Reverting to type

THX1138

Watch this great Downfall mashup when Hitler finds out his name is on the leaked BNP database

This is really really funny unless your a UKIP supporter that is.

http://tinyurl.com/5hy8dv

BTW It's a bit swearey.

THX1138

Sorry this is the link.

http://tinyurl.com/5hy8dv

Dixon

Thats what their leadership LOOK like. I hate to judge by appearances, but isnt it?

The vileness makes them all the better for a protest vote. Its like saying, look ( sitting MP / councillor ) I'm so against you I'll even give my vote to those thugs!

Anthony

I couldn't get the radio link to work either, Ms Phillips, but it's also on another part of the site as an iplayer programme (it looks different to the little box that normally comes up when I listen). Here's the link for that for anyone who wants to listen:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00fl5w5/Moral_Maze_26_11_2008/

What an atmosphere.

I was exhausted just listening to it all, so I don't know what it must be like to be in the room.

You're right. He comes in at 15.45 minutes with a flying tackle in which he introduces your articles about Israel.

phil

Melanie I am surprised that you deigned to engage with an oaf like him -I dealt with him in the summer on an earlier thread as he deserved to be dealt with -he "ran" ,not unexpected as he is unable to discuss anything in a rational manner -The man is rubbish as he no doubt demonstrated and is not worthy of your time .

Israel

"And after all that effort the BNP has made to sanitise itself, too. You’d have to have a heart of stone not to laugh."

I don't have a heart of stone and when it comes to the BNP l don't find anything to laugh about.

The simple fact that this ignorant bigot was given the platform to spout his disgusting views with decent people annoys me greatly. There is far too much pandering to scum like these and maybe if people were not too busy trying to demonize brown skinned people and eastern europeans in this country (right wing press, i'm looking at you and a lot of your "commentators") and blaming them for everything that is going wrong, as well as tory members of parliament claiming that we should follow some of their policies, these morons would be in the place they should be, standing on soap boxes screaming at passers-by who do there best not to make eye contact and ignore them.

Jennifer Ascot

Lee Barnes is an Idiot.

I just wonder why the BNP let him near a mic. Simon Darby or Nick Griffin are much better at calmly putting their point across and making anyone who attacks them look like a snarling dog [and yes there was a bit of attacking from the panel, I listened].

On the balance this man Barnes is a liability for the BNP and I doubt he will be giving many interviews in future. I can just imagine the phone call from Nick Griffin to him after the show!

Lee Hancock

I heard that show and you it was you Melainie, and that other chap who kept going on about the police, who were actually talking over Lee Barnes.

Every time he tried to make a point, you two tried to shut him up. Not very edifying on your part, to be honest.

Matthew Blott

@ THX1138

Very funny, I like the Vistas gag especially.

Whullie

Isn't it the case that a political party is comprised of the people who form its membership?

And doesn't it then follow that the more 'ordinary', non-extreme and generally benign citizens who become members, the more 'ordinary', non-extreme and generally benign the party becomes?

Lee Laurie

You've made your point,Mel,the BNP are all "thugs" but why the constant articles / statements reminding us.After all as they are so "thuggish" no one will ever vote,in great enough numbers ,for them will they?
Meanwhile over in Manchester we find that the ex Chief Constable has been found to have had 38 affairs,(with his superiors knowledge,of course), with various women some of whom were serving police officers and whose subsequent promotion is now under a cloud.Manchester is of course,the police authority that sacks serving officers for appearing in public whilst wearing a BNP badge.Perhaps we could have an article from you,Mel,or comments from some of your correspondents on the irony of this.
I add the usual "I am not a BNP member" before the usual suspects start to have a go at me for trying to put an alternative side to all this Anti BNP hysteria.

Anthony

Lee Hancock, you are supposed to answer the questions you are asked.

Not the question you would like to be asked.

Lee Barnes was asked by Melanie Phillips whether it was not hypocritical to talk of human rights when you don't recognise them for other people.

This just produced a diatribe about Zionism, Melanie Phillips Israel etc, etc.

After that she could barely get a word in. You are supposed to listen to the question and then answer it.

None of the other witnesses gave any coherent set of answers at all, but at least we got to hear the question and then see them running away from what they've been asked.

Somewhere in there you can hear Clifford Longley asking a question relating to whether Lee Barnes thought it acceptable to repeal the law that means a serving police officer cannot be an active member of the BNP but he barely gets three words out before Mr Barnes just blasted away like a foghorn about something else to do with the law.

The odd thing was that all the panel gave the BNP a very fair hearing on the narrow point of whether you could be a member of a politcal party such as that and not have to lose your job.

From what I was able to gather, all that Ms Phillips' and Mr Longley's questions wanted to explore was whether it was right that there had to be some caveats to any general principle that people should not be disqualified from jobs owing to political party membership, for example when it comes to being in the police. They were never allowed to get the words out but that was where we seemed to be heading.

Frank P

Will somebody sort out the margins on this blog FFS?
Pete? James F?

Huw Thornton

I think that you did really well Melanie in getting Lee Barnes to disclose more about himself and the BNP than he intended.

I do not mean to trivialise the seriousness of what the BNP stands for, but Lee Barnes showed himself to be comically inept at putting forward any kind of persuasive argument.

Laurie Lee

P.S.
I note from this mornings news that Damien Green,the Tory Shadow Minister for Immigration has just been arrested by anti terrorism police officers.
Seems there has been a leak of information that our democratic national government didn't want leaked.
He now faces charges which could result in life imprisonment.
And we are still worried about the fascists in the BNP.I would suggest that there are fascists abroad in UK and not all members of that organisation either.

Israel

What's interesting is the fact that the Cro-Magnon from the BNP uses a phrase l have seen a lot on here, he calls the views of left wingers who are against him and his odious fellows "Liberal Fascist". The simple fact that this oxymoron is used by people here and someone who must take a lot of time to do his blog (it must be hard to type with your knuckles) and is up there with the "Commie Nazis" scene from The Simpsons would be amusing but what it really does is help legitmize what these scumbags do and say. Michael Portillo's comments were just the sort of thing the BNP love as he helps them make their case.

In fact, those like the BNP who bleat like little girls who have fallen over and scraped their knee demanding that their human rights are being denied, when they would deny the human rights of people they class as inferior, should quite frankly be denied the use of the Human Rights Act themselves. If they don't believe in it, they should not be given the chance to use it.

Nick Kaplan

Thanks THX that was great!

Herbert Thornton

I've just listened to the voice only version of the debate.

It seems to me that to accuse Lee Barnes of trying to out shout Melanie and the other man is very much a case of the pot trying to call the kettle black.

The two - as Lee Hancock says - kept trying to talk over Lee Barnes and shut him up, and indeed, to put words in his mouth: so much so that it was not surprising that he refused to be shut up.

I think that in the case of Lee Barnes, there was a big element, on both sides, of too much emotion combined with a personality clash.

At any rate, I was disappointed that Lee Barnes was treated much less politely than Christine was treated, despite her confused, indeed totalitarian, belief - and I paraphrase - that freedom must consist only of freedom to be politically correct.

I recommend that people actually listen to the recording and judge for themselves.

Dixon

Israel
November 27th, 2008 10:19pm
"And after all that effort the BNP has made to sanitise itself, too. You’d have to have a heart of stone not to laugh."
I don't have a heart of stone and when it comes to the BNP l don't find anything to laugh about.
The simple fact that this ignorant bigot was given the platform to spout his disgusting views with decent people annoys me greatly. There is far too much pandering to scum like these and maybe if people were not too busy trying to demonize brown skinned people and eastern europeans in this country (right wing press, i'm looking at you and a lot of your "commentators") and blaming them for everything that is going wrong, as well as tory members of parliament claiming that we should follow some of their policies, these morons would be in the place they should be, standing on soap boxes screaming at passers-by who do there best not to make eye contact and ignore them."

But how do we know what they are like unless they are given that chance to show us? To be fair, I already had such a picture of them in my mind, but there is often this sneaking suspicion about whether they are being misrepresented...only disproven by the fact that they do get a chance to display what thugs they are!

Nonetheless, as I said earlier, the viler they are, the better they serve as a protest vote.

Dixon

On the other hand, one meets a lot of loud mouthed fugs in everyday life, as often as not socialists and Labour supporters, so a party that comprises such people among its members is I suppose representative of society. Like them or not, I know the BNP iOS broadly speaking representative of the attitudes and opinions of working-class British people. Who dont vote for them because they are not a proper party so much as a protest group.

Hence, their service to the community as recipients of protest votes.

