. Tory Party Councillor (Wickbar/Bristol) Roger Talboys - Convicted and jailed for 6 years for multiple sex attacks on children.

. Tory Party Vice-Chairman of Welsh Conservatives, Andrew Baker - Received a banning order for stalking women.

. Tory Party MP (Billericay) Harvey Proctor - Stood trial for sex offences of a sado-masochistic nature against teenage boys, and was forced to resign.

. Tory Party Councillor ( Stratford-upon-Avon ) Christopher Pilkington - Convicted of downloading hardcore child **** on his PC. Placed on sex offenders register and forced to resign.

. Tory Party councillor ( Coventry ), Peter Stidworthy - Charged with indecent assault of a 15-year old boy.

. Tory Party Mayor ( North Tyneside ), Chris Morgan - Forced to resign after being arrested twice in 2 weeks, for indecent assault on a 15-year old girl, and for suspicion of downloading child ****.

. Tory Party MEP, Tom Spencer - Caught smuggling drugs and **** through customs.

. Tory Party councillor and former Mayor (Wrexham), Michael Morris - Convicted and put on probation for 2 years, for the indecent assault of another man, which was captured on CCTV.

. Tory Party Liaison Manager on the London Assembly, Douglas Campbell, who’s job includes running the Tory GLA website - Arrested for allegedly downloading child ****. He is currently suspended while the Police investigation continues.

VIOLENCE

. Tory Party MP (Henley), Boris Johnson - Caught on tape plotting to have a man beaten up by a hired thug. The man was a journalist who had written an unsympathetic piece about Johnson’s close friend - Convicted fraudster, Darius Guppy.

. Tory Party Councillor (Folkestone - in Leader, Michael Howard’s constituency), Robert Richdale - 41 year history of crime, involving 30 convictions and 5 prison sentences. Richdales enormous criminal record, which covers 10 pages of A4 paper, includes convictions for assault, theft, causing death by dangerous driving, forgery, drugs offences, possession of an offensive weapon, and sex attacks against underage schoolgirls. The Tory Party election campaign literature described Richdale as “a family man” who had a “compassionate personality”

CORRUPTION

. Tory Party councillor (Dudley), Abdul Quadus, who was also chairman of the Dudley Police Committee and a Tory Party spokesman on crime - Convicted and jailed for 6 months for passport fraud and assisting illegal immigration from his native country - Pakistan.

. Former Tory Party Cabinet Minister, Jonathan Aitken - Convicted and jailed for Perjury and Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice.

. Former Tory Leader of Westminster Council, Dame Shirley Porter - Fled to Israel to evade justice after indulging in fraud, corruption and gerrymandering on a massive scale, and stealing millions of pounds from local taxpayers.

. Tory Party Councillor ( Margate ), Colin Kiddell - Forced to resign after Police investigation into his alleged theft and embezzlement of funds from the local `Dreamland` Amusement Park.

. Former Tory Party Chairman and London Mayoral Candidate, Jeffrey Archer - Convicted and jailed for Perjury and Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice.

Labour Party Criminals

SEX:

. Labour Councillor (Newton Aycliffe) Martin Locklyn - Convicted and jailed for 15 years for sexually abusing 3 14-year-old boys.

. Labour Councillor (North Lincolnshire) David Spooner - Convicted and jailed for 1 year for masturbating in front of 2 young boys.

. Labour Mayor (Westhoughton/Lancashire) Nicholas Green - Convicted and jailed for 10 years for 3 rapes and 13 counts of indecent assault against little girls between the age of 6 and 10. He raped one woman on her wedding day.

. Labour Mayor (Todmorden) John Winstanley - Convicted and jailed for rape and threats to kill. After raping and threatening to kill his terrified victim, Winstanley then ordered the woman to go on all fours before urinating on her.

. Prominent Labour Party activist Mark Tann (who has met Tony & Cherie at Party functions) recently got a 15-year sentence for raping a 4-year old girl on 2 separate occasions.

. Labour’s current Parliamentary Candidate (Reading East) Tony Page - Has 2 Convictions for Acts of Gross Indecency` in public toilets.

. Labour Mayor (Burnley) Peter Swainston - Convicted of sex offences in public toilet.

. Entire Labour Party conspired to conceal the activities of Labour Party activist and serial child-molester Mark Trotter, who died from AIDS before he could be convicted.

. Labour Councillor (North Yorkshire) Raymond Coats - Court appearance for indecently assaulting a woman.

