. But not me.

    But I notice that not only do you not condemn ‘www’ and his illegal incitement to mass murder political opponents as an “angry ranting weirdo” but you don’t even condemn the idea of the mass murder of people. You think it’s perfectly fine.

    Which means you keep failing to answer legitimate questions:

    Are you dangerous extremists now ready to renounce your disgusting creed and turn your back on you truly deplorable blood soaked history?

    Or are you all just working towards it again, undercover of a more moderate cloak?

    Do you look to the mass murder of political dissenters too?

    –“And no, you haven’t “explained” how you can legally operate a colour bar on party membership, mainly because it is illegal.”—

    I don’t know how else to put this. I am a nice and polite bloke but I don’t know how else to express reaction to this level of dementedness the left have: I can’t work out in what proportions you are stupid, ignorant or dishonest. I really can’t.

    If the discussion was still about a ‘colour ban’ then our half caste friend here wouldn’t be able to join at all, now could he? And so there would be no “CLASS idea” at all, now would there? Do you really not understand that? And that he is talking about the coming constuition change?

    Just nod if you can hear me!

    But the “colour ban” was no such thing, and worked in exactly the same way the 12,000 or more organizations that organize on ethnic lines (not one on British ethnic lines though, with a small sample list above) and is exempt under s26 of the RRA; there has been no ruling that it is not so don’t even bother to peddle that lie and fantasy.

    The BNP has voluntarily offered to change the constuition, after due and democratic consultation with the membership, because although the BNP would most likely win this challenge, they would no longer be exempt under the forthcoming so-called “Equality Bill” in any case.

    I can’t believe that for people that love to comment on the BNP and BNP news so much, you so very little about the truth and realties of it.

    @ ace

    –“to Curious Freedom – fact of the matter is we ARE joining up – simple as that mate.”–

    And you will be asked to declare your previous political affiliations too for any proscribed organizations to filter out the dangerous Socialist mass murderers from joining.

    We don’t want nasty, murderous, genocidal racist worshippers tainting our ranks and embarrassing us. There is no place for extermists in the BNP.

    All perfectly legal too, old bean.

    –“Of course I’m going to pay and I don’t mind waiting to vote”–

    Oh yes, wait you will; and oh how you are going to pay too! And pay for 5 years before going onto probation for a further 2 years. 7 years worth of dues in all. And only activists will allowed to vote in any case.

    And guess what all members and activists have to abide by or face expulsion? The BNP constitution, its goals and its aims as well as the party’s mission statement and code of conduct. So when you carry out any activism for the BNP it will be under the BNP banner, its goals, aims and policies or it will be the door. Or don’t be active, and never vote, just keep paying dues. The choice is yours!

    So if, given that you are openly declaring your intent as a fifth columnist to enter the party with the sole aim of destroying its constitution, its goals and its aims and you get past the filtering out of proscribed organizations, and you become an activist, and don’t reveal your true intentions and you pay all of your dues and stay within the BNP constitution, its goals, its aims and its mission statement, if after 7 long years of that, if you really do reach that stage and try to change the BNP’s mission statement you will find yourself very much alone I can assure you!

    But I think it’s a really great idea for you and your friends to try though, the BNP looks forward to taking your money. And lots of it.

    –“By the way, are you really English?”—

    And the first time you pull that stunt of the questioning the very legitimacy of an English identity you will be in breach and be shown the door.

    You guys obviously don’t know how much that idiotic student tactic enrages the ordinary Englishman and Briton – not the extremists like the guys here that mix with other extremists or the liberal elite – but the ordinary Joe on the street.

    To watch people who have no compunction whatsoever in very aggressively asserting their own ethnic identity and culture questioning the legitimacy and very existence of the people who’s country they reside in is extremely racist and extremely counter-productive.

    –“I mean, have you really traced your ancestry back, because we will be demanding that all you white members prove that you are indeed really English”—

    You really don’t have a clue do you? Not the first idea of what you are talking about.

    It is the British National Party.

    –“We don’t want any johnny come latelys whose ancestry only goes back a couple of hundred years you know.”—

    Again, your ignorance is astounding.

    There is only one constitutional definition of who is British and that is contained in the Act of Settlement 1701 (and is extremely similar to the Israeli Law of Return, or vice versa really.)

    And so as matter of fact, ancestry only has to go that far back and conform to the constitutional Jus Sanguinus principle to be truly British.

    Further to this, the British Nationality Act 1948, which was a parliamentary law that was publicly used to repeal the provisions of the constitutional Act of Settlement 1701 does not have any legal foundation or right to do so; the constuition cannot be changed by such acts.

    As a consequence the constitution of the United Kingdom has been treasonously ignored as has its principle of Jus Sanguinus in matters of citizenship. This issue will be revisited in a nationalist government, no doubt.

    –“The BNP will be for English people only… I mean Prince Phillip isn’t as English… We are England – this is England mate… claiming to be English”–

    Like I said, you haven’t got the first idea of what you are ranting on about; you are clearly just another shallow, deluded student politic type extremist who cannot separate fact from fiction, reality from fantasy.

    The BNP is the British National Party and has many members, and contests many seats across the whole realm of the UK.

    With fifth columnist as dense as you mate, we have nothing to worry about at all.
    But tell me mate, what do you think of those 12,000 organizations (some listed above) that operate on purely ethnic lines, such as The Black Police association, , the Society of Asian lawyers, the Black student union and so on that either bar white people from joining altogether or only allow ‘associate’ membership, that is not ‘full’
    membership and voting rights?

    What say you of them, mate?

  61. martin ohr said,

    Curious Arsehole. I’m curius even more now about your ethnicity rules for who is british. I mean my passport says I am british, but my family were german jews. Do I count as british or not?

    Also, back to your favourite topic of crime rates (data from the official crime statistics 2007/08 http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/stats-race-criminal-justice-system-07-08-revised.pdf)

    You claim that black people dominate the figures, however you’ve made your own definition of violent crime (in fact most violent crime actually goes unreported or is simply recorded as domestic incidents, but that is by the by)

    the real figures are in tables3.5 3.6 3.7, showing that black SUSPECTS are 20% black for most parts of the country these are 2-10%. And these are just the arrest figures, it’s clear from the stop and search figures that if you’re black you’re much more likely to be stopped in the first place, regardless of whether arrest or charge follows.

    fyi I’ve lived for 15 years in chapeltown in leeds, in the heart of the community where supposedly gun crime is rife. The only guns I’ve ever seen are those pulled by the police.

    I notice from the latest leaked bnp membership list that not a single bnp member lives in LS7 -perhaps that is why it is such a nice place to live.

  62. martin ohr said,

    oh, somehow my middle para got mangled:

    the real figures are in tables3.5 3.6 3.7, showing that black SUSPECTS in murder cases are <20% and that the arrests for crimes against the person (table 5.4a) are 20% black in the met area and for most parts of the country these are 2-10%. And these are just the arrest figures, it’s clear from the stop and search figures that if you’re black you’re much more likely to be stopped in the first place, regardless of whether arrest or charge follows.

  63. Curious Freedom said,

    @ martin ohr

    –“Curious Arsehole”–

    And you see, that is another reason that the ordinary British people are moving so fast away from your absurd position and it’s Fascistic, anti-free speech, anti-democratic violent screamers in droves.

    Fundamentally, the British people are a very fair minded and polite bunch and detest these kinds of gratuitous rudeness.

    It is extremely un-British.

    –“even more now about your ethnicity rules for who is british. I mean my passport says I am british, but my family were german jews. Do I count as british or not?”–

    I don’t think I could have been any clearer on that then I was above; again, if you need perfectly articulate statements explained to you, then it is not my job to do it.

    In any case your ideological position is that there is no such thing as British / English etc ethnicity in the first place, so it is really a facile question as you don’t even accept there is a unique British / English etc identity.

    But I do note that in common with Jack Straw on QT, you haven chosen to identity yourself with your ethnicity, along with your ancestral nationality (but Straw only used his ethnicity on QT) so clearly ethnicity is very important to you as part of your identity, but you seek to deny that there such a thing as the British / English etc ethnicity.

    Do you agree with the state of Israel?

    Because if you do then you agree with its whole legitimacy as a country based upon an ethnic ‘Law of Return’ that has as its foundation the principle that whoever would have been persecuted under the Nazi Nuremburg racial laws was considered to be Jewish and would have the automatic right to Israeli citizenship.

    I passionately agree with Israel’s right to exist and its legitimacy.