EC

Whullie, No.

Lee Laurie

The state police arrest an MP for doing his job....the MSM get stirred up about it and what do we get from Israel?
The same old cliches about Knuckles,Cro magnon etc.etc.
Come out from your bubble and have a good look around at what is happenning in UK today.Maybe you'll stop worrying about some small non descript political party with no hope of running the country and start worrying about those who already are.

Tancred

Oh, just got into the IPlayer.

Such a fair go eh? Michael Burke set the whole thing up by roundly insulting all BNP members. Melanie started off by saying we are loathsome, Malik said our views were odious.

So much for balance. So much for debate and open minds. So much for understanding the legitimate concerns of native Britons.

This experience taught me a lot. Very disturbing.

For all my life I have supported the right of Jews to their own homeland. As a native Briton I now see that right is not extened to us.

Who are the racists now?

This is turning point for me.

bert

Would someone please quote a "Waycist" policy of the BNP's
Go on quote one !
It's all very well berating people without any facts!!!

It may surprise some people that the BNP has polish, hungarian, gay, jewish, Italian as members, and many members have foreign wives/husbands etc.
Adam Walker BNP teacher has a Japanese wife, Richard Barnbrook (BNP GLA member) his partner Simone Clarke (BNP member)are bringinmg up Simones mixed race young child.
Democracy=the will of the people, the opposite is dictatorship, banning legal partys.
ever wondered why the BNP is a LEGAL party?
could it just be you have been fed lies like the EU, Weapons of mass distruction anyone?

Bob

Is it just me, or is there a trend of bad manners running through interviwerson TV and radio? Journalists and commentators appear to find it trendy to be some kind of voracious shark when interviewing.
Melanie asked a question and before the Barnes lad got his answer out she was shouting all over the place. In the end Barnes had to keep raising his voice just to get heard. I love reading Melanie's articles but her performance on the moral maze was pretty 3rd rate.
If you ask a question at least let the respondent answer it. Lets stop this 'i wanna be a shock jock' type of interview.

raymond joseph douglas

No sane person,I suspect, wants the BNP to get anyway near power.But,the fact that our three main parties refuse to deal with immigration, the E.U.,dangerous islamic immans etc, makes the case for voting BNP, halfway plausible!Our political establishment needs to look to itself, before turning on those who vote BNP!

Joan Walters

Sorry Melanie - I sense Lee Barnes was irritated by your self righteous, sanctimonious politically correct attitude. You take yourself far to seriously - chill out, take off your blinkers and acknowledge that native, white Britons are worried for our futures.

TonyS

I detest Barnes' views but I think his behaviour on the MM was no different to that of many panelists and BBC interviewers, who interrupt constantly. I think he gave Mel and some of the other panelists a dose of their own medicine and they did not like it.

THX1138

Mel I just listen to it all seemed pretty tame to me. C'mon you do hand it out so you gotta take it.

Have a look closer home at the abuse dissenters receive on this blog if anyone has the temerity to disagree with you.

A typical example from a couple of days ago aimed at me from the fragrant Verity.

"Such a silly, angry man. US Immigration simply failed to understand how important he is and how much he has to teach Americans.

What a jerk."

Not sure what I had done to deserve that kicking, probably just because I hold different views from her.

Adam B.

Tony S and Herbert, I don't know if I listened to the same programme as you! Clearly, Barnes was the first to become belligerent, not answering the questions put to him, claiming he was the victim of an ad hominem attack when he wasn't, and becoming generally abusive. He is clearly a complete imbecile, incapable of reasoned discussion. I also wish he would extend his defence of all things "indigenous" (can he trace his ancestors back to the ice age?) to the English language, and learn how to pronounce a "t".

Peter Michaels

I too listened to the broadcast and although Lee Barnes came across as "excitable" he made some very good points.

As for your own that the BNP would be unable to uphold the rights of black or asian britons, rightly or wrongly Mr Barnes was pointing out that the reverse is currently happening in this country.

You also made a point that his party would only represent the wishes of its members (and voters) as if this was a unique position. I am obviously not as intellectual as your good self, but I always imagined that this approach was at the very heart of partisan politics as practised in all western democracies.

The point is that the BNP policies would only ever be enacted if the majority votes for them; what I find more scarey is the totalitarian attitude of the woman who appears to represent the view of the current government. Now that is scarey.

phil

THX1138 welcome to the fragrant ones club :)she is the most bizarre person I have ever come across,with views from outer space ,definitely not from a normal human being -be careful if you are on benefits ,she wants your vasectomy done or your ovaries out !!circumcision is not compulsory ,failure to comply with the first two disqualifies you from a vote (lol)

phil

do I detect a gathering of the BNP clan on this thread -they certainly are organised to defend their idiots .

Israel

bert:

"Would someone please quote a "Waycist" policy of the BNP's
Go on quote one !
It's all very well berating people without any facts!!!"

It's in their manifesto. That doesn't make it hard to find does it. It also shows where your views are if you sneeringly describe them as "Waycist".

"It may surprise some people that the BNP has polish, hungarian, gay, jewish, Italian as members, and many members have foreign wives/husbands etc."

So f'ing what. Here's some news for ya bunkie:

A lot of the hardcore racist groups of the seventies like the BNP and Combat 18 used to be big fans of The Specials and other ska groups. You think that stopped them being racist scumbags? Does it surprise me that they married foreigners? No. I don't care if they have foreign spouses who are stupid enough to stick with them. It may be something that serves to release the bile they feel for foreigners or black father abandonment issues. The fact is they are, and always will be a racist group. That is their core identity, no matter how many times they are invited to speak at Oxford or debate with people on the radio. For that reason l show them the same tolerance they would show me as a minority, screw being the better person.

JJS

Joan Walters, Melanie IS a native, white Briton. And she is most certainly worried. So your point is......?

Pinkmobile

Peter Michaels, Michael Portillo even conceded at the end of the show that much of the political argument put forward by Lee Barnes was ‘competent‘. But that is what is so ironic.

Having spent all that time altering the manifesto and the BNP’s accompanying literature and with the panel broadly in favour of not interfering with freedom of thought when it came to political party membership and job disqualification, Lee Barnes just blew it when it came to taking questions.

I know Gordon Brown hardly ever answers questions at PMQs but even he doesn’t talk over the person putting the question. If we couldn’t even hear the question in full how are we supposed to give credibility to any ‘answer’ from Lee Barnes?

Lee Barnes just barked out a sort of party political broadcast but didn’t want to take questions on it.

The first witness was appalling, too: robot voice and a robot mind to go with it. Everybody can think what they want to think so long as we say they can think it.

This is why I gave up my union membership so long ago. A curse on me for ever joining one.

The bulk of them aren’t interested in pay and conditions at all, just getting fingers into as many pies as possible. They’re like the goons in town halls with ideas well above their station. Haven’t they asked the government to pass a bill meaning members of the BNP can’t be a member of a union?

anglicus

Addendum.
Serving members in the Armed Forces are allowed to be members of any political party, including the BNP, as long as they don't attend meetings in uniform or become activists, i.e. be on committees etc.
Check it out Melanie.

Nick Kaplan

There are a lot of things of interest in this story. First, can you imagine what the reaction would be had a bunch of communist party members been listed publically, followed by the suggestion that such people should be banned from working in the public sector. I would imagine those who published the list would have been accused of McCarthyite blacklisting by most of the lefty MSM. I support blacklisting and I support the publication of the BNP list but for the same reason I support the warning that Smoking Kills being placed on cigarette packets (it’s always useful to know who or what you are dealing with), but I’d be interested to know how the lefties square the circle of supporting one and not the other. Isreal, perhaps you could answer?

Second, surely having a view or being a member of a party should not affect employment in the public sector; only acting upon that view should make a difference. Thus if teachers or police officers are discriminating against minorities they should be fired since this means they are not doing their job properly. However, it is surely the case that one can hold racist views and yet at the same time not act on them. Since it is the action not the view that is the problem then surely people with such views should be allowed to have public sector jobs, and not be disallowed only due to their racisim. Being a member of the BNP should just imply special scrutiny that one is doing one’s job properly and no more.

However, this only applies to the public sector. In the private sector one must surely be allowed to higher who one wants and to discriminate on the basis of a candidates’ views. The right to be a member of a party or to hold particular views is not the right to force others to associate with you even when they don’t share those views. By the principle of free association it is surely right that a private company be allowed to deny someone a job on the basis of their views alone, for the same reason that you should be allowed to deny racists entry into your home.
Similarly it should be well within the rights of consumers not to buy from companies that are known employers of racists if they personally believe this to be of sufficient importance.