. Labour MP (Rhonda Valley) Chris Bryant poses in his pants on the Internet to advertise himself for casual gay sex encounters. Describes himself as “**** as buggery” and says, “I’d love a good long ****”.

. Labour Councillor (Manchester), George Harding - Charged with indecent assault on a girl of 12.

. Labour MP Ron Davies was mugged by a Rasta on Clapham Common while cruising for gay sex. He was photographed again by the media recently, engaged in some `man-on-man` action in a field off a motorway. “I was only looking for badgers” he said.

. Labour Councillor (Durham), Derrick Payne - Arrested by Police following a sex attack.

. Labour MP, Joe Ashton - Caught up in a Police raid while frequenting a brothel. Tried to lie his way out of the scandal.

. Labour Councillor (Shropshire), Derek Woodvine - Arrested by Police in anti-**** operation.

. Labour Councillor (Basildon), Tony Wright - Forced to resign after being caught using his council computer to download ****.

. Labour MP (Sheffield), Clive Betts - Suspended from Parliament for 7 days after being caught forging immigration papers to extend the stay of his Brazilian rent-boy gay lover.

. According to media reports, the names of 2 former Labour Cabinet Ministers said to be `Household names` appear on the `Operation Ore ` list of subscribers to hard-core child ****. The same FBI investigation, which led to the arrest of rock star Pete Townshend. So who are they Mr Blair?

VIOLENCE

. Labour Councillor (Kirkby, Merseyside) Charlie Preston - Convicted and jailed for 5 years in 1982 for assault and burglary. Preston broke into the home of a 64 year old man, and beat him up in his bed as he slept before robbing the house. The judge described the case as “As bad a matter of burglary as I can remember” Preston also holds the position on the Council of… `Deputy Cabinet Member for Youth, Citizenship, and Community Safety`.

. Labour Councillor ( Wales ) Denis Jones - Convicted and jailed for unlawful wounding after attacking a neighbour with a sledgehammer.

. Labour Councillor ( Wales ) Ken Brookman - Bit off a mans ear in a dispute over a seat on a train!

. Labour Councillor and former Mayor (Stockton), Keith Dobinson - Investigated by Police for alleged assault on an OAP, which left the old man of 79, hospitalised.

. Labour MP, Tommy Graham - Expelled from Party for his part in driving a person to suicide.

. Labour Councillors (Ilfracombe), Brian Cotton and Tony Cooper - Investigated by Police following serious allegations of Harassment.

CORRUPTION

. Labour Councillor (Sandwell) Mohamed Niwaz convicted of illegally obtaining £20,000 in Housing Grants.

. Labour Councillors in Doncaster - 23 Convicted and 2 jailed for massive fraud, corruption and theft of public funds. Investigation also uncovered massive Labour Party corruption in neighbouring Rotherham .

. Labour Party Councillor ( Blackburn ), Mohammed Hussein - arrested together with 6 Labour activists on suspicion of Election rigging.

. Labour MP Mohammed Sawar ( Britain ’s first Asian MP - Glasgow) was the subject of a major News of the World investigation a few years ago into bribery and corruption. Despite this, the massive Asian population in his constituency keeps him safely in his seat.

. Labour MP (Leicester) and former Cabinet Minister, Keith Vaz - Investigated for fraud and corruption before quietly leaving his Europe Minister post with `health problems`. According to his former Secretary, Vaz does absolutely nothing in his constituency other than help local Pakistanis with their Immigration cases (which also helps to explain the `whites a minority` status of Leicester and the safe Labour seat of Mr Vaz)

. Labour Party Euro MP, David Martin is currently being investigated for an alleged expenses fraud involving `hundreds of thousands of pounds`.

. Labour Councillor (Glamorgan), Shaun Stringer - Forced to resign following Police investigation into financial corruption.

OTHER

. Tony Blair recently appointed his close friend/crony and colleague of his wife - Ken Macdonald as the new Director of Public Prosecutions, despite the fact he has a drugs conviction.

. William Straw - Son of Labour Foreign Secretary, and former Home Secretary - Jack Straw, was cautioned by Police for drug dealing, amid a frantic Government attempt to cover up the matter and gag the media as to his identity. Jack Straw also has a brother who was convicted of a sex attack on a schoolgirl. Lovely family!

. Homosexual mass murderer; Dennis Nielsen, who strangled and dismembered 16 young men in the 1980`s, was also a highly active member of Labour fringe groups such as the Anti-Nazi League, and the SWP. That’s when he wasn’t busy boiling peoples heads in a pot, or masturbating over the corpses of his victims.