    But in short, the BNP policy is very clear on your oft asked question and I really can’t believe that for someone who is clearly so obsessed and enraged by the BNP, you do not have the first idea of what their actual policies are: You are civically British, but you are not ethnically British.

    Clearly you know nothing at all about the BNP polices and seem to have some issues with the whole ethnicity thing, so what’s all your outrage really about?

    –“You claim that black people dominate the figures”–

    I don’t claim it at all.

    The figures prove it.

    –“however you’ve made your own definition of violent crime”—

    I think if you asked 10 normal people which crimes they would class as the most anti-social and dangerous violent crimes in society they would list shootings, stabbings and gang rapes as the worst.

    –“the real figures are in tables3.5 3.6 3.7,”—

    Well, your link doesn’t actually go anywhere so I would have to take your word for all you say, and I am not prepared to do that, funnily enough.

    Whereas all of the links I have posted are working and show quite clearly that I am right in what I have posted.

    –“it’s clear from the stop and search figures that if you’re black you’re much more likely to be stopped in the first place, regardless of whether arrest or charge follows”—

    Well that’s already been explained to you after your previous ‘so what’ statement:

    When we know that

    1) Over 70 per cent of London’s gun suspects are black
    2) 73% of those charged with knife crime are non-white
    3) That in 80% of gang rape cases in 1998, the defendants were black

    and so consequently are disproportionately and largely responsible for committing the very crimes that stop-and-search is designed to prevent (rape excluded), then it is quite obvious sound police practice that this will the group disproportionately and largely stopped and searched.

    –“fyi I’ve lived for 15 years in chapeltown in leeds, in the heart of the community where supposedly gun crime is rife.”–

    What do mean there is supposed to be? There either is or there isn’t. There are either lots of shooting are there are not.

    If you lived in areas like Brixton, Tottenham and Haringey that now need the first and only routinely armed police patrols in the UK then you would know that there is a massive problem with it, and not just ‘supposed’ to be.

    And we know why these areas have such a problem: We know the demographic and the statistics.

    And incidentally, the BNP membership in these areas is low to non-existent too.

    –“I notice from the latest leaked bnp membership list that not a single bnp member lives in LS7 -perhaps that is why it is such a nice place to live.”—

    I think the comment above covers this, but are you seriously suggesting it is BNP members that really behind the majority of shootings, stabbings and gang rapes?

  64. martin ohr said,

    ho hum,

    not sure why that link doesn’t work but you can get to the same figures from here: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/raceandcjs.htm

    http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/stats-race-criminal-justice-system-07-08-revised.pdf

    I don’t know where you get your stats from, just pulled out of your arse I expect, but they’re not on the home office website that’s for sure.
    ____
    On nationalilty. I’ve never claimed there is no such thing as british. In fact I’ve claimed quite the opposite on lots of occassions, if you search the sociaistunity website you will see long debates between me and other socialists on exactly that.

    But having checked the bnp website I still can’t find what precisely you think my race/nationality is, or whether I am truly british- please can you explain, it is actually quite important that you can explain such things. Personally I don’t regard my ethnicitiy as remotely important except on the occasions where I suffer some sort of discrimination for it- some of your friends in the BNP do find it very important and I still have copies of the death threats to prove that (I’m keeping them safe just in case those individuals ever get close to being elected.)

    Chapeltown has a reputation for being a really bad and dangerous place- whereas the truth is far from that, maybe the same is true of brixton, certainly my comrades who live there absolutely love the place- perhaps it’s because it is not full of bnp either.

    As for the rest of your stuff, it is all tedious bluster. In all your contributions you’ve never really said anything at all. You’ve made up a few facts and then accused everyone else of ignoring them, like the rest of the bnp you are a tedious waste of space obsessed with race but without being able to explain why or daring to explain what your solution is.

  65. Andy Bowden said,

    Martin do you mean this document – http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/stats-race-criminal-justice-system-07-08-revised.pdf

    Think it didn’t open correctly cos there was an “)” at the end.

  66. Curious Freedom said,

    @ Martin Ohr

    –“not sure why that link doesn’t work”—

    Well, I’d have thought was pretty obvious.

    –“I don’t know where you get your stats from, just pulled out of your arse I expect”—

    They are not ‘my’ stats for a start, but why don’t you know?

    They are all linked to above (with links that actually work) so feel free to get off your own arse and look at them and stop expecting other people to spoon feed you.

    I will look at the figures you posted when I have more time tomorrow and comment on them.

    –“but they’re not on the home office website that’s for sure.”—

    And that’s for sure even though you haven’t looked at them?!

    Oh you make me laugh Martin!

    “On nationalilty. I’ve never claimed there is no such thing as british”

    I don’t think even the most brain dead lefty has challenged that yet, its British / English ethnicity is what we have been talking about here. Did you really not follow that? Really?

    –“But having checked the bnp website I still can’t find what precisely you think my race/nationality is”—

    Did you really think there was going to be a section entitled “Martin Ohr’s race / ethnicity is…”?

    You choose ethnicity as well as nationality to define who your parents are, and who you are, in the comment above.

    –“or whether I am truly british- please can you explain, it is actually quite important that you can explain such things”—

    It has already been explained to you in great detail and very carefully Martin.

    You are civically British but clearly you not ethnically British, no more the you would be ethnically Chinese if your Jewish German parents had emigrated to China.

    –“Personally I don’t regard my ethnicitiy as remotely important”-

    Really?

    Then why do you choose to use it to identify who your parents are and who you are?

    Why did you not just say they were German?

    –“some of your friends in the BNP do find it very important and I still have copies of the death threats to prove that (I’m keeping them safe just in case those individuals ever get close to being elected.)”—

    Death threats from whom, exactly?

    Why haven’t you taken them to the police?

    Tell me who they are and provide me with copy of the evidence you have and I will take it to the police myself for you, if you are too afraid.

    I have already reported ‘www’ to the police for his incitements to murder, so he’d better hope he has been masking his IP address.

    But I notice that you have consistently failed to condemn his threats and incitement to not only murder, but mass murder, so clearly the only problem you have with death threats is not that they are made, but who they are made to.

    –“Chapeltown has a reputation for being a really bad and dangerous place- whereas the truth is far from that”—

    A reputation is not reality.

    Like I said, if you really lived in a rough area, you would know it.

    –“maybe the same is true of brixton”–

    No it is not as the report I have already linked explained why it is now one area that will have the first routinely armed police patrol in British history.

    Here is another explanation for you:

    “Armed police are to carry out routine patrols in London to combat gun carrying drug gangs.

    In an unprecedented move for British policing…

    The move, which follows a 30 per cent surge in gun crime in London this year, will be the first time in Britain that armed officers have been put on permanent patrol.
    The latest Met figures show that the number of gun crimes in September rose from 230 last year to 300 this year.

    Over the last six months gun crime has risen by 17 per cent on last year, with 1,736 gun crimes reported in London between April and September this year — 252 more than the same period last year.

    This month it was revealed that the number of “war wound” attacks — in which gang members shoot each other in the legs for “disrespect” — have more than doubled to 72 this year compared with the whole of last year…”

    http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23759786-armed-police-to-patrol-britains-streets-to-fight-gun-gangs.do

    –“certainly my comrades who live there absolutely love the place- perhaps it’s because it is not full of bnp either”—

    Like I said, are you seriously suggesting it is BNP members that are really behind the majority of shootings, stabbings and gang rapes in London now?

    –“As for the rest of your stuff, it is all tedious bluster. In all your contributions you’ve never really said anything at all…”—

    And you are straight back to your well worn, predicable and empty sound bites.

    I have answered every question posed with reason, logic and evidence, much of which has clearly been far over your head.

    You have simply failed to understand what is being said and the evidence presented.

    –“You’ve made up a few facts”—

    What facts have I made up exactly? Ones that you admit you haven’t even checked the sources for?

    You really are a funny, angry man Martin. Raging away at things beyond your
    understanding or knowledge.

    –“like the rest of the bnp you are a tedious waste of space obsessed with race”—

    You are the one banging on about race and wanting me and the BNP to define your race for you, because you don’t seem to know yourself!

    Are you for real?!

    And we are back to the ‘dare’ thing now are we? What possible consequences do you think there could be? ‘www’ will come and ‘cut my throat’?

    I told you my first solution and then asked you a question (Quid Pro Quo) that you have consistently ignored:

    Why is that blacks are massively and disproportionately behind gang rape? And what is your solution to the issue?

    And here is another question you have decided to ignore too:

    Do you agree with the state of Israel?