All the confusion comes from a confusion of the character of rights. Rights are essentially negative, they are protections against things not entitlements to them. The right to be a member of a party is a right not to be banned from being a member of that party, it is not a right to make demands on the compliance of others to facilitate the membership of that party. Thus the fact that one has a right to be a member of the BNP does not mean that the law should be involved in making one’s membership easier or stopping others discriminating against you due to your membership.

The government however must be neutral, this is fundamental for any society that wants to be governed by the rule of law. Thus the government cannot deny employment to anyone based only on their views. However the government’s neutrality requires that those working for it also act neutrally and so if any of its employees who happen to hold racist views act on those views they should be fired for failing to perform the duties that their employment was dependent on.

Just one last point: Did anyone else find the woman from the teachers union even scarier than the BNP guy? She repeatedly went on about the point of education being diversity, tolerance, equality and social justice.... There I was, thinking the point of education was to learn how to think for oneself, yet it turns out the point of education is leftist indoctrination... back to school for me I guess, I failed to learn the value of most of those things.

phil

Bert ,Israel has said it all I suppose ,but I need to ask you if your Jewish member belongs to a synagogue or a Jewish charity committee or is accepted within her community -I suspect no to all ,nor will your Poles and Hungarians prove very popular within their communities ,we all know each of those nations unfortunately has to suffer from neo nazis amongst them ,so what do you think you prove -Maybe you are a decent person ,but you are moving amongst some who definitely are not. As for your man Barnes .just read his web site ,the man is demented .

logdon

Pathetic! Back to the ridiculous moderating again. My argument was balanced with no untruths. Have you got a Labour mole in there? If so arrest him!

Dixon

Israel
November 28th, 2008 1:44pm
bert:
" Here's some news for ya bunkie:
A lot of the hardcore racist groups of the seventies like the BNP and Combat 18 used to be big fans of The Specials and other ska groups. You think that stopped them being racist scumbags? Does it surprise me that they married foreigners? No. I don't care if they have foreign spouses who are stupid enough to stick with them. It may be something that serves to release the bile they feel for foreigners or black father abandonment issues. The fact is they are, and always will be a racist group. That is their core identity, no matter how many times they are invited to speak at Oxford or debate with people on the radio. For that reason l show them the same tolerance they would show me as a minority, screw being the better person."

I once ( briefly ) employed a man who was a maniacal fan of Jimmy Hendrix, even copying his hairdo, in spite of it looking ridiculous on a bearded white geezer. He was probably the most unpleasantly racist ( anti Afro-Carribean ) person Ive ebver come accross. And, yes, he was a BNP supporter.

The irony never seemed to strike him, that in between ranting about N this and C that he was ranting on about the brilliant Hendrix!

He also tried selling me cheap "imports". Later ( after I had stopped employing him ) being reportedly arrested on 93 counts of handling goods ( such as cookers ) stolen from warehouses.

Nice bloke, some would say.

o.u.

I'm sorry you had to sit through that, Ms. Philips.

Melanie talked over BNP's Lee Barnes once or twice. Barnes was cutting off everyone with his ranting.

Tancred: "For all my life I have supported the right of Jews to their own homeland. As a native Briton I now see that right is not extened to us.
Who are the racists now?
This is turning point for me."

Sure it is Tancred.
So you've always supported the Jewish people in support of their homeland, but now that you learn that many deplore the BNP because of their long historical hatred of and violence against Jews, and their love of Nazism and Hitler, you suddenly feel that you no longer have a right to your homeland (what?) and are now all in support of the BNP.
That must have been some wrench for you.

bert: "Would someone please quote a "Waycist" policy of the BNP's
Go on quote one !"

How about this from the BNP constitution, freshly pulled from the bnp.org.uk website (summary: only white Europeans race stock allowed) :
-- begin quote --
SECTION 2: MEMBERSHIP
1) The British National Party represents the collective National, Environmental, Political,
Racial, Folkish, Social, Cultural, Religious and Economic interests of the indigenous
Anglo-Saxon, Celtic and Norse folk communities of Britain and those we regard as
closely related and ethnically assimilated or assimilable aboriginal members of the
European race also resident in Britain. Membership of the BNP is strictly defined
within the terms of, and our members also self define themselves within, the legal
ambit of a defined ‘racial group’ this being ‘Indigenous Caucasian’ and defined ‘ethnic
groups’ emanating from that Race as specified in law in the House of Lords case of
Mandla V Dowell Lee (1983) 1 ALL ER 1062, HL.
2) The indigenous British ethnic groups deriving from the class of ‘Indigenous
Caucasian’ consist of members of: i) The Anglo-Saxon Folk Community; ii) The Celtic
Scottish Folk Community; iii) The Scots-Northern Irish Folk Community; iv) The
Celtic Welsh Folk Community; v) The Celtic Irish Folk Community; vi) The Celtic
Cornish Folk Community; vii) The Anglo-Saxon-Celtic Folk Community; viii) The
Celtic-Norse Folk Community; ix) The Anglo-Saxon-Norse Folk Community; x) The
Anglo-Saxon-Indigenous European Folk Community; xi) Members of these ethnic
groups who reside either within or outside Europe but ethnically derive from them.
-- end quote --

I'd say that's racist.

Piers

Athough not strictly related to the debate here, I can't help noticing that Michael Buerk seems to sideline Melanie on the programme all the time..

Peter

Extremists don't like each other!

Camilla Stevens

So Melanie, why did Michael Portillo describe Lee Barnes' performance as 'obviously competent'. Did he ruffle you so much?

The Dandiprat

Well. I listened to the debate and quite honestly Melanie, I think the summary you give here of the exchange is wide of the mark.

He was robust in his manner yes, but he did fairly address the points put to him.

I did not hear 'ranting and raving'. I heard a man putting forward points with the force necessary when faced with hectoring.

I disagree most strongly with his description of the situation in Gaza. But his comments on what is happening here, rang very true, and the panellists' left me with the impression that they could sense this.

I note reference in the comments to his 'thuggish' mode of speech; along with the well worked 'knuckle dragging' cliches. Again, what I heard was a series of cogent statements in the face of mildly hostile questioning. Perhaps the fact that his speaking style is identifiably not that of the polite middle -class, allows such negative attitudes to continue to pose as objective appraisal.

There is indeed a grave threat to minorities in this country and you Melanie know more than anyone what that threat is. It is not the BNP.

Please stop demonising people who want no more than to put an end to the systematic abolition of their homeland.

Arthur Lincoln

I have just listened to the 'Moral Maze' and particularly Lee Barnes' input. As a neutral who believes in the democratic system my own view is that Lee Barnes said some things that I consider sensible. He said the BNP wanted the police to arrest criminals and not be social workers in uniform. I can agree with this but I would go further and state that I do not want the police politicised and interfering with the democratic process i.e. Damien Green.

He said we have many institutions and organisations (many getting public funding) for minorities within our multicultural society but non for the British islanders. I have often wondered why, if this is a MULTI-cultural society, the indigenous are disuaded from having their own institutions but asked to celebrate other communities rights to organisation? (am I a closet racist?)

Clifford Longley implied, and agreed when Lee Barnes asked him, if political correctness was law. This I find amazing and I would wholeheartedly agree with anyone who wanted the end to political correctness.

My own view is that everyone who lives in this country should be treated the same. But some years ago I was told that holding this view is, in itself, racist. I still ponder that one. All in all I think that Lee Barnes knew he would meet with antagonism before the debate and employed the maxim that attack is the best form of defence.

Dixon

RE O.U: "Id saythats racist"

Er, no, OU, its MIND BOGGLIN!

Dixon

Re Arthur Lincoln.

I think the point Artie is that the BNP DO say a lot of things that we can all agree with, but they are not the people we want to say those things. In other words, we want the likes of normal mainstream politicians, of any "real" party to start saying those things. Therefore, its useful to vote BNP but all the while acknowledging that as well as the things they say that we agree with, there is a lot they believe in thats repugnant. I mean, look at that stuff quoted from their membership site by OU, above.

So, my position is still that people who are concerned about certain issues should go ahead and vote BNP, but only so long as theyve no chance of any real power. Lets face it, 12,000 members! Whats that? There are stamp collecting clubs bigger than that!

Rebel Saint

Melanie, more than anyone else you represent my views on the vast majority of subjects. However on this particular discourse you were just as bad as each other. Lee Barnes certainly lost his cool and did himself no favours, but it was obvious he came expecting to be on the defensive and simply came out fighting.