Liberal Democrat Criminals

SEX

. Lib-Dem Council candidate (Tower Hamlets), Justin Sillman - Convicted and jailed for 2 years for sexual abuse of young boys.

. Lib-Dem Councillor and Mayoral Candidate ( Sheffield ), Francis Butler- Prosecuted for indecent assault of a young boy.

. Lib-Dem Councillor ( Stockport ) Neil Derbyshire - Sexually assaulted a 16-year old boy in a public toilet. He was caught with a plastic bag containing lubricant, plastic surgical gloves, a condom, and underpants.

. Lib-Dem Councillor ( Preston ), Bill Chadwick - Charged with: Making an indecent photograph of a child, Incitement to rape, Incitement to murder, Incitement to kidnap, and Incitement to torture. Chadwick’s gay lover - Alan Valentine, is also a Lib-Dem councillor.

VIOLENCE

. Lib-Dem councillor (North Norfolk), Catherine Wilkins - Also a nurse until she was struck off the nursing register after being found guilty of mistreating patients and abusive behaviour.

. Lib-Dem Parliamentary candidate ( Burnley ), Paul Wright - Charged with drunken assault on his `lodger`. Wright sobbed like a baby during the court case, and the case is to be re-listed and heard again after the jury failed to reach a verdict.

. Lib-Dem Councillor ( Sheffield ) Trevor Morgan - Convicted and jailed for 9 months for unlawful wounding/dangerous driving. After attacking an elderly woman’s Golden retriever dog by throwing pepper in its face, he then seriously injured the dog’s owner - 57-year old Barbara Johnson, with his car as she tried to stop him escaping.

CORRUPTION

. Lib-Dem Councillor (Peterborough), Michael Jackson - Prosecuted for 21 counts of Theft and False Accounting.

. 3 Lib-Dem Councillors convicted and jailed for Election Fraud in Hackney in 2001

. 12 Lib-Dem officials convicted of Election Fraud in Oldham in 2001.

. Julie Roberts - Convicted of 9 counts of benefit fraud in 2003. 2 weeks after the court case, she was elected as a Lib-Dem councillor in Leicester !

. Lib-Dem councillor (Portsmouth), Ray Race - Convicted and jailed for 4 months for election rigging, along with Lib-Dem colleague Michael Hayward. Race was arrested again in July 2003 for threatening a witness who helped to convict him.

. Lib-Dem councillor (Lambeth), Gabriel Fernandez - Forced to resign after being investigated for benefit fraud.

OTHER

. Former Liberal leader Jeremy Thorpe - Stood trail for conspiring to have his blackmailing gay lover murdered.

but just as an addenda response to Jason:
Media outlets have a “right” (a social construction) to report, however they choose what & how to report based on their agenda, which is in turn derived from their values, which in turn are derived from their origins (parents): it’s one group imposing it’s value system upon another group.

If you are a member of the group imposing the value system, then it’s logical to resist.
Groupism is a fundamental survival strategy for life from the ost basic to the most complex: us (as far as we know).
It’s evolutionary and behavioural: it’s a choice between survival and non-survival. It’s not a sub-group of “type of survival” within the class called “survival”.

With that in mind, it is a logical response to question selective reports made by journalists who ask leading questions (complex question logical fallacy) to educe “straw-man”-friendly responses from inarticulate subjects.
Democracy is no good unless the participants are educated: armed with accurate information; and possessing a basic grasp of logical reasoning.

I’m not blaming the ills of society on “gays”; I’m blaming the cult of individuality, of which “gayism” is a symptom.
Values that are pumped into our society from America, are going to turn us into America… it’s already starting to happen with American-English creeping in, and the black-on-black violent urban gang culture; made worse by admitting immigrants willy-nilly from messed-up parts of the developing-world.

“the absurdity of declaring the decline of the family is responsible for societal ills,”
I mean what planet are you on? How obvious does it have to be?!
Read the constant stream of reports by people who study this stuff!

The biological family is not a social construction; though types of families are. Same-sex “family” is a social construction as it serves no biological purpose, and in evolutionary terms is a choice of non-survival, which in the context of life having the sole objective of survival, is illogical.

On that basis, it is a disassociation from reality; less so than transexualisty, who actually deny the physical reality of their body. It is cruel and unethical to pander to this by allowing them to undergo cosmetic surgery that reinforces the delusion.
Similarly, it is also cruel and unethical to pander to the same-sex family idea by bestowing all the trappings of a procreational family, to reinforce the delusion, and disassociation from reality.