    Because if you do then you agree with its whole legitimacy as a country based upon an ethnic ‘Law of Return’ that has as its foundation the principle that whoever would have been persecuted under the Nazi Nuremburg racial laws was considered to be Jewish and would have the automatic right to Israeli citizenship.

    I passionately agree with Israel’s right to exist and its legitimacy. Do you?

    So all of you waffle about me ducking and diving is patently false, you have been answered in detail but you refuse to answer questions put to you in return.

  67. martin ohr said,

    oh you are very tedious indeed. I followed your links and they took me to an itv press release about a tv programme and a daily mail article which focusses on unofficiaial figures (ie not the nationallly used crime rates and not using the standard definitions of race) from the Met for a 3 month period in 2008 looking at under 18’s only; there is no record of the source data for those stats so they are not veryfiable. If you believe anything you read in the daily mail then you are a fucking idiot.

    Also it was widely reported (well in the guardian and on radio4 -that’s pretty wide for me) that the routine armed patrols was a made-up story by the tabloid press: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/oct/29/metropolitan-police-armed-stephenson for example.

    I don’t know what your source for the gang rape stat is either- I can’t find that anywhere in the official crime figures, in the fact the only place I can find it is on far-right websites and blogs.

    Israel is a different place to britian, there is a long and ongoing debate about it within the left which is well defined with multi-strands of opinion, anyone who answers your question ‘Do you agree with the state of Israel?’ with a straight yes or no is a fool. I do believe that there was a historical necessity for Israel to be created originally and we have to deal with the consequences of that; Israel should retreat to it’s pre 1967 borders and pay huge reparations to palestine in order to allow both states to flourish. I believe that anyone who wants to live in Israel should be free to do so.

    In terms of myself, my parents we’ren’t german jews, but my family were going back a few generations, perhaps you should learn to read before making assumptions. I don’t really care whether I pass your british/english or whatever test, since you’ll never have power, it will never be a problem.

    Thanks but no thanks in taking the death threats to the police for me. I did that 20 year ago already. I’ll just hold onto them for now, they’ll be much more useful in defeating your lot if I time them well. Happily I’ll comdemn WWW if he has said something bad, I didn’t read what he wrote. Although I should say I generally agree with the old maxim “when you meet a fascist if you can’t introduce him to marxism then introduce his head to the pavement”

  68. ace said,

    –“By the way, are you really English?”—

    “And the first time you pull that stunt of the questioning the very legitimacy of an English identity you will be in breach and be shown the door.”

    So are you really English or not then? Can you trace your ancestry or not? Have you even tried? I told you that white skin means nothing to me because for all I know you could be German.

    You talk like you are the sole voice of the BNP, like we would have to wait 7yrs, because that’s the law. Well I have had debates with other BNP members and activists on web sites and in person, and they were coming from the position that if you are born here you are ok. So once we come down and join then those same people will have no truck with us or changing how the BNP operate. It happens in all political parties – they change.

    I think you need to get your head round the fact that the BNP will change, it has to change to have any chance of picking up more votes. As it does, like in any political party, the extremists start to get ousted from positions of power.

    Face it mate, you may have to switch over to the NF. A bit like what has happened with Republicans in Ireland forming the Real IRA.

    Your time is begining to ebb away, and really you didn’t do enough to get the party where you wanted it to go. Now the time is fast approaching for us to lead it in a new direction. Its not about fifth columnists its about filtering out people like you who stop the party from progressing. Even current BNP members have voiced their anger at the way old Nick handled himself on QT, some can already see that he has too much baggage to take the party forward. The changes are starting already and we haven’t even joined yet.

    Keep ranting though because you sound more and more like dear old Adolf in the bunker circa’45. Oh and my grandfather fought for this country – did yours, or was he even English because you still haven’t answered that question about what you are.

  69. Curious Freedom said,

    @ ace

    –“So are you really English or not then?”–

    Like I said, the first time you pull that stunt at a BNP meeting you will be in breach and be shown the door.

    –“Can you trace your ancestry or not? Have you even tried?”—

    Yes thanks, and yes thanks.

    –“I told you that white skin means nothing to me”—

    I think you have made that pretty clear, mate.

    –“You talk like you are the sole voice of the BNP, like we would have to wait 7yrs, because that’s the law.”—

    Like I said, you are pretty dense. It’s going to be the proposed constuition to combat dense self-proclaimed fifth columnists like you, and it will almost certainly be accepted by the majority.

    –“Well I have had debates with other BNP members and activists on web sites and in person”—

    Care to name these members and when and where you spoke to them and also provide a link to your online chats then?

    –“and they were coming from the position that if you are born here you are ok.”—

    That bit is right; you can join, but not join with the sole intention of destroying us a party that holds the core aims and values that it does.

    –“So once we come down and join then those same people will have no truck with us or changing how the BNP operate.”—

    I’m not sure who you think you are or what right you have to ‘change the way the BNP operate’ i.e. the very foundation of the party, but as I have assured you several times before, it is all pure fantasy. You will never be in a position to wreck the BNP, ever.

    –“I think you need to get your head round the fact that the BNP will change”—

    I think you need to get your head around the fact that it will never change its core values, aims and objectives.

    –“Face it mate, you may have to switch over to the NF.”—

    It will be you being shown the door mate, the moment your reveal your true intentions to ‘take over’ whereas I will be in the party till I the day I shuffle off; I may well be around to see the first BNP government, and much sooner then I thought too the way things are going.

    –“Even current BNP members have voiced their anger at the way old Nick handled himself on QT”—

    Like whom, exactly?

    That fiction about Barnes? That tiny misquote of a few words taken from an article of hundreds words?

    “you still haven’t answered that question about what you are.”

    I have answered about ‘what I am’ so ‘what are you’, exactly?

    Very, very confused I think. Have a read of this article below, and comfort yourself that many share your confusion and pain, and try and think of any answer to my question that you keep avoiding:

    What do you think of those 12,000 organizations (some listed above) that operate on purely ethnic lines, such as The Black Police association, , the Society of Asian lawyers, the Black student union and so on that either bar white people from joining altogether or only allow ‘associate’ membership, that is not ‘full’
    membership and voting rights?
    What say you of them, mate?

    “…her generation of black Brits have still not found that place they call ‘home’..

    The England soccer game had just finished, and everyone was gathered outside of the pub near my house. My mum and I were walking home across the notorious National Front area of Islington’s Packington Bridge, north London, in and we waded are way through the sea of England shirts and Union Jack flags.

    Curious and undoubtedly naive, I asked my mother; ‘How come there are so many white people here mum?’ She looked down at me and held my little hand tighter, and replied simply but sternly; ‘Akilah, this is there country…and don’t you ever forget that’.

    I never did. So at only six years old, I already knew I did not belong here. Then at eight years old, I finally went ‘back home’ to Jamaica, only to discover that it was not my ‘home’ at all.

    I itched in distress from hundreds of mosquito bites. I hid from the relentless sunlight, and unforgiving heat. I cried when I saw all the giant alien insects. Then laughed when I saw a group of cows roaming by the side of the road, and people passed by and didn’t seem to notice. I have never felt so English before in my life. This was not ‘back home’ to me, and I wanted to go back home….

    This was when I realised I was not Jamaican, and I wasn’t English either. I wasn’t fully apart of anything. So, does that mean that I am nothing? This is the riddle that haunts my generation.

    We are not are immigrant parents. We are not the indigenous people of our ‘home’. Some seek identity in; religion, family, profession, gender, or by race. But what if you never really fit anywhere? How do you identify yourself then?

    The easiest answer would be that we are nothing. And if we are indeed nothing, do we have anything to lose or even gain? And could this identity crisis, be at the heart of the recent gun and knife crime wave hitting Britain?

    Identity issues plague my generation, particularly those who are born here but have parents that were raised in other countries.

    The displacement and confusion that emerges as we are forced to blend both cultures and create some kind of hybrid, has nearly led to complete identity loss.”

    http://www.voice-online.co.uk/content.php?show=14358

  70. Curious Freedom said,

    @ www

    –“So funny. Anonymous commenter claims he recieved ‘death threats’ from someone who has no idea who he is or where he lives!”–

    Actually it was the incitement to murder, and on political grounds bringing it under terrorist legislation too, that the formal complaint was made.

    –“bet the cops put that right on the top of their list of priorities. Right above murder, rape, burglary, fraud, arson, you name it.”–

    If you had written that in a paper or said it in public vocally it would have been a criminal offence, its just testament to your idiocy that you think that that position somehow changes online.