Robert

I think, Melanie, that Mr Barnes reflected the anger of many at what politicians have done to Britain. The ethos imbued in of many of your articles is in fact in agreement with the cause of the anger so evident in Mr Barnes.

I do not believe, having heard the programme, that Mr Barnes was given a proper chance to answer the questions put to him. His failure to remain calm did not help him; those questioning him seemed determined not to listen to his replies, but attempted to put words into his mouth.

Regardless of what you think of the BNP many people would recogise the force of its argument.

The programme got off to a bad start, by the BBC's Buerk's prejudice in stating that the police banned its members from being members of the BNP because it regarded the organisation as racist; giving the impression that police officers are free to be members of the mainstream parties. In fact police officers are NOT ALLOWED to be members of ANY political party not just the BNP.

As to Hollywood and Mr Barnes criticism: I do not know who was responsible for producing and financing the films, but prior to 9/11 the British, especially the English were more often then not portrayed as the villians.

I am one of your greatest fans, Melanie, but I do not agree with much in your "Reverting to Type" nor in your criticism of Mr Barnes - you did not want to listen and I understand his apparent anger and, as I understand you, no one is more scathing of the MSP than you and with regard to what those politicians have done and are doing to destroy the fabric of England.

Israel

Nick Kaplan:

A simple answer to your simpleton question:

No communist l know has attacked and beaten ethnic minorites in the streets screaming at them to "get back to your own f'ing country". No communist l know has smeared racist epithets all over the properties and businesses of hard working ethnic minorities or smashed them up causing thousands in damages. No communists l know have used fear and intimidation in local elections at the polling stations to deter ethnic minorities their democratic right to take part in local elections. No communist has ever come up to me while playing against them on a football field in the eighties and called me the "N" word or the "C" word telling me that they would cripple me because "your just a black b'stard who shouldn't be here anyway".

Now, l have to admit that l don't know too many communists, and there are lists of ones who were complete gits, the thing is (and this is the kicker) THEY DON'T HOLD THE SAME RACIST VIEWS OF THE BNP. Your question doesn't compare apples to oranges, it compares apples to lego bricks. Maybe next time you can find a group who you think are on the left who hold the same type of odious views as the BNP and get the same kind of stupid reaction from the likes of Portillo and ask the question again? You may do better.

BTW:

My name only has SIX LETTERS IN IT. You would think that from all you read on this blog and it's mentioned, how many times it appears on the news on tv, the fact that it'son maps of the world and the fact that it appears regularly in two major religions text books you would be able to spell it right!! I'm just saying.

Conservative Cabbie

Israel

Welcome back, haven't seen you on here for a while.

On "Liberal Facism"

That odious phrase you referred to was coined by H.G. Wells the renowned socialist, Fabian Society Member and Labour Party Candidate. He said: "I am asking for a liberal fascisti, for enlightened Nazis...obviously the Fascists of Liberalism must carry out a parallel ambition on a still vaster scale. They must begin as a disciplined sect but they must end as the sustaining organisation of a reconstituted mankind".

Remember how you liked to quote RINO's supporting Obama during the election, well theres a famous leftist celebrating not only fascism but Nazism too.

I don't think it can be denied that liberalism either incorporates elements of fascism, or at the very least has fascistic tendencies. If you doubt that, take a look at the Black Power Movement so revered by liberals, that was clearly fascistic even down to the racial superiority element. Have a look at the progressives, the grandparents of the liberal movement, in the 20's and 30's who revered Mussolini until he allied himself with Hitler. Have a look at Oswald Moseley, another Fabian Socialist who became a fascist.Or finally, have a look at the Presidency of Woodrow Wilson, another progressive, all the above have definite fascistic elements.

You refer to the cro-magnon right. I won't deny that the right has it's darker side, but Liberals don't bleed "sugar and spice and all things nice", liberalism has it's darker elements too, just think of all those wonderful people that the left have rushed to support; Stalin, Mussolini, Castro, Che Guevara, all thoroughly dispicable people that the left have gone ga-ga over at one time or another.

I'm not saying you're a fascist or that liberals in general are, I'm just saying that elements of fascism does stray into their value set from time to time. Take Planned Parenthood, the pro-abortion group in the states. This Christmas, you can buy christmas gift vouchers to give to that special someone so that they can have an abortion. Hitler himself would have been proud of such an innovative approach to population control.

I eagerly await your rebuttal.

Conservative Cabbie

Verity/ Frank

Haven't sorted out your Xmas presents yet, why not try this:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=wSP_i9MI9NU

A perfect gift for the cultists.

Edwin Greenwood

Does it matter whether or not the BNP are "racist"? They represent, or purport to represent, the sectional interests of a particular group, namely the indigenous White population of the UK. Now you can work yourselves into a lather dissing and dissecting the terms "indigenous" and "White", go round in ever-decreasing circles manipulating the "Nation of Immigrants" and "Mongrel Nation" arguments, but I suspect we all have a reasonable working idea what "indigenous White population" means. Various pressure groups, parties and quangos represent other groups. The MCB claims to represent the interests of Muslims. OBV and innumerable similar groups the interests of Blacks. Respect is, in practice, a political party for South Asian, primarily Muslim, interests. The NBPA and its branches represent non-White policemen.

So why do we all go into paroxysms of alarm about a party which represents the interests of White people? When you prick us, do we not also bleed?

logdon

Why the BNP exists. Note that antisemitism in the thinly disguised form of Israel bashing is alive and well in establishment circles too. The kneejerk audience applause shows how far the indocxtrination has gone. From the Biased BBC blog.

"Caught the beginning of Any Questions this evening and had a chuckel at the make up of the panel. There was Geoff Hoon (Left), Caroline Lucas (Left), Vince Cable (New to the BBC I think, ahem, but also Left) and David Willets (Soft-centre). So hint of bias there, right? First up was a question on whether "extremism"as evidenced in events on Bombay could be defeated. Caroline Lucas immediately launched into an attack on American foreign policy and then got stuck into Israel's "occupation" of Palestine as a probable cause of the Islamic terrorist scum attack in Bombay yesterday. Her rant was greeted by generous applause. Vince Cable also helpfully explained that "extremism" needed a political solution. Willets waffled about winning hearts and minds (Not the best advise when a deranged Muslim with an AK47 is hunting you down because you might have a British passport but still..) and amazingly only Hoon sounded even slightly gung ho, which is saying something! I look forward to the day when Any Questions will find the guts to allow an unapologetic spokesman for the war on Islamic terror onto its lousy show - but I'm sure it will never happen since a plurality of views is forbidden in easy consensus BBC land."

phil

Having now had the opportunity to hear the programme ,I find it astonishing that any of you would not be appalled by the aggressive ignorance of lee barnes -Melanie hardly managed to get a word in edgewise and was nor responsible for the fracas that ensued -I suggest you ask yourselves would you like to be governed by a collection of people that let this man represent them -would you feel safe?I have never heard him speak before but I have read his web site -I,m sorry to say his manner ,apart from his politics ,reminded me of terrible broadcasts from the nineteen thirties .I cannot disagree with all that that party say ,every word cannot be stupid and that is what they rely upon ,but the basic message disgusts this voter.Their message of hate has switched on the surface from Jews to Muslims because they are more visible and there is more support ,does that give me comfort -NO NO NO

most of you will have seen this poem by Pastor Niemoller ,but it is worth reading again and thinking carefully about its message -then consider whether we need the BNP to encourage police to arrest criminals or to control unrestricted immigration etc etc -We do not -we need to pressure the mainstream parties to reflect the common sense and tolerance that this great nation has been famous for .

"When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak

phil

Edwin Greenwood
"Does it matter whether or not the BNP are "racist"YES YES YES

phil

Cabbie forward an address and I will send you one ,and when we have seen the man has saved the world we can all have dinner off it, you, me and Melanie-you can invite the fourth but please not the fragrant one :):)
I must admit the advert was a bit shmaltzy.

Edwin Greenwood

Phil, I can only respond, "Why? Why? Why?"

Let's leave aside Israel's predictable frantic hyperbole about people bashing other people up because of the colour of their skin. That's unacceptable criminality and it's by no means a one-way White-on-Black street either.

But generally, why are we so hung up on intertribal hostility and tribal favoritism? Or more precisely, why are we so hung up on whipping ourselves up into a frenzy to condemn tribalism by White people, when we wink indulgently at similar behaviour by non-Whites? After all, it's part of their Culture, innit?

Anthony

It's no surprise, logdon.

By the way, Jonathan Dimbleby wrote a book called 'The Palestinians' years ago.