The family unit forming into ethnic-communities is part of the evolutionary-derived behaviour of groupism.

You are also part of a group (one that displays cult-like behaviour on a macro-scale) and you are trying to enforce your group’s values onto another group. You are expecting them to abandon logical and evolutionary-derived behaviours and accept values that are illogical and counter-evolutionary.
Is it any wonder that people resist, even if they can’t articulate why?

People aren’t going to vote for “hate”; what they do do, is “white flight” and not vote at all, to delegitimise the oppressive system that has alienated them.
Blair was not elected on 35% of the vote, only 26% of the population voted him in last time… that’s about 3/4 of the population not voting for him; and about 40% not voting at all.

This is a slow-motion car crash, and we have to collectively overthrow this oppressive pseudo-liberal individualist cult that fearmongers to stifle any opposition to it’s value-system.

This article about Redwatch is an example of this; and this is why I felt it important to break my silence to protest.

Again, I’m not defending the policies of the BNP; but their right to express them; and trying to stress the importance of understanding them.

I happen to think that it is important that we release ourselves from energy dependency on bad regimes, and develop our renewable infrastructure.
I’m sure you recognise that the motives for this are to “lead the way” (because you have to practice what you preach); and also to economically “punish” bad regimes.
This is not the selfish policy it appears; I recognise that this is a global issue; but I also studied in university in China, and am aware of their attitudes, and how they need a carrot and stick, which means we have to lead by example or be called hypocrites; and refuse to buy products that are produced at the expense of the earth.
This, on the surface seems like an isolationist policy; but it’s actually not when you look at the big picture; it also bears some similarity to Green Party policy.

I’m afraid, the UN has not really got much credibility anymore, but I’m not going to go into any digressive detail on that.

Nor am I going to discuss BNP policies; any more than I’m going to be associated with them.

Putting aside all the usual flowery ranting (the logical fallacy of loaded language), what this debate seems to boil down to is:

Groups

My premise is: only logical and objective thinking can resolve the emerging crisis of identity that is fracturing British society.

The subtext of the whole debate that includes patriotism vs immigrationism, the family vs cult of individuality, is fundamentally that of group conflict.

One group, (I call it the far left,) appears to dominate the discourse by virtue of it’s dominant presence in channels of discourse: the education system; the media; the public services of the state.
This group, whatever we agree to call it, wishes to restrict the behaviour of another group (you might call it the far right,) whose values it doesn’t appear to understand.

This naturally fosters resentment, and this is being increasingly manifested in growth of support for the BNP. Condemning people who feel this way rather than engaging with them with an open mind, shall only exacerbate the situation.

It is perfectly logical for a group to oppose incomers; this is a basic evolutionary instinct. To depict it as some kind of abnormal response is not only illogical, but also either criminally disingenuous, or evidence of a lack of intelligence and sensitivity.

So why are the far left group trying to encourage immigration – it must logically suit them in some evolutionary way: to lower the cost of living is pretty evident motivation; to acquire information about competitor states could be another (whether it’s cuisine or military intelligence).

The Family
The logical fallacy of Argumentum ad Crumenam (“blinding with science”) reared it’s head with claims that the family and the nation are social constructions, and by implication were of no importance; whilst in the same breath we were instructed to work for the benefit of all an ambiguous social construction called a “community”, in place of working for the benefit of the family; and to accept social constructions such as “evil”.
It is inconsistent to argue that social constructions should be ignored; and then to decree a new set of social constructions for us to accept.

The family is not a social construction, but an evolutional reality; it is illogical to state otherwise.
Whereas same-sex relationships are social constructions.
We don’t agree as biological units to form parent-child groups; their existence is a result of procreation. When it comes to forming alternative arrangements, they can only be defined as social constructions, as they have no logical purpose.
It’s also logical for us as humans to feel a powerful connection (love) to our biological origin (our family, our parents). It’s part of our identity.
By trying to denigrate the family to the level of being a mere invention, you are denying humans’ observable sense of connection to their origins as they experience them.
The knock-on effect is that by attacking the family, the whole social construct of nation starts to disintegrate; the destructive results are observed by the recent UNICEF report on children.