    –“I bet the cop on the other end of the phone was relieved at being able to hang up.”–

    I didn’t phone it in mate, I went in person and I have been back since and been told that they have looked at the evidence and they feel an offence has been committed; they are now asking the CPS for advice before committing to an investigation.

    So like I said, you’d better hope you have been masking your IP address and masking it effectively because the chances you will get a knock on the door are looking pretty good.

    –“Wasting police time is a criminal offence, by the way, as is inciting racial hatred.”—

    I’ve done neither, but do then feel free to put in your own complaint to the police on this.

    Problem with that is you will reveal your real identity in the process too, and incitement to murder, as you so clearly have, really is a criminal offence that has been demonstrably committed here.

    And besides, we all know that you are too cowardly to reveal your identity in any case.

    You are ‘brave’ enough to incite the mass murder of innocent people, but lack the balls to put your name to it.

    Get a lawyer sunshine, you’re gonna need one by the looks of it.

  71. martin ohr said,

    Curious Tosser: have you given up trying to claim your made up crime facts are true- I’ll take your silence in coming back to me as you condeding and apologising simultaneously- you’re welcome.

  72. Curious Freedom said,

    @ www

    “I’m sure the policeman humoured you to get rid of you.”

    I’m sure that’s what you’d like to believe so you can get some sleep but the fact is that it has been a CID detective and a CID Sergeant attached to a specialist internet crime unit that I have spoken to and I have a crime reference number and I have seen the paperwork generated.

    You have committed a very, very serious offence by inciting the murder of BNP members and supporters made all the more serious by the fact that the BNP membership list is out on the internet for public viewing as is all of their home addresses.

    I have already written to the CPS informing them that if they do not agree to prosecute this crime when it is very clearly in the public interest, it will not only be fully publicized through BNP mediums, but they will be in jeopardy of legal action too.

    You obviously thought you were very clever and dangerous posting your criminal hate rants, but it appears to have backfired on you spectacularly.

    The evidence is already preserved, so don’t think asking your buddy to delete your incitements to murder will help.

    You reap what you sow.

    Like I said, Get a lawyer sunshine, you’re gonna need one by the looks of it.

  73. Curious Freedom said,

    @ Martin Ohr

    “Curious Tosser: have you given up trying to claim your made up crime facts are true- I’ll take your silence in coming back to me”

    No, what has really happened as you well know, is that you friend has been consistently censoring my responses to you as they fully expose you for the deluded, lying crank you are.

    It’s just typical of the underhanded games you people play and the fear you have of the truth.

    I have re-posted my response tearing apart your bullshit above and I will keep posting every time it is removed.

  74. martin ohr said,

    VP/Jim have you been censoring Curious Freewilly? Can you stop I’m keen to be exposed by him

  75. Red Maria said,

    I second that and agree with everything Martin Ohr has said so far too.

    My comment went astray last night but I still have some questions I’d like to put to Curious Freedom.

  76. Curious Freedom said,

    @ Red Maria

    –“I second that”–

    Well good to see that free speech figures on your radar, Maria.

    –“and agree with everything Martin Ohr has said so far too”–

    Why would that be exactly? Everything he has said has either been disproved by evidence or proven to be an outright lie in statement!

    This very curious delusion that is endemic on the extreme left is genuine source of bemusement and amusement to pretty much everyone else: You want to believe something so you will believe it no matter what the reality; the evidence and the truth have to say about it!

    Amazing.

    –“My comment went astray last night”—

    Mine didn’t, it was censored and not for the first time either; the truth of that can be seen by Martin’s comment @ #87 and the re-emergence now of my comment @ #81.
    I very much doubt your comment went ‘astray’ it is much more likely you said something that didn’t fit in with party line.

    Criminal incitements to murder people are fine. Dissent is not.

    –“but I still have some questions I’d like to put to Curious Freedom.”–

    Feel free and fire away.

  77. Curious Freedom said,

    Martin Ohr: have you given up trying to claim your made up crime facts are true- I’ll take your silence in coming back to me as you conceding and apologizing simultaneously- you’re welcome.

  78. martin ohr said,

    Curious Femidom, you have responded to my pst #71 above, I’m not silent, there is simply nothing to come back on.

    Let me repeat I just looked at the official crime rates- they are highly skewed when compared to actual crime rates to emphasise the involvement of black and other ethnic minorities as shown by hundreds of elementary articles of sociological research.

    The figures you presented were highly selective slices from unofficial sources, picked to deliberately portray a racial problem in relation to violent crime.

    The story about routine armed police patrols which you made such a big deal of has been shown to be a non-story; the head of the met says there is no routine arming of police in any part of london, just bau armed backup to specific incidents.

    The BNP are full of shit and you know it.

  79. Red Maria said,

    Well good to see that free speech figures on your radar, Maria.

    Who said anything about free-speech? Free speech has its limits even in the most liberal of democracies.

    –“and agree with everything Martin Ohr has said so far too”–
    Why would that be exactly? Everything he has said has either been disproved by evidence or proven to be an outright lie in statement!

    I don’t see that it has. But then, I suspect that your idea of evidence is rather less rigorous than mine.

    Mine didn’t, it was censored and not for the first time either; the truth of that can be seen by Martin’s comment @ #87 and the re-emergence now of my comment @ #81.
    I very much doubt your comment went ‘astray’ it is much more likely you said something that didn’t fit in with party line.

    Er, no. My comment went astray, for reasons I’m aware of but are too boring to recount here. These things happen. If you were a regular visitor to Shiraz Socialist you’d know that there is no party line here. I regularly post comments here in disagreement with the bloggers, they sometimes comment over at mine in disagreement with me. All the bloggers at Shiraz Socialist are good eggs, very bright and nice people.

    To describe your deleted comments as censorship is overdoing it. A blog is like a virtual home and you can throw someone out of your home anytime you like and for any reason. You are perfectly free to start a blog of your own, however.

    Criminal incitements to murder people are fine. Dissent is not.

    Another overstatement. I think many of us suspect the identity of “www” and I can tell you that if he is who we think he is that that’s just his literary style. He’s said rude things to me before but there you are, that’s how the blogging cookie crumbles. He has a low boredom-threshold and invariably threatens fire and damnation on the slow-witted and iniquitous. But thus far we’ve all survived unscathed.

    Or, putting it differently: grow up.

    Now to my queries.

    # 1. Apropos your claim that “white people” have been “ethnically-cleansed” from unnamed cities and you, indeed from East London, could you tell me when these incidents occurred, which military force(s) were involved in the incursions and who led them? Furthermore, what was your Tuzla, your Screbrenica, who was responsible for them and what charges, against whom and by whom have been filed at national and international criminal courts for these incidents?

    # 2. Regarding your points about “Black people” and crime, could you tell me what you mean by “Black people” and for that matter by “White people”? Are these classifications based on culture, genetics and heredity, or what? Are “White people” descended from or related to “Black people” or vice versa? Are there peope whose identities overlap or don’t belong to these classifications and if so, where do they fit into your schema?

    # 4. With respect to your crime figures, do you notice any other common factors among those arrested for sexual and violent crimes? What, if anything, do you infer from this?

    # 5. Regarding your comments about differential birth rates; is there anything preventing “White people” from having large families and if so, what is it?

    # 6. What do you consider to be mass immigration? Are you opposed to mass immigration or all immigration anywhere and at any time?

    # 7. With respect to questions 5 and 6 above, in cases of labour shortage and below-replacement birth-rates, what policies do you think governments should follow to fill the demographic gap? If not immigration, then what?

    # 8. Do you think British governments should favour immigrants from certain countries or backgrounds over others? If so, which ones and why?

    # 9. What are the benefits of immigration? List them.

    # 10. If you genuinely take exception, as you say you do, to violence and incitement to violence explain the contradiction between that and your support for the BNP whose members and leaders have serious criminal records for cimes including assault, violent disorder, rape, child-sex offenses, arson, bombing and terrorist activities?

    Take your time. Explain your working.

  80. Red Maria said,

    Whoops, missed out a third question. Here it is:

    # 3. What, if any, legal framework do you think should be in place for protecting minority groups from hate-crimes?

  81. Curious Freedom said,

    @ Martin Ohr,

    –“Curious Femidom, you have responded to my pst #71 above, I’m not silent, there is simply nothing to come back on.”—

    You mean you cant wriggle out of the fact that you have consistently lied and consistently been caught out and that not one of your absurd statements has held any water?