There's a great parody of Any Questions on here:

http://concom.blogspot.com/2004/02/and-now-its-time-for-any-questions-in.html

The level of media bias over the Bombay bombings has just been jawdropping everywhere, though.

I was wondering if anyone was going to pick up on all this and today, in the Telegraph, Charles Moore has.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/29/do2901.xml

Jon Snow of Channel 4 News thinks Bombay is like the Columbine massacre, Caroline Lucas thinks it's probably to do with US foreign policy (what about all the other Islamic militant terror attacks in India going back decades - perhaps they don't count), or she thinks it's Israel/Palestine.

Or we hear it's about Kashmir.

Or the way the Hindus have treated Muslims.

My, my.

There I was thinking that the thing that connected all these things was a global Islamic jihad with a series of localised phoney grievances used as cover and to give the useful idiots something to latch on to.

Isn't it funny how so many of these puffed-up journalists never take anyone at face value - unless the person they're talking to happens to be providing an excuse for the jihadists?

The aptly named Jason Burke was on at least three shows on Thursday talking his usual rubbish: Channel 4 News, Newsnight and This Week. All three channels, including Channel 4, receive public subsidy. Why?

The British mainstream media's coverage of the Bombay atrocities has been nothing less than a disgrace and I'm sick of paying for it.

john

Thought it was a run of the mill debate really Melanie.
Was disgusted by the teacher's representative.As long as the person is fulfilling their duties,their politics is no business of hers.Her failure to answer comparable possible bans for other political affiliations was truly pathetic - "uh,the issue is...." etc etc
True totalitarian thinking.

Nick Kaplan

Israel: Perhaps you have never heard of a communist who has attacked or beaten any minorities, but I don’t think it’s a good idea argue from ignorance. Stalinist communists persecuted religions of all kinds due to their ghastly ideology of hate. They also particularly persecuted Jews because all totalitarian ideologies need a scapegoat. Similarly Che Guevara that heart throb of leftist naivety had a well known record of murdering homosexuals and anyone of a nationality or background he personally disapproved of. What’s more communism as an ideology advocates at the very least the enslavement of the successful and in practice it usually involves murdering anyone who dares to excel themselves. Forced equalisation (or the eradication of difference) as a principle is deeply anti-human since the fundamental feature of human-nature is individuality and difference; hence the need for murder, indoctrination and violent suppression that has been seen every that it has been put in practice e.g. The USSR, Cambodia, China, Cuba etc, becaus these regimes were actually fighting nature.

Communism as an ideology has been responsible for more inhumanity than any other ideology, this in no way excuses fascism (and neither is it meant to, I find it and the racism with which it is associated to be as abhorrent as communism) but as an ideology it is equally incompatible with liberal values (by liberal I actually mean liberal as in how it was first intended rather than in its perverted form adopted by the left) of individual rights and freedoms and it is deserving of the same level of contempt as fascism is. Communists may not hold the exact same odious views as the BNP but their views are equally odious if different and in practice they have been even more dangerous. If you personally believe, as I do, that due to the odious nature of the BNPs views people acting in a private capacity should have the right not to associate with or employ them, then you must agree that the same applies to publishing lists of communist party members and not employing them if you so choose. So why blacklist one and not the other?

It’s also interesting to note as Conservative Cabbie has that the people most in support of the ghastly ideology of Nazism back in the day were the very same intellectuals who supported Communism. Academics throughout the West were,in the 1920’s and 30’s, in love with various kinds of collectivist statism, and National Socialism aka Fascist Nazism is just one variant of that. The similarities between Nazism and leftism are fairly numerous; it’s really no coincidence that they were called National Socialists.

Sorry I misspelt your name, given that I come from a Jewish family you would have thought I would pick up on that but I’m told that I’m dyslexic (what does that mean except bad at spelling??) so I will plead that you allow that as an excuse!

Dixon

Re Cabbie and Israel on "liberal fascists".

Heres my version: The term "fascist" was taken by the Italians from the name of the symbol of ancient Rome, a bundle of twigs. This term continues in English as "fascine", a bundle of twigs used in WW1 to cross trenches.

The meaning of the symbol is clear: one twig is weak, a bundle tied together is immeasurably strong. Thats what "Fascism" means: a group of people bound by a common purpose riding roughshod unstoppably over all opponents. Irresepective of other views, laws or "ethical" objections.

Jurgen Sybeburg ( or Sybeberg ) made a film in the 1970s called "Our Hitler: A Film From Germany". It was serialised on BBC2 as "Hitler: A Film From Germany". They probably would ban it today. In it, Sybeburg advances the argument that the real descendents of Hitler are any group who resort to the principle of "direct action", irrespective of their views. Its those people who share a common view and try to ram it down the throats of everyone else by any means possible.

Clearly, that IS what "Fascism " is. People who define it in terms of NAZI Germany and Mussolinis Italy are missing the point. Its a dynamic, not a set of policies.

By that criterion, todays Fascists are the Green Movement. Look at Lord Melchett and his white uniformed gangs tearing up and destroying fields of GM crops. Its uncannily, eerily, terifyingly similar to the Stormtroopers smashing up Jewish businesses in the 30's. No direct life lost, but give it time. Indeed, some would say the wrecking of GM technology will lead to the deaths of millions.

Todays Stormtroopers are "Greenpeace", attacking and wrecking and "protesting" by destroying the lives and businesses of anyone they see as representing what they oppose.

Todays Fascist left dont saub racist slogans, etc, but they do go out in gangs to wreck bracnches of McDonalsds, shut down businesses even shut down majorroads and town centres. Have you ever been going under a motorway flyover when a brick lands on the roof of the "SUV" you are riding in...I have. Thats being on the receiving end of todays form of Fascism.

Dont forget, the contempories of Hitler and Mussolini did not know where it would lead. Many were as idealistic as the followers of todays Fascistic "Green Movement".

Augustus

What about women with red hair? Once they also were seen as a danger to society, in fact they represented a double danger, They were also perceived as devils. Priests devized all kinds of reasons, they were especially persecuted in times of political and religious conflict. Actully, it wasn't the redhead so much as the witch which presented the problem. It wasn't only a superstition either, the political enemy, and the enemy of God needed to be defined and eliminated. Also people with abnormalities represented a danger to the public. They were seen as unnatural beings. People with one eye, three eyes, no legs, crooked legs, etc., carried the curse of the devil. If something went wrong in a village or town, the misformed were usually blamed.

But now, we are so many centuries further on, and yet still in Tanzania today, middle age practices are rife. That part of East Africa is particularly dangerous for albinos. In Tanzania albinos are hacked into pieces simply because they are albinos. But why? Because an albino is a devil in disguise? No, not at all. There are Tanzanians who believe that the limbs of an Albino have magical powers. They bring prosperity. Not only isolated madmen do this, also the society's elite believe this and buy them. Witchdoctors sell substances which contain extracts from the limbs of albinos. These practices are beyond our understanding. They are even beyond the understanding of our medieval forefathers, after all, they only killed people who in their eyes were evil. But albinos are basicaly killed to be eaten, many of whom have been eaten by politicians and businessmen, who may even have represented Tanzania internationally. But who cares? The cannibals aren't Jews and the albinos aren't Palestinians, otherwise the UN, which consists to a large extent of political cannibals, would have unquestionably condemned the practice. Too little pigment in a dangerous world. Poor albinos!

Dave M

The big flaw (and contradiction) of the B.N.P. is the anti semitic element lurking within. Really it makes no sense at all to take a swipe at Israel when Israel happens to be a minority democracy in a majority muslim landscape (the Middle East). I think there are a lot of BNP members who actually view themselves as Judeo Christian so the anti Israel element is to be found more at the core and not the grass roots. We do need a Party that's willing to make a balanced stand against all out multiculturalism as a so-called basis for building a prosperous, healthy society. You can see such parties evolving in Holland or Denmark and the main concern of these parties is radical Islam getting a foothold within Europe and destabilising democracies. Most of the Party leadership in those contries is also liberal and educated. The downfall of the BNP is it still does appear thuggish. However, if the mainstream political parties still refuse to even question multiculturalism as a supposedly foolproof ideology that will one day lead us to utopia, people will continue to turn to the BNP out of desperation. By the way, those countries that haven't taken the path of multiculturalism such as China, Russia e.t.c. are proof you can build a strong economy without putting diversity before national identity.

phil

Edwin Greenwood -I posted a poem by Pastor Neimoller that should have answered your question ,but as you were polite enough to address my remarks I will refer you back to it -what I find continually surprising here is that I think most posters only read their own and rarely address other peoples heartfelt out pouring's :)

The one known as the fragrant one even denies having read a persons posts and then actually replies ! well I suppose its better than ignoring each other , she,s rather strange anyhow ,and dont worry she never reads my stuff so she wont feel hurt .(lol)-

o.u.