You may retort that “love isn’t logical”; well I’m afraid it is. The existence of life is utterly defined by procreation and survival. Everything done between a male and a female in our species towards the achievement of the objective of procreation and species survival is logically consistent; consequently, any simulated activity between members of the same sex in our species is simply complex, ritualised, masturbation. This is not a moral judgement, but a logical statement of fact. It’s well known that some of the activity between same sex couples is damaging to health; and this is not a crude “the bottom is only made for one-way traffic” remark, it’s a well-evidenced fact.
The point, of course, is that we must tell the truth about this things, and not dress up this behaviour as something that it’s not. We must not sell our children the lie that this is an option that is as legitimate as the procreational model; the evident norm.
To be anti-procreational, is illogical, and hence it is a minority behaviour.

Patriotism
Patriotism, or nationalism, is merely a form of groupism, and is entirely consistent and logical with achieving the evolutional objective of survival.
The biological family forms the basis of social constructions that work towards this end: small communities; large communities; and the ethnic state, (or nation).
It is therefore logical to be patriotic, because by being patriotic, you are demonstrating allegiance to your ethnic group, in much the same way as colonies of termites; or herds of gnus; shoals of mackerel; flocks of birds; prides of lions. It’s logical, and evolutionarily consistent.
To be anti-patriotic, is illogical, and hence it is a minority behaviour.

Definitions
The reason humans have groups is so that we can trust; assess; and remember the meanings we give to words the ideas they convey and to confirm our experience of reality; [read Wittgenstein’s critique of private language].
Conflict between groups emerges when conflicting conclusions over what abstract nouns like “freedom” mean. The only way to resolve such conflicts is to extract emotion, and apply logic.

Putting a Mr Spock hat on again for a moment:

Racism: hating of denigrating people because of their “race” is illogical. Whether it’s immoral is irrelevant, as morality is largely subjective, and related to the values of a group as a whole.

The problem with the concept of Racism, is that research has demonstrated that race is an illusion. On that basis, it is illogical to describe anyone as racist. The truth is that we realise that there are other things going on, and that most people are not able to articulate what they instinctively feel.
Consequently, it comes as little surprise that it was not possible to secure a conviction of the BNP leader recently on a racism charge.

Usage of the term “racial phenotype” does not ignore genetic gradiation, on the contrary it recognises it; where as terms like “race” fail to.
Phenotype more or less equates to the genotype plus the environment.
The genotype is the specific set of DNA instructions that produce the phenotype. The racial phenotype is what we look like; and most of us agree that we are not simply “individual organisms”, but fall into categories of specific collections of racial phenotypes. Human brains like to categorise things; our eyes are designed to perceive differences and boundaries.
Racial phenotypes may serve an evolutionary purpose, being to help us recognise a member of our group or another group; though some phenotypes are determined by environment (chemical component of soil; climate; geography) over long periods.
We can all observe these collections of differences in terms of eyes, hair, noses, skull shape etc…that are grouped together to define particular ethnic groups. Using this to describe the polygenic inheritance we see is not completely denying an individual’s agency: the choices we make are independent of our biological ethnic origin, though always entirely free of our cultural ethnic origin.

Fascism: seeing individuals as cells of a national body; totalitarian anti-democracy; anti-dissent.
It has nothing intrinsically to do with “race” or ethnicity in itself; it’s about restrictions on individual freedom and debate.
The date of the definition of Fascism is of no consequence.
the definition of Communism is from the mid-19th century; democracy even earlier.
Clearly a dictionary-sized definition can’t include everything.
Ethno-fascism, is a conflation of “racism” and fascism; it’s not the same definition.
The problem with describing the BNP as fascist is illustrated by the difference in attitudes towards the white working-classes as was described earlier.

Any inference that some evolutional link exists from Fascism to the BNP requires evidence, and logical argument.

A BNP member can say that he thinks Hitler was ace, and call himself a fascist, but that does not equate to evidence that either the BNP as whole is represented by his views (that’s a smoke & fire fallacy); or that he is actually correct in calling himself a Fascist (he may not actually know what it means - like his accuser).

Essentially what you are doing is attempting to append, stretch and edit the definition to suit your argument.
You want to extend it to include things that are not part of the definition.
The motive is to assign the same negative connotations the word has to others political views that you don’t like.
Similarly, you want to use the word Nazi, when you know full well it has a specific and different meaning to what you are using it to describe.

This is clear attempt at laying the foundations for a “genetic fallacy”; whereby you focus on argumentum ad hominem and argumentum ad metum whilst ignoring the actual content of the argument, because subconsciously you feel unable to refute it.

You surely understand the baggage that comes with an adjectival name in a range of contexts:
republican - American? Irish? what?
nationalist - SNP, plaid cymru, BNP, what?