    And that you like to ask many questions but not only don’t like the evidenced answers, but fail to answer any questions put to you in return.

    “Let me repeat I just looked at the official crime rates…”

    You were wrong. I was right. I take no pleasure in that; quite the reverse.

    –“The figures you presented were highly selective slices from unofficial sources”–]

    We’ve been through this Martin, do keep up. One was from a leaked source, an official source, but a leaked source.

    But only one.

    –“The story about routine armed police patrols which you made such a big deal of has been shown to be a non-story”—

    Again, we’ve been through this Martin, do keep up.

    First of all you say it was made up and now you say it was non-story when the reality is that routine armed patrols WERE ordered.

    It is only the light of the media storm and the obvious implications of the decision that it has now been backtracked. The commanders and police on the ground wanted it though because the problem has escalated so rapidly and so exponentially.

    –“The BNP are full of shit and you know it.”—

    You are full of shit and you now know it, Martin.

    You haven’t been able to debate with any honesty or integrity at all, just one lie after another.

    You don’t even know what your Marxist god really thought about race and genocide and you clearly don’t even have the first clue about any BNP policies at all.

    You are a joke.

  82. Curious Freedom said,

    @ Red Maria

    –“Who said anything about free-speech?”—

    That’s better, let’s get to the part where free speech is only for those who you think should have it. i.e. those you agree with.

    –“Free speech has its limits even in the most liberal of democracies.”—

    That’s right and my free speech and that of the BNP’s is fully within these legal limits.

    The incitement to murder that you think I should “grow up” over and is a serious criminal offence and does exceed these limits on free speech, but you have no issue at all with that.

    Do you really think if throat cutting and murder was incited against ethnic minorities, gays or, indeed anyone other then BNP members here you might have not worked yourself up in a hysterical rage over it?

    –“I don’t see that it has. But then, I suspect that your idea of evidence is rather less rigorous than mine.”—

    Explain then what part of the evidence you don’t accept and why. ‘Take your time. Explain your working.’

    And explain what part of Martin’s “evidence” you think negates it. ‘Take your time. Explain your working.’

    –“All the bloggers at Shiraz Socialist are good eggs, very bright and nice people.”—

    All of the commentators here so far have merely lied through their teeth and been caught out only then to resort to foul abuse, threats and incitements to murder.

    I suspect that your idea of “good eggs” is rather less rigorous than mine.

    –“To describe your deleted comments as censorship is overdoing it.”—

    Not at all. To censor something is to practice censorship.

    –“A blog is like a virtual home and you can throw someone out of your home anytime you like and for any reason.”—

    Rubbish.

    If you cannot handle honest and frank debate then you should clearly say so at the start, not play underhanded games when it’s underway.

    –“Another overstatement”—

    Rubbish.

    Like I said, if throat cutting and murder was incited against ethnic minorities, gays or, indeed anyone other then BNP members you would have worked yourself up in a hysterical rage and would have been screaming from the rooftops over it.

    Face it; you couldn’t care less about it because you couldn’t care less if it really happened.

    Either ways it is a police matter now.

    —“Now to my queries…”—

    No, no, no.

    For one I will only answer one question in return for an answer to a question I pose. Quid Pro Quo. Perfectly fair.

    For another the questions in the main are facile, student politic idiocy and lastly you have no authority or superiority over me whatsoever so let’s drop the tone that you do with your “List them” and “Take your time. Explain your working” smug and patronizing style.

    That out of the way, I will answer all of your questions if you answer all of mine. Fair enough.

    # 1

    –“Apropos your claim that “white people” have been “ethnically-cleansed” from unnamed cities and you, indeed from East London, could you tell me when these incidents occurred”–

    ‘The Labour councils in the East End quite deliberately sold out their working class base to their ulterior agenda and began refusing local housing to local people who had lived in the area for generations and had been on waiting lists for many, may years; applications under the traditional policy of generational housing / family ties whereby families with close ties and long standing ties to the area were given priority of close proximity housing to each other were refused and the policy was halted; instead they gave them recently arrived immigrants, overwhelming from Asia and more and more of the indigenous Londoners had to leave the East End and began migrating eastwards, in the main towards Barking and Dagenham. (Which is one major reason the BNP have done so well in that ward.)

    Then when the East Ends entire character and its very demographics had taken a dramatic break away from the indigenous Londoners, the Labour councils reinstated the generational housing / family ties policy and began allocating the remain East End housing to the South Asian immigrants as a priority, and with their much larger extended families the result was the complete change of the East End form the traditional indigenous Cockney English to an area that resembles the makeup of its majority.’

    If you really don’t know this, and if you didn’t go through it you wouldn’t, I would highly recommend that you read this book and educate yourself on it. It’s not a completely accurate account but it’s as near as we are likely to see at the moment:

    http://www.uel.ac.uk/risingeast/archive04/debate/hudson_marriott_owens_dench.htm

    –“which military force(s) were involved in the incursions and who led them?… Furthermore, what was your Tuzla, your Screbrenica”—

    Like I said childish facile, student politic waffle. It does show a complete lack of comprehension on the matter though.

    In Bosnia, for instance, when some aid agencies (and the British military) moved / evacuated civilian populations that they knew were in risk of violence, they UN classified it as “ethnic cleansing” and even order British units to move the civilians back.

    Peaceful ethnic cleansing (non-violent moving of people by demographics) carried on long after the conflict and still does today in Kosovo. It is one of the main reasons that the conflict has not reflamed thus far.

    Ethnic cleansing does not have to be done through show of arms. Labour has done it through immigration and housing policy. We now know from Neather that the uncontrolled mass immigration that Labour tried to purport as incompetence was a deliberate policy to overwhelmingly and treasonably change the demographics of the UK (“truly multicultural” ) and to “to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.”

    The end result for London? It is now nearly half non-white. i.e. the whites have been ethnically cleansed from their capital city so thoroughly within such a short space of time that soon they will be a minority.

    As for our“Tuzla and Screbrenica” the victims of the massive and disproportionate violent crimes of certain ethnic groups (as already proved) that has been unnecessarily unleashed on the unsuspecting populace as a result, many whites included, has and will far exceed those of Tuzla and Screbrenica and others.

    –“who was responsible for them and what charges, against whom and by whom have been filed at national and international criminal courts for these incidents?”—

    I have outline who has been responsible and believe me, charges will be laid when the BNP takes office.

    OK.

    I have thoroughly and fairly answered your first question, even though it was entirely based and couched in childish student politic terms.

    So, now answer mine:

    Why is that blacks are massively and disproportionately behind gang rape? And what is your solution to the issue?

    http://www.newstatesman.com/199811200011

  83. Harry Tuttle said,

    From Searchlight magazine:

    Just what agenda will Griffin pursue when he takes up his seat? He gave a pretty big clue when he told a BBC journalist that the solution to immigration was that the EU should sink boats carrying illegal immigrants to prevent them entering Europe. The astonished interviewer pointed out, “I don’t think the EU is in the business of murdering people at sea”. Griffin denied suggesting murdering people but averred that, “boats should be sunk, they can throw them a life raft and they can go back to Libya”. Darby tried to parry criticism by sug-gesting, perhaps partly tongue in cheek, that such a policy was “environmentally friendly” because shipwrecks made a “splendid habitat” for aquatic life.

    The interview can be found here.

    This is the man and the party you are defending, Curious. You should be ashamed.

  84. Curious Freedom said,

    @ Harry Tuttle

    –“From Searchlight magazine”–

    Well if you only ever get your information from one extremely biased source, its no wonder that you only have half the picture and no real idea of what you are talking about.

    –“He gave a pretty big clue when he told a BBC journalist that the solution to immigration was that the EU should sink boats carrying illegal immigrants to prevent them entering Europe…”–

    If any other countries vessels or navies entered territorial water without prior permission, what do you think would happen?

    If this unwanted and illegal flood of people that is being helped and facilitated by countries like Libya in their purely economic invasion of a recession crippled Europe realize that it is a futile exercise they will give it up, and as a consequence this policy would also save countless African lives at sea as well as the future of Europeans.

    –“Griffin denied suggesting murdering people but averred that, “boats should be sunk, they can throw them a life raft and they can go back to Libya—

    Well there you go; what’s all the hysteria about then?

    During the last foreign mass attempt at invading Britain, the common convention was that when vassals were sunk, the sinkers put out life boats for the sunken. And that was in the middle of world war.

    –“This is the man and the party you are defending, Curious. You should be ashamed.”–

    Not at all.