Edwin Greenwood: "Let's leave aside Israel's predictable frantic hyperbole about people bashing other people up because of the colour of their skin."

It's not hyperbole, it's an accurate description of a legacy of the BNP.

For a look at the BNP's racism, anti-semitism, criminality, violent extremism, anti-democratic policies and links to other extremist organisations, I recommend again this resource at the Stop the BNP website:
http://www.stopthebnp.org.uk/uncovered/uncovered.htm

o.u.

Nick Kaplan: "Communists may not hold the exact same odious views as the BNP but their views are equally odious if different and in practice they have been even more dangerous."

Nick, England directly fought a world war against the Nazi regime (the ideological forebear of the NF and the BNP), and suffered enormous losses as a consequence. This counts for something.

The BNP are the British legion of the Nazi party, at heart.

Putting themselves forward now as the guardians of Western enlightenment values is a shameless, cynical and sick act.

As many have said, including Ms. Philips, there is real anger in the UK about jihadist effrontery. Most immigrants to the UK, at least historically, admired the UK and came here to build a better life for themselves through lawful hard work. As an immigrant myself, I feel rage and horror at those who come to England and then denigrate and wish to destroy the culture and institutions that nourish them.

England is one of the most tolerant and caring cultures in the history of the planet. The BNP played no part in this evolution, except as an unholy force to be confronted and defeated, just as jihadism needs to be defeated now.

As someone who is grateful for the life and opportunities that England has provided me and my family, I feel it is my duty to do what I can to protect England against the base urges of the BNP (which represent the very worst of nationalism), as well as against the hateful jihadist ideology that wishes to destroy the UK's superior culture (by the metric of freedom of though, speech and action, and judicial fairness).

Ian Parker

Nick Kaplan, yes, I found that lady very scary. Is she the best advocate they could put forward? If so, that would go a long way to explaining the demise of education in this country.

I must say, it's a few decades since I was at school but I cannot remember a single teacher ever trying to brainwash me with a particular political or ideological stance. One might therefore ask why a maths teacher, who happens to support the BNP, should be excluded from teaching maths.

With regards to the actual broadcast, I thought the whole thing was pretty inept and, at time, cringeworthy. On the issue of the police force, fo example, Barnes stated quite clearly, several times, that the BNP would expect the police to operate totally without fear or favour. This, to the questioner, seemed to mean that they could act with racial bias. Was there some dialogue in a frequency which I couldn't hear linking the two?

Lee Laurie

It seems that Liverpool police have dropped all charges against the BNP members who were distributing leaflets.
Mind you they still have their DNA and fingerprints on file.
I wonder if Mr.Green had to give the police his when he was arrested.
This is the sort of thing that people in Britain should be worried about....not Neanderthals or whoever.

Nick Kaplan

O.U; I, coming from an immigrant family as well (admittedly a good few generations ago), feel exactly the same way. British values of Liberty, individual rights and tolerance are far superior to most other political values, particularly the narrow and racist nationalism of the BNP. I agree that we should fight against their ideology but we should do so with convincing arguments and the power of British ideals, not by gagging them by stopping them from speaking or participating in our democracy or its institutions, which would be a distinctly un-British thing to do. Likewise we should fight the good fight against the communists whose beliefs are equally incompatible with British values, whether we went to war with them in the past or not.

Conservative Cabbie

Phil

"Cabbie forward an address and I will send you one"

Thankyou for your kindness but can I have a Sarah Palin calender instead :-)

I was particularly taken by "his cofident smile and kind eyes are an inspiration to us all". Just lovely!!!

Huw Thornton

@ Robert

"The ethos imbued in of many of your articles is in fact in agreement with the cause of the anger so evident in Mr Barnes."

As far as I can see, nobody has commented on this.

I must say that I do not agree with some of Melanie's writings. But never would I dream of insulting her by associating her with Lee Barnes and the evil little coterie of people that he associates with.

Huw Thornton

@ Edwin Greenwood

"So why do we all go into paroxysms of alarm about a party which represents the interests of White people?"

I bet the BNP will represent the interests of white people just great. The Nazis achieved great things for the German people - within twelve years, German society had been destroyed and millions of Germans were dead.

"When you prick us, do we not also bleed?"

Ah yes, the same old story - vermin feasting on victim culture. An obnoxious political tendency with a new pathetic spin.

Huw Thornton

Thanks o.u., a good comment.

Frank P

Cons Cabbie

Thanks mate, I've ordered a gross to take to my next party at my favourite Greek Restaurant; we always do the Zorba dance on the breakages afterwards. A little Taki, perhaps, particularly if there are any West Ham fans attending who insist on singing their anthem?
Happy Christmas!

My return present is this:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/shadow_world_resurgent_russia.html

Read it carefully; it's a vindication of 5 years of Melanie's blog and fills in all the dotted lines; someone else gets it! I hope the book is a best seller.

Joe

Hi Melanie

I am an avid reader of your blog and articles and generally agree with your point of view but on this occassion like several others I do not agree that your version of the debate was really relective of what I heard on i-player.

Mr Barnes came accross as "excitable" but given the introduction to the programme maybe it was understandable that he felt he needed to fight his corner. On balance I agreed with Mr Portillo that Mr Barnes gave a competent performance.

Let us analyze Mr Barnes stated position:

(i) People condem the BNP and ascribe policies to it which do not reflect it's actual stated position - they should read it's polices. I think the idiot from the teacher's union more than demonstrated the validity of his concern that there is a knee-jerk condemnation based on perceptions of what the BNP stands for rather than what they actually put forward.

(2) Policemen should discharge their reponsibilities without fear or favour and irrespective of race and creed. If they don't they should be kicked out.

(3) Public servents should do the jobs they are employed to do not act as agents of PC based social engineering.

(4) It is entirely reasonable for the majority indigenous population to have their views and interests represented.

I don't think anyone can reasonably disagree with these views.

In fact I suspect that many leading members of the BNP do hold deeply unpleasant views but then so do the leading lights in other organisations (SWP, MCB, etc., etc.) so you can't demonise one group without applying the same rule to others who are comparable.

Joe

phil

Joe dont be deluded by fancy words .this is where hitler started and once in power there was no way back -the three main parties can achieve all we need and more -we need to push them harder because in the end they need our votes and must reflect our views .

phil

O.U timely words and a refection of my own thoughts as a granchild of immigrants .We know how lucky we are to have lived in a great nation and we will remain in the forefront of those who will defend its values .

Joe Strummer

As someone of Ulster Protestant descent, the horrific BNP remind me so much of Sinn Fein /IRA who ironically were backed 100 % by the Left in the UK throughout The Troubles in Northern Ireland

Sinn Fein would picket Protestant owned small shops, taking photographs of customers entering to intimidate them, resulting in lack of business, then closedown. Protestant social clubs or meeting places like Orange Halls or church halls would go up in flames due to repaeated arson attacks. Then the Ulster Protestants would be limited by the police to where and when they could publicly express their religious or cultural identity due to Sinn Fein / IRA threatening violence if any parade or procession came near to one of " their areas", whatever that means.

Don't think for a second that the pernicious BNP haven't learned from the vicious race haters of Sinn Fein / IRA against the British community in Ireland and won't think of using similar tactics here in the UK against the ethnic minorities.

hadrian

I have absolutely no time whatsoever for fanatical, self-righteous, politically messianic parties like the BNP who imbue the State with god-like powers it doesn't possess but will still cause massive clamity if given the chance to do so. Should extremists be automatically debarred from the democratic process or threatened with dismissal? Only if they EXPLICITLY advocate violence towards others..though even then one must be aware that could snuff out those advocating capital punishment. However I think we can all tell the difference between a thug who will personally resort to callous violence and those who feel the state has to execute for the highest crime.
In any case in the end legislation can only go so far in smothering these vile ideologies. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance- every society that neglects this learns its lesson the hard way. W need to be persuading, informing, arguing our ground, winning others over. And the message here is national socialism would ruin all that's been best in British culture, not save it!! The culture of the 'political hardman' destroys, it NEVER saves.

phil

Conservative Cabbie :)

Our dialogue shows how our values allow us to discuss peacefully issues that divide us ,without rancour ,and with the possibility of influencing one another -that is the democracy that I believe in .