The definition is what it is; if it’s not convenient; tough.

The only fascists, by definition, are the pseudoliberal elite, because you want to suppress dissent and debate with your “No Platform” policies; and victimise dissenters as being “abnormal”; you are only happy with “democracy” if you control the discourse.

Clearly dissent is an important evolutionary idea, it enables new ideas to be tested out, and old ones challenged; it allows a species to spread it’s losses.

To be anti-dissension is illogical, which is why it is a minority behaviour.

Far-left Brainwashing
Debating with those best described as the “pseudo-liberal elite” highlights some fundamental problems: the religious nature of the left.

There is parity between the vitriol that issues from far-left student organisations and well-reported cult behaviour. The milieu control of the media; favouring of the ingroup, and denigration of the outgroup; reality drift.

So far arguments presented have been packed with logical fallacy; prejudiced attacks; and an evident lack of understanding of basic definitions of concepts. Bigotry, to put it succinctly.

Just as it’s quite common for religious people to describe enemies as “evil”; the pseudoliberals freely administer words such as “fascist, racist, bigot, prejudiced, hate, etc…”; words that, not only do they appear not to understand, but that best describe themselves: this is a classic behaviour, called “projecting”.

http://books.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1996559,00.html

An appalingly biased and obviously far left article, but still containing some useful information for you

Secondly, I was not saying that you have any affiliation with the BNP, but rather, as someone who has defended the BNP, you have expressed a view on Global Warming (January 28th, 2007 at 1:02 am) that is similar to the BNP’s, and I think most people’s view on that subject. What I was drawing attention to was that your defense of BNP policies could conflict greatly with your stance on the environment, in the same way that the enactment of the BNP’s policies would conflict with their aims on the environment, for the reasons I gave above.

This is just one of the many reasons I gave for the unworkability of BNP policies, including rising prices and the shortsightedness of withdrawal from international bodies such as the UN. I will state again, this is not a time in the history of the human race as a whole that selfish policies of “looking-after-number-one” are sensible or noble.

what I will say is that:

“Ben part 1″
1. the definitions of things do matter. if you’ve read my definition of “racism”, then please either link your evidence to my definition if you agree with it; or explain how and why you think it’s incorrect.
It doesn’t give your argument any more potency to use one contested incendiary term in place of another.
2. I don’t argue for the policies of the BNP, but I do argue against misrepresentation of them. They strike me as containing a fair bit of economically “left-wing” stuff. Being opposed to immigration is not by definition racist either by the way.

“Jason”
“obsession, delusion, paranoia” - this is Argumentum ad Hominem again - a logically fallacious tactic to divert attention from a challenge.

“Poisioning the Well” and “Loaded Language” and common rhetorical ploys used by those who are incapable of arguing cogently. You’ve managed to include a Red Herring as well.

You have no grounds to depict me as anti-Communist, you are simple guessing, you have no idea about my political persuasion beyond the specific issues.

If anything you yourself are McCarthyist, with your clumsy hysterical and emotional language, and consistent lack of logic, making links between things that aren’t there. Your “reds under the bed” are the BNP members you are so determined to see everywhere.

I use the term far left for those who use the term far right, as it’s obviously relative to your position. If someone calls you far right, then they are sure identifying themselves as far left from their position.

“evidence enough that he is racist (or prejudiced against all the followers of a specific religion, or however it pleases you to phrase it)”
!
I think this says it all about you really. You are conceding that racist is not a truly accurate term; if it had been he might have been convicted of something. You know exactly what the truth is, but you struggle to get past your prejudices. As said before, definitions do matter don’t they.

Sorry, may arguement that the 13 million Chinese, 1.5 million Armenians, 1 million Camnbodians, 800,000 Rwandans etc should be equally commemorated with the Jews is “pathetically weak”?! what kind of of disgusting twisted inhuman monster are you?
I never defend holocaust deniers whichever holocaust they choose to deny.
I sincerely hope you are not one of these miserable creatures.

Avon’s Social Constructionist argument is highly flawed, and highly contested, I will go into this later. there is also utter hypocrisy in saying attacking me for relying on social constructions and then instructing me to become part of a social construction that Avon has decreed is permitted! laughable!

Needless to say, the family is not a complete social construction, we all have the same biological origin that we have no choicein, and we all feel a powerful connection to that that defines a large part of our identity.
I will go into detail about instinct and human nature and evolution and identity later.

I and will present the evidence for the damage done by the attack on the family and the inculcaiton