    As Nick said, and I am saying there was no call or incitement to murder people in the slightest.

    Whereas there has been very blatant and repeated threats and incitements to murder innocent people – merely political dissenters, by throat cutting amongst other methods, on this very site and yet you clearly don’t feel that that even warrants a comment, let alone a condemnation.

    In fact not one commentator on this site does.

    You should all be ashamed.

  85. Rosie said,

    http://edmundstanding.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/bnp-activist-charged-with-explosives-and-firearms-offences/

    More BNP criminality. How does the BNP find these beauties?

    Suffolk BNP activist David Lucas:
    has been charged with possession of explosives under suspicious circumstances, possession of an explosives substance without an explosives licence, possession of a prohibited weapon, possession of ammunition with intent to endanger life, possession of ammunition without a firearms certificate and two counts of possession of prohibited ammunition.

    Seems this chap also sells gallows:-
    A farmer who builds gallows and has sold them to African countries with poor human rights records has been condemned by Amnesty International.
    David Lucas, of Mildenhall, Suffolk, said he had been selling execution equipment to countries including Zimbabwe for about 10 years.

    Y’know this kind of thing gives me the same feeling as when reading the ravings of the BNP legal adviser Lee John Barnes. I think these are fictional characters who have been created by a very crude satirist.

    As for Wee Willy Wonka, Curious should not worry his pretty little head* about him. He has his own violent fantasy world but is unlikely to bring it into real life.

    *I use the annoying patronising term deliberately as our new House Fash was over at my blog calling me Dollface etc. It certainly feels odd and weird having a Fash call you by a cutesy-pie name.

  86. Curious Freedom said,

    @ Rosie

    And you are yet another one Rosie working yourself up into paroxysm of rage and indignation about hot air that is now a man who hasn’t actually been proven to have done anything wrong as yet, but completely fail to condemn the threats and incitement to mass murder political opponents on this site.

    Why? Because it bothers you not, does it? You couldn’t care less about being said or done.

    (And the quality of the reporting in that article leaves a lot to be desired as there are no such charges of: “possession of explosives under suspicious circumstances” or “possession of ammunition with intent to endanger life” on the statue books.)

    I’m really not sure what you think this proves; we have a government comprised of mass-murdering war criminals who deliberately lied to get there illegal wars of aggression and a so-called opposition party that supported them in it.

    In addition to this we now know that pretty much every MP (with only one or two exceptions) has embezzled the public purse in their fraudulent expense gravy train.

    Like I said to our friend above, if you only ever get your information from one extremely biased source, it’s no wonder that you only have half the picture and no real idea of what you are talking about.

    The extreme-left fantasy that only BNP members have ever committed any crimes (and that by implication the BNP alone have failed to institute some kind of deep vetting that no other parties do) is just absolutely ludicrous and here is a site dedicated to proving it.

    http://liarsbuggersandthieves.blogspot.com/

    Just the three of the latest entries:

    1)

    “A tory councillor was last night behind bars after being charged with raping and sexually abusing a girl of 13.

    Married step-dad David Kirton, 55, was remanded in custody by magistrates after being arrested at the weekend following complaints from the alleged victim.

    Police confirmed: “A 55-year-old man has been remanded in custody prior to appearance at crown court.

    “He was charged with offences under the Sexual Offences Act, including rape and sexual assault.”

    2)

    “A SENIOR Midland Conservative councillor was today appearing in court charged with sexual assault.

    Coun Ian Hillas, who represents Castle Bromwich ward on Solihull Borough Council, was appearing before Warley Magistrates. He was charged with sexual assault on a woman after being arrested by police.

    The 42-year-old, pictured, from Oakwood Croft, Solihull, is a cabinet member for economic development and regeneration and the former deputy leader of Solihull Council.

    A West Midlands Police spokeswoman said: “I can confirm a 42-year-old man from Solihull was arrested on Monday morning on suspicion of sexual assault.
    “He is appearing before Warley Magistrates court today charged with sexual assault.”

    3)

    “A former mayor escaped jail today after being convicted of possessing and distributing child pornography.

    Stewart Brown, 60, admitted 21 offences of possessing indecent images of children and one of distributing pictures.

    At Leeds Crown Court today he was given a nine-month prison sentence which was suspended for two years.

    In 2006 he was mayor of Hebden Royd in West Yorkshire and was also a Labour councillor on Calderdale Council, the court heard.

    At a hearing in July, Brown, of Nutclough, Hebden Bridge, admitted all the charges, some of which were said to relate to images of girls as young as three.”

    So are we going to see your outrage expressed at these disgusting criminals of the established parties now Rosie?

    And as for the “fash” and “Nazi” crap, it is just more delusional baseless smearing. Back up with evidence that I am some sort of “Fascist” or “Nazi” Rosie. You must have some sort of proof, now surely?

  87. Curious Freedom said,

    @ www

    You really don’t learn do you?

    –“There have been no threats against anyone here”–

    There have been threats and incitements to murder a named and identifiable group and a named and identifiable group of whom are particularly vulnerable due to the fact their names and addresses are all over the internet.

    The police have already confirmed that a serious offence has been committed in their view and have referred it to the CPS for advice before further action; that advice is expected to be forthcoming within 14 days.

    You have put yourself in this position with your big mouth and small brain, and here you are again digging away again.

    You are a fool.

    And a liar.

    And a very sick individual.

    –“this out-and-out Hitlerite”—

    Back that up then, weirdo.

    –“it would not only be the Jews”—

    The BNP have a Jewish councilor and leader of a BNP group.

    –“We base this on our experience of the Nazi regime”—

    Of which the BNP has had no part whatsoever.

    But what we do know from the socialist regimes that practice your ideology that they have been the biggest tyrants and worse mass murderers this world has ever seen, having mass murdered over 110,000,000 innocent people so far and committed the biggest genocide this world has ever seen.

    And it was all carried out by people like you.

    –“I would be prepared both to die and to kill in such a civil war”—

    But don’t have the balls to reveal your real identity online?!!

    What a farce. What a joke. What a sick, demented little coward you are.

    –“Well, if the police want to try and make those ideas ‘criminal’—

    Incitement to murder is not a political idea, it is a criminal offence.

    –“The police and any other legal authority are welcome to peruse this latest installment of this discussion”—

    I will be drawing their attention to it certainly; but it looks very much that you have already convicted yourself with what you have already said.

    –“I had thought about asking for my contribution to this debate to be deleted”—

    And then you read me informing you that it wouldn’t make any difference at all as the evidence has already been preserved.

    But that aside, you really think you have ‘contributed’ to a debate here? By threats and incitements to murder?!!

    What a farce. What a joke. What a sick, demented little specimen you are.

    –“I don’t think any jury in the land would convict me of anything for saying this”—

    For inciting the mass murder and throat cutting of hundreds of thousands of innocent people in a named and identifiable group?!

    You are seriously deluded.

    If you go up in front of a jury of ordinary Brits take a toothbrush with you.

    –“These kind of orthodox Marxist views are not illegal in this country as yet”—

    The threat and incitement to mass murder is illegal and immoral, but in your view it is “orthodox Marxist opinion”?

    This will make for an interesting trial indeed.

    –“The Gestapo does not rule Westminster.”—

    And neither does the NKVD or KGB.

  88. Red Maria said,

    –“Who said anything about free-speech?”—
    That’s better, let’s get to the part where free speech is only for those who you think should have it. i.e. those you agree with.

    Wrong. If I did believe only in free speech for those who agree with me, I wouldn’t be here debating with you. I suspect that there are very few people who agree with all my views; if free speech were restricted only to that slice of the population, I’d have very few people to argue with and life would be no fun at all.

    –“Free speech has its limits even in the most liberal of democracies.”—
    That’s right and my free speech and that of the BNP’s is fully within these legal limits.

    Not on blogs it aint. Blogs are private property. There is no right to free-speech on private property. I am not aware that the BNP has been commenting on this blog, unless you are an official spokesperson for that party.

    The incitement to murder that you think I should “grow up” over and is a serious criminal offence and does exceed these limits on free speech, but you have no issue at all with that.

    I don’t think that the incitement to murder you are talking about was a serious one.

    Do you really think if throat cutting and murder was incited against ethnic minorities, gays or, indeed anyone other then BNP members here you might have not worked yourself up in a hysterical rage over it?

    My rages are not hysterical, sir. They are thunderous. If – if – there are serious incitements to violence and murder against anyone, anywhere, they are to be condemned.