Herbert Thornton

Several weeks ago somebody complained that postings to Melanie's blog were being censored in order to lessen the amount of dissent that was published.

I am disappointed to see that the practice has been resumed.

It makes the claim in Phil's November 30th 2008 3:41pm posting about "peaceful discussion ..... with the possibility of influencing one another..." rather hollow.

Moreover, his reference to the discussions being "without rancour" is so laughably the opposite of the truth - which is that the language of rancour has been employed virtually entirely on his side of the discussion - that the only word that comes to mind to adequately describe his claim is Chutzpah.

Huw Thornton

@ Herbert Thornton

"Moreover, his reference to the discussions being "without rancour" is so laughably the opposite of the truth - which is that the language of rancour has been employed virtually entirely on his side of the discussion - that the only word that comes to mind to adequately describe his claim is Chutzpah."

This might be fair comment about the discussion about the BNP, but it is certainly not fair about phil.

One of the things which I admire about phil is that he engages very constructively with BNP supporters in order to show them another point of view in a way which they can accept. All credit to him, and in a polarised discussion, he keeps a real dialogue going.

Herbert Thornton

@ Huw Thornton,

My comment was indeed aimed at the general discussion rather than at Phil personally.

However, since you say that I am not being fair, I have just checked his posts in this thread - and I am not as ready as are you to exculpate him. I say this because although several of his posts are courteous, others have included these words and expressions, directed either at Lee Barnes or at BNP members in general - oaf, this man is rubbish, idiots, demented, and aggressive ignorance. That is not rational discussion but personal abuse. Does it not evince rancour?

Palookaville

Was he too working class for you Melanie? Or was it that he responded to questions with pre preapred answers, something that mainstream politicians do on rotine basis. Are they 'thugs' as well?

Huw Thornton

@ Herbert Thornton

A dialogue of the H Thorntons! I don't know what it is that the world has lacked for so long, but I am not sure that this is it.

I think that this has to be the most rancorous boards around, and this seeps through to most participants in the end.

I must say that I cannot recall rancorousness on your part, however.

It just struck me that, almost uniquely amongst the anti-BNP tendency on this board, phil is a person who will try to engage in dialogue about the issues with BNP supporters who post here. If you had wanted to pick an individual and thus mentioned almost anyone else - me included - you would have hit your target better.

I accept that you were making a general point, which I think was absolutely valid in the context of this board discussion.

phil

Huw and Herbert thank you for bringing me a little fame :)and especially for Huw,s POSITIVE REMARKS -I have all along posted my thoughts politely to BNP members who have written here in the same manner ,usually those frustrated by what they perceive as a lack of attention by the three main parties .I have indeed tried to persuade them to push those parties to address their views ,and yes I have written scathing remarks to those I perceive as racist thugs and I MAKE NO APOLOGY FOR THAT

.I do understand many decent people have given up trying to have their views heard but I also have said it will do them no good allying themselves to a party seen as racist ,and being involved with the kind of thick necked ,shaved headed morons who stand next to mr griffin whenever he is in public -I do not see those types looking after the other leaders .

Joe

I see my responses to Phil and Joe Strummer have not appeared - moderated out?

David Cooke

Response to Joe: Probably, just like mine were moderated out a few days ago.

Lapsed liberals like myself who have finally realised the downside of "cultural enrichment" obviously have no place here.

It seems the only people allowed to post on this page are those who have never had the misfortune to have been forced to live cheek by jowl with the consequences of their own crackpot ideology.

Dream on! The clock is ticking!

Herbert Thornton

Joe and David - My reply to Phil's
December 1st, 2008 11:58am posting has not appeared either.

Herbert Thornton

Maybe there are some key words that automatically screen out some postings? With that possibility in mind, here's a truncated version of my reply to Phil -

What mystifies me most is how people who are so acutely aware of the increasing proliferation and success of the murderous, low-level, world wide jihad being waged against civilisation - and who are in the first ranks of those who are sought out as victims - can yet at the same time be convinced that the party we are discussing is equally evil.

Should a drowning man, on seeing a lifesaver coming to his rescue, call out - "Go away! Some of your friends are thick necked, shaven headed, morons. I'd rather drown than be rescued by the likes of you."? It doesn't seem, to me, to be rational.

Joe

Thanks David and Herbert

Hmm .... let me try and rephrase the response to see if it gets through.

Joe Strummer:

Joe what you are decribing sounds much more like the tactics adopted by the "left" (SWP, ALF, UAF, cliques within certain trade unions, etc., etc.) than anything the BNP do.

Phil:

Just for the record I am not a BNP member or a sympathiser. Whilst I might qualify as a member of the indigenous population as defined by BNP I am actually not a British citizen nor do I hold a British passport and I come from a cultural background where "Brits" are historically seen as the enemy.

I do not have an axe to grind other than a belief that all issues should be fairly examined on the basis of the facts as they are not as you would wish them to be to suit your own agenda/world view (which I guess damms me in PC terms).

For this reason I get irritated at the knee jerk demonisation of the BNP - there are other entities out there which are far more of a threat to our way of life than the BNP! If we are going to attack the BNP let us do so on the basis of facts not perceptions - their published policies and public statements actually do not accord with that regularly portrayed by the media and the righteous "left". If we are saying their public statements do not reflect the real sentiment of their leadership (and rank and file?) let's prove that rather than just making them sympathy figures by applying wholly different judgemental standards to the BNP to those applied to other groups.

The policies on immigration published by BNP do not, by and large, differ from what many other acceptable groups and individuals are now saying: we cannot as a society cope with unrestrained mass immigration on the scale of the last 10 years and we need to insist on the subscription by residents in this country to the "norms" of British society. This is not something black, asian or other non indigenous friends and acquaintances have anything other than support for.

The question of whether all members or leaders of the BNP suscribe to their published policy or have different views is something on which I will not comment here.

Increasingly my liberal, left inclined friends seem to be driven by the multiculti, PC, "1984" world of Gordo they live in to comment they are thinking of voting for the BNP.

I think it is a sad indictment of the major political parties that ordinary decent people in this country feel they have no other political party to to reflect their concerns.

I also suspect that if the BNP genuinely altered their policy, and accepted people who regardless of their ethnic origins suscribed to "British" values, in the current climate they'd sweep the board.

Joe

phil

Herbert Thornton
Herbert I have said all along that people who are educated and sensitive as you always seem to be, do not need to be associated with the types that you mention .you could work hard within the auspices of the main parties to achieve your hopes -why give up and stand side by side with people who are obviously despised by the vast majority of our nation ?.

Some of your objectives are not opposed in many instances ,but they are submerged due to the disgust many feel at the likes of those described -You are not one of them so why stand with them and waste your efforts ?
SURELY YOU CANNOT THINK THE AVERAGE MAN IN THE STREET ADMIRES NICK GRIFFIN OR OUR FRIEND MR BARNES .so they keep you in the wilderness .you obviously have much to offer and three parties to choose from -why not try?
btw -by this time this is probably just a two way conversation and I think I am one of the few who is trying to bring you in from the cold .please at least consider what I have said -it is with goodwill .

Herbert Thornton

Phil,

My problem is that I see absolutely no prospect that working within the auspices of the main parties will do anything at all towards lifting Britain out of the frightening state that it has been dragged into. Nor am I persuaded that the physical appearance of people you see associated with Mr Griffin should reasonably be a factor in assessing the nature of his political party.

I realise you feel strongly about your position, but I question whether you are really touch with the average man in the street. I no longer live in England & I'm in no position to conduct any sort of opinion poll, but I do remain in touch with old friends, and some confide in me that they - and more and more of their friends - do intend to vote for the BNP.

I take your point about this being a two-way conversation. I respond that I sense entirely good intentions in your postings, and that while the chances of my persuading you even slightly towards my viewpoint may not be good, I hope I shall be allowed to persist.

o.u.

Nick Kaplan, apologies for this late reply: I agree that it's probably healthier to not outlaw groups like the BNP, as 1) We're a free country, and we demonstrate that freedom by tolerating such groups, and not voting for them based upon our own evaluations, and 2) It's a drawn line that may be moved in the future to further restrict freedom.

Regarding the dangers of communism, I'm in complete agreement with you.

Huw & phil, thank you for your kind words.

Herbert Thornton:
It's not the physical appearance of Nick Griffin and his entourage that is an issue, but more his appearances at white supremacist gatherings alongside people like David Duke (former leader of the KKK), and alongside other neo-nazi groups like the Aryan Nation and Stormfront. And the publication of his racist and antisemitic fantasies. Etc.

Joe:
"The policies on immigration published by BNP do not, by and large, differ from what many other acceptable groups and individuals are now saying [...] This is not something black, asian or other non indigenous friends and acquaintances have anything other than support for."

Joe, the BNP's policies on immigration can be summarised as:
- Deport all immigrants in jail
- Deport all illegal immigrants
- Halt all further immigration, except for those who are white and will sufficiently benefit the economy
- Introduce a scheme of voluntary repatriation for immigrants already here

Perhaps this may appear appealing. It is also identical to the Nazis' policy on immigration.

phil

HERBERT SEE YOU ON THE HUSYINGS :)

phil

HERBERT SEE YOU ON THE HUSTINGS:)

Herbert Thornton

o.u. -

You seem, to me, to be both making rather strange allegations, and to be using the word " Nazi" quite unfairly.

In particular, after saying that BNP policy includes "a scheme of voluntary repatriation for immigrants already here" (and acknowledging that it has an appealing character) you then say that it is "also identical to the Nazis' policy on immigration."

The official BNP policy on immigration includes this -

"...immigrants who are legally here will be afforded the opportunity to return to their lands of ethnic origin assisted by a generous financial incentives both for individuals and for the countries in question."

In what way is that policy - which includes the offering of generous financial incentives - "almost identical" to Nazi policies on immigration?

o.u.

Herbert Thornton, I'm not really an expert on the BNP's policies - not something I was hoping to have to keep up with. I don't think they are that dissimilar to policies the Nazi party introduced. If you can enlighten me as to the differences between them, I'd appreciate it. I will have a closer look myself.

Giving immigrants generous financial incentives to leave may not be very realistic - apparently this has been floated before and had some popularity until the costs were calculated. Perhaps we as a nation can afford more these days, or be willing to pay more.

Concerning my use of the term neo-Nazi, I don't think it's in any way controversial to use the term to describe David Duke, Stormfront or the BNP .
A group like Stormfront will proudly admit it, as did the BNP under John Tyndall. Under Nick Griffin, I agree, they have tried desparately present a calm and normal front. (As Griffin told Tyndall upon taking over, Tyndall's liking for dressing in Nazi uniform created a PR problem for the BNP). I'm not that convinced that any significant ideological improvement or spiritual growth has taken place, though.

The meetings of the various neo-nazi groups and leaders have been documented by participants and reporters.

Herbert Thornton

Once again, I see that a reply from me (this time to o.u.'s of December 4th, 2008 1:04am) has not appeared.

Herbert Thornton

o.u.

Since my detailed reply to your December 4th, 2008 1:04am did not appear, I am trying again to respond to your request.
Your most important question invited me to describe for you the differences between Nazi policies and BNP policies.

Since it appears that my comprehensive reply was unacceptable, perhaps I shall be allowed to at least offer you this link - http://bnp.org.uk/about-us/policies/ - so that you can compare its proposals with the horrors perpetrated by the Nazis before and during in World War 2.

o.u.

Herbert Thornton,
I've had a look at that BNP page, and I believe I did accurately summarise the BNP's stated policy on immigration, except for missing the part about putting a stop to all immigration.

The BNP's policy of only-white membership of the party will ensure that non-whites will not be represented should the party come to power. They will become second-class citizens. I agree that this is different to the Nazi's policy of allowing citizenship only to whites - perhaps the BNP are just going one step at a time?

If I may quote the leader of the BNP, Nick Griffin, on Hitler, you'll notice that his view seems to be less condemnatory than yours:
"Yes, Adolf went a bit too far. His legacy is the biggest problem that the British nationalist movement has to deal with. It just creates a bad image."

And on the issue of immigration and race, Griffin has been more forthcoming than the BNP's PR-friendly manifesto, and is distinctly in step with Nazi policy:
"Without the White race, nothing matters. [Other right-wing parties] believe that the answer to the race question is integration and a futile attempt to create 'Black Britons', while we affirm that non-Whites have no place here at all and will not rest until every last one has left our land."

Furthermore, he was convicted for publication and dissemination of antisemitic works based on forgeries like the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' and other confessed inspirations like Hitler's Mein Kampf.

So really quite Nazi-like?

I agree that the BNP haven't put forward a policy of killing Jews and other non-whites deemed undesirable (neither did the Nazi party until they'd been some time in power).

I'll say it again : the BNP founder Tyndall venerated Hitler, sordid genocidal history and all. The current leader Griffin is also a fan.

You haven't actually addressed this strong historical, empathetic and inspirational connection between the Nazi party and the BNP - would you care to do so?

Huw Thornton

Hi Herbert Thornton -

Thanks for the information which you've given on this thread.

It seems to me that the BNP would like to speak for three groups in particular: those who think that Britain is a worse place than it was fifty years ago, those (especially the white working class) who suffer real disadvantage in our current society, and those who feel that Britain is under threat from outside attack.

All these three are reasonable causes in themselves, and perhaps not properly recognised - not least by the government (of whatever party). All these things should be debated, and indeed are, this blog being one opportunity to do so.

The trouble is that the BNP is the last organisation to help any of these causes - because of its historical baggage, and because in my view it's unacceptable as a party now. I always get the impression about the BNP that its true aims are very different from these three causes.

Having a "whites only" membership policy is a symbol of all that is unacceptable. It may be that individual policies of the BNP are fine, and there is no secret agenda to do anything like the German Nazis. But in its current form, it can only be a party of the irrelevant fringe - not because of the unimportance of the causes, but because of the BNP itself.

I'm with o. u. on this one, but I think that this is a good discussion - speaking personally for me, there's always new things for me to learn!

Herbert Thornton

o.u. and Huw -

I have attempted, twice, to respond to you postings on 5th December.

Both appear to have been rejected.

Huw Thornton

Thanks, Herbert, do keep trying - I am looking forward to receiving your comments.

Sometimes posts of mine don't get published. There's no rhyme or reason as far as I can see. It seems random, and it may be for technical reasons.

It may be better to make a separate file of your answers and copy and paste them to save you always starting a message from the beginning.

Good luck, anyway!

Herbert Thornton

Huw - I followed your advice - but yet again to no effect.

This, I think, is my fourth attempt to get even a hint of the gist of my thoughts across. It is that there is a very dangerous elephant in the room. And the elephant is the presence, in Britain, of an alien religion.

Some perceptive and outspoken journalists write about the grave danger the elephant poses to civilisation, but to every one of the mainstream parties the elephant is either invisible or of little consequence. Some of the more naive imagine that it can be persuaded, by means of Political Correctness, to undergo some kind of beneficent metamorphosis and become a harmless mouse.

Yet rational discussion of the one and only party that has a policy to actually remove the elephant from the room is almost impossible.

Huw Thornton

Hi Herbert -

Thanks for your message, and I'm glad that you've posted the gist of what you wanted to say.

I would certainly agree about a dangerous ideology, islamism, and I think that it has taken all establishment parties by surprise. I would lay the emphasis myself on an ideology rather than on a religion, as such.

I would certainly agree also that we are in danger in this country of losing much of our valuable traditions.

It seems to me however that these developments have been a result of public indifference. It's possible to blame politicians in each of the three major parties, but they seem to be following public opinion rather than creating it.

I am not saying this to try to make out that there isn't really a problem, quite the contrary - the problem is that there does not seem to be any real public acknowledgement that our society is under threat.

If I am right about this, a small party outside the political establishment cannot do much about it - especially a small party with a lot of historical baggage.

I can see the force of an opposing position, but in my view it is better to try to argue the case in the three major parties, and try to appeal to what remains of our own society's traditions.

Herbert Thornton

Huw -

You've put you finger on the other problem. For my part I've lost all faith in arguing the case in the three main parties.

The situation reminds me of the days following Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union. Some people asked Churchill how he could possibly ally Britain with the likes of Stalin.

Winston's responded something like this -

"If Hitler had invaded Hell, then when I next spoke in the House of Commons, I would at least manage to make a favourable reference to the Devil."

In other words, when your survival is at stake, it is wise to grasp who is your real enemy.

Huw Thornton

Many thanks for your further reply, Herbert, and I'm glad that we've found out that we agree to some extent about what the important issues are, even if we differ on how they might be dealt with! Now I'll be able to read your postings on other threads with a more educated eye.

Varvara

Sorry. You don't have to cook fancy or complicated masterpieces - just good food from fresh ingredients.
I am from Pakistan and learning to speak English, give true I wrote the following sentence: "Blood pressure top catalog anti allergic asthma click to enlarge.Term for drugs used to treat allergic reactions as well as those drugs that"

Best regards :P, Raja.