    –“I don’t see that it has. But then, I suspect that your idea of evidence is rather less rigorous than mine.”—
    Explain then what part of the evidence you don’t accept and why. ‘Take your time. Explain your working.’
    And explain what part of Martin’s “evidence” you think negates it. ‘Take your time. Explain your working.’

    If you’re talking about the rape and violent crime statistics you proffered, Martin quite rightly pointed out that you had included suspects in the figures you had described as “proving” the prevalence of “Black people” in the number of rapists and violent criminals, rendering them quite worthless. A key principle in common law is the presumption of innocence. I deal in facts, not supposition. The methodology you employed, if one can call it that, was hopeless.

    –“All the bloggers at Shiraz Socialist are good eggs, very bright and nice people.”—
    All of the commentators here so far have merely lied through their teeth and been caught out only then to resort to foul abuse, threats and incitements to murder. I suspect that your idea of “good eggs” is rather less rigorous than mine.

    I don’t see that they have lied or been abusive. There’s been one commenter whose style was rather bellicose – that’s just his style, lots of people are on the receiving end of it – but everyone else has merely taken apart your very poor arguments. I am debating you with courtesy and honesty; I invite you to do the same with me.

    –“To describe your deleted comments as censorship is overdoing it.”—
    Not at all. To censor something is to practice censorship.

    If you must, be pedantic but there is no right to free-speech on someone else’s blog. I repeat, no one is preventing you from starting your own blog.

    –“A blog is like a virtual home and you can throw someone out of your home anytime you like and for any reason.”—
    Rubbish.

    I think you’ll find that I’m correct on this. An Englishman’s home or blog is their castle; they can have as much or as little free speech in them as they see fit.

    If you cannot handle honest and frank debate then you should clearly say so at the start, not play underhanded games when it’s underway.

    I am debating with you honestly, frankly and politely. I hope you will do the same with me.

    Like I said, if throat cutting and murder was incited against ethnic minorities, gays or, indeed anyone other then BNP members you would have worked yourself up in a hysterical rage and would have been screaming from the rooftops over it.
    Face it; you couldn’t care less about it because you couldn’t care less if it really happened.

    If there is any serious incitement to violence or murder it is, I repeat, to be condemned. I don’t scream, I shout and roar.

    Either ways it is a police matter now.

    I don’t think the police will do anything about it. Why? Because a threat made against you by someone who doesn’t know you, your name, what you look like, still less where you live, is not to be taken seriously.

    —“Now to my queries…”
    No, no, no.

    Why ever not?

    For one I will only answer one question in return for an answer to a question I pose. Quid Pro Quo. Perfectly fair.

    I have no problem in answering your questions, if you answer mine, ok?

    For another the questions in the main are facile, student politic idiocy and lastly you have no authority or superiority over me whatsoever so let’s drop the tone that you do with your “List them” and “Take your time. Explain your working” smug and patronizing style.

    I disagree with you about my questions, which were, to my mind, fair, relevant and interesting. I’m sorry if you think I patronised you and can only say that you aren’t the only person to have been treated thus. Others, however, have brushed aside the offence and got on with arguing the toss. Nonetheless, I will do what I can to advance the cause of free and frank debate in the hope that you will too.

    That out of the way, I will answer all of your questions if you answer all of mine. Fair enough.

    Yes, I said it was.

    –“Apropos your claim that “white people” have been “ethnically-cleansed” from unnamed cities and you, indeed from East London, could you tell me when these incidents occurred”–
    ‘The Labour councils in the East End quite deliberately sold out their working class base to their ulterior agenda and began refusing local housing to local people who had lived in the area for generations and had been on waiting lists for many, may years; applications under the traditional policy of generational housing / family ties whereby families with close ties and long standing ties to the area were given priority of close proximity housing to each other were refused and the policy was halted; instead they gave them recently arrived immigrants, overwhelming from Asia and more and more of the indigenous Londoners had to leave the East End and began migrating eastwards, in the main towards Barking and Dagenham. (Which is one major reason the BNP have done so well in that ward.)
    Then when the East Ends entire character and its very demographics had taken a dramatic break away from the indigenous Londoners, the Labour councils reinstated the generational housing / family ties policy and began allocating the remain East End housing to the South Asian immigrants as a priority, and with their much larger extended families the result was the complete change of the East End form the traditional indigenous Cockney English to an area that resembles the makeup of its majority.’

    A string of assertions but little in the way of evidence to buttress your claims. Could you supply some, especially with reference to your claim that Labour councils “deliberately” refused to house local people. Who was responsible for such a policy? When? Can you cite any documentation backing up your contention?
    Dates are important here. I’d argue that the demographics of the East End had changed, changed and changed again well before there were any such things as Labour councils. Hence it’s difficult to see what you’re objecting to and why. Clarification, please.

    If you really don’t know this, and if you didn’t go through it you wouldn’t, I would highly recommend that you read this book and educate yourself on it. It’s not a completely accurate account but it’s as near as we are likely to see at the moment:

    http://www.uel.ac.uk/risingeast/archive04/debate/hudson_marriott_owens_dench.htm

    This begs the question, what exactly did you go through? The link you provided was to reviews of a book, which seemed to be quite favourable. Can you provide a quotation from the book as evidence for your claims?

    –“which military force(s) were involved in the incursions and who led them?… Furthermore, what was your Tuzla, your Screbrenica”—
    Like I said childish facile, student politic waffle. It does show a complete lack of comprehension on the matter though.
    In Bosnia, for instance, when some aid agencies (and the British military) moved / evacuated civilian populations that they knew were in risk of violence, they UN classified it as “ethnic cleansing” and even order British units to move the civilians back.

    In writing anything at all didactic, a comment peice, say, or an essay, you must define your terms and explain how your argument meets the defintion(s). When you are asserting something, you must supply evidence in the form of citations, footnotes and links to buttress your case. Remember I said I deal in facts not supposition. So let’s start with an accepted and authoritiative definition of ethnic cleansing. The UN defines it as “the planned deliberate removal from a specific territory of persons of a particular ethnic group, by force or intimidation, in order to render that area ethnically homogenous.” Hence my questions about your Srebrenica or Tuzla were not at all facetious but to the point. I ask you again for details and evidence of this supposed ethnic cleansing. If you can’t provide it, you should stop making references to it.

    peaceful ethnic cleansing (non-violent moving of people by demographics) carried on long after the conflict and still does today in Kosovo. It is one of the main reasons that the conflict has not reflamed thus far.
    Ethnic cleansing does not have to be done through show of arms. Labour has done it through immigration and housing policy. We now know from Neather that the uncontrolled mass immigration that Labour tried to purport as incompetence was a deliberate policy to overwhelmingly and treasonably change the demographics of the UK (“truly multicultural” ) and to “to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.”
    The end result for London? It is now nearly half non-white. i.e. the whites have been ethnically cleansed from their capital city so thoroughly within such a short space of time that soon they will be a minority.

    The first word of every sentence should start with a capital letter. Secondly, don’t use “z” in words like “patronise”. This is England not America. Thirdly, you should learn the value of factual accuracy. It’s just not on for you to make things up as you go along. I’m sorry if you feel this is patronising or smug but this debate won’t get very far unless you master the basics of the discipline. It’s tiresome having to correct such elementary mistakes in your comments.

    There is no such thing as “peaceful ethnic cleansing”. See the UN definition above. Secondly, the phrase “non-violent moving of people by demographics” doesn’t make sense. Demographics are the characteristics of a given population as used in research. Demographics don’t travel. As an aside, I find it very difficult to take people like you seriously who profess boundless love for their country when they don’t even take the trouble to master their mother tongue. You would have to insert the word “manipulation” into the sentence, ie “peaceful ethnic cleansing by the manipulation of demographics” but even then it wouldn’t make sense, unless you could make a water-tight case that the demographics had been manipulated (how?) and you were a good writer. But you’re not, I’m afraid. Sorry.

    As for our“Tuzla and Screbrenica” the victims of the massive and disproportionate violent crimes of certain ethnic groups (as already proved) that has been unnecessarily unleashed on the unsuspecting populace as a result, many whites included, has and will far exceed those of Tuzla and Screbrenica and others.

    Again: this debate is rendered needlessly difficult by the fact that you have not mastered the English language and your inability to construct a coherent argument. And again I’m sorry if you find my frankness disconcerting or patronising but it isn’t me who is patronising you. You are being patronised, sir, by the BNP, led, as it is, by the privately-educated Nicholas Griffin.

    This is hopeless. Look, I’ll take your last paragraph out and give it the necessary corrections in capitals. Clearly we have to start from first principles here.

    As for ourSPACEBETWEEN ONE WORD AND THE NEXT ONE“Tuzla and Screbrenica” SUPERFLUOUS INVERTED COMMAS, COMMA BEFORE THE SUCCEEDING CLAUSE the victims of the massive UNECESSARY ADJECTIVE AND WITHOUT QUALIFICATION and disproportionate DITTO violent crimes of certain ethnic groups WHICH ONES? (as already proved) THE WORD “HAS” IS MISSING IN THE BRACKETED STATEMENT; YOU HAVEN’T “PROVED” ANYTHING, YOU DON’T KNOW OR GRASP THE MEANING OF THE EMPHATIC WORD “PROVE”; YOU COULD USE THE WORD “DEMONSTRATE”, NOT THAT YOU HAVE DEMONSTRATED ANYTHING, HOWEVER that has HAVE, REMEMBER YOU USED THE PLURAL “CRIMES” BEFORE HAND been unnecessarily unleashed “UNLEASHED” IS SUPERFLUOUS WHERE YOU HAVE USED “UNNECESSARILY” on the unsuspecting IT IS IN THE NATIURE OF THINGS TO BE UNLEASHED ON THE UNSUSPECTING, THAT WORD IS, AGAIN, SUPERFLUOUS populace as a result, many whites included IT IS UNCLEAR TO THE READER WHO ON EARTH YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, has NUMBERS, FIGURES STATISTICS? ANOTHER UNQUALIFIED ASSERTION and will HOW DO YOU KNOW? ARE YOU A SEER? NO YOU AREN’T. STOP BEING SILLY far exceed those of Tuzla and Screbrenica HOW MANY WERE KILLED IN SREBRENICA AND TUZLA? HOW MANY FATALITIES HAVE THERE BEEN IN EAST LONDON AND OTHER UNNAMED CITIES IN THE COURSE OF THE “ETHNIC CLEANSING” YOU CLAIM HAS OCCURRED? YOU CANNOT COMPARE AND CONTRAST WITHOUT THOSE FIGURES and others.

    –“who was responsible for them and what charges, against whom and by whom have been filed at national and international criminal courts for these incidents?”—
    I have outline who has been responsible and believe me, charges will be laid when the BNP takes office.
    OK.

    No, you have not outline (sic) anything at all. You have ranted on and on but for all the paroxysms of ungovernable passion there’s been a dearth of detail and evidence in your semi-literate outpourings.

    When the BNP takes office? And er, where? It hasn’t even scaled the dizzy heights of leading Burnley Borough Council yet and that’s despite the Great Recession. You’re not a seer and neither am I but based on current performance I don’t think Nicholas Griffin should start practising his salute just yet.

    I have thoroughly and fairly answered your first question, even though it was entirely based and couched in childish student politic terms.

    Says the man who can’t even express himself properly in his mother tongue.

    So, now answer mine:
    Why is that blacks are massively and disproportionately behind gang rape? And what is your solution to the issue?

    You haven’t shown that “Blacks”, whoever or whatever that might mean, are “massively” or “disproportionately” responsible for gang rapes. A link to a Staggers article just doesn’t cut it in the evidence stakes, I’m afraid. Moreover, you are inclined to play fast and loose with facts and figures, as Martin Ohr amply demonstrated.

    Over to you, Curious Freedom. Let’s see what you’re made of.

  89. Red Maria said,

    Curious Freedom, regarding your reply to Rosie, comment # 97 your argument yet again runs aground amid the rocks of elementary debating. In this case you didn’t compare like with like. Compared to the mainstream parties, the BNP has a tiny membership. Therefore the number of criminal convictions its members have racked up is far more significant, indeed, undoubtedly statistically significant, whereas those criminals you cite from the major parties are a tiny proportion of their total membership.

    Not only that but once convicted of serious crimes, members of the major parties are expelled or kept very much at arms length. Whereas BNP criminals – and there are quite a few of them – either remain in the party and/or are close to its leadership. I think it was WWW who mentioned Tony Lecomber “the bomber”, a nasty peice of work and a good friend of Nicholas Griffin.

    Apropos Tony Blair, the majority of the Labour Party and Labour movement opposed the Iraq War. But even if that were not the case, it’s decidedly odd to be lectured about illegal wars by a political descendent of Adolf Hitler, who illegally invaded Czechoslovakia and Poland and set the standard when it came to brutality and genocide.

    And it’s very strange indeed to be lectured about illegal wars by someone who votes for a party which is very cheap with the lives and livelihoods of British citizens.

    No, your ejaculations are not to be taken seriously.

    You boast about complaining to the police about WWW’s comments but you know what? I don’t believe you.

    This comments box remains unmoderated and WWW is still posting on it. I think you’ll have to wait a lot longer than a fortnight for that police response.

    But just supposing that you had complained to the police and – big leap of the imagination, this – just supposing the police did take your complaint seriously and did take action over the comments, there’d be no shortage of people ready to complain to the PCA for their egregious time-wasting.

    Despite the publication of the BNP membership list – which wouldn’t apply to you if you were merely an electoral supporter of the party, not a member – are you a member of the BNP, Curious Freedom? Why didn’t you admit it before? What are you ashamed of? – you are still NOT a member of an identifiable group. No one here knows your name, what you look like or where you live.

    But again, just supposing if you had complained and the police took it seriously, I can tell you now, that there’d be no shortage of people, professional people of standing in the community, willing to give witness statements attesting to WWW’s good character and moderate nature. It’s not a crime to have Tourette’s Syndrome, at least not yet.

    And

    Another

    Thing:

    Self defence is no offence.

  90. Rosie said,

    Rosie working yourself up into paroxysm of rage and indignation

    Oh dear, you aren’t very good at reading tones, are you? Re-read my comment 95. Its tone is sardonic and amused. I can get angry and indignant but I wasn’t in that comment.

    And as for the “fash” and “Nazi” crap, it is just more delusional baseless smearing. Back up with evidence that I am some sort of “Fascist” or “Nazi” Rosie. You must have some sort of proof, now surely?

    As it says about Christopher Wren in St Pauls:- Si monumentum requiris, circumspice – If you seek his monument, look about you. You’re on a thread hotly defending a Nazi party. Therefore people will conclude that . . well, I don’t need to spell it out. (Or maybe I do).

  91. voltairespriest said,

    Comments from www have been removed from this thread at the commenter’s own request.

    Update: Curious Freedom is now banned, for the reason that s/he posted a comment naming an individual (incidentally a naming that I believe to erroneous), and stated that the information had been obtained from “BNP security”. Jim, Max, Rosie et al, if you could delete any further comments from him on sight, that would be most highly appreciated.

  92. Rosie said,

    OK Volty. I think it was fine to let Curious Freedom go on – he was educational on how a Fash thinks. I like having an open comments thread, as open as possible, but when it comes to outing or legal threats, that’s when you pull the plug. Same with crazy abuse, as with the Cannibal Rabbi

  93. Curious Freedom said,

    OK, fair enough, if the comments are back in context thats fair enough.

    I won’t post them again.

  94. Daniel Hoffmann-Gill said,

    Quelle surprise, the racist Curious Freedom is lurking here to…

  95. Hoffmann-Gill is a troll said,

    And the stalking troll Hoffman-Gill is lurking here too…

  96. Daniel Hoffmann-Gill said,

    I wonder who that could be?

    What a joke.

  97. Hoffmann-Gill is a troll said,

    nd the stalking troll Hoffman-Gill returns to stalk again here too…

  98. Daniel Hoffmann-Gill said,

    You’re up ay 4am in the morning trolling blogs you poor, sad bastard?

    HA HA HA!

  99. Hoffmann-Gill is a troll said,

    and the stalking troll Hoffman-Gill returns to stalk again here too…

  100. voltairespriest said,

    One uses his real name, the other has made up a specific pseudonym just for this thread. One links to his own blog, the other links nowhere. One puts forward a specific statement, the other avoids answering it.

    Who’s the troll? We report, you decide.

  101. Daniel Hoffmann-Gill said,

    Spot on Voltairespriest!

  102. Hoffmann-Gill is a troll said,

    Comment deleted. Get a life, fash. VP

  103. Daniel Hoffmann-Gill said,

    Curious Freedom/Sentinel: You should have met me face to face when you had the chance coward, now all you can do is shout obscenities from the margins, hiding behind fake names and hidemyass.

    What a brave little boy you are.

    HA!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 503 other followers

%d bloggers like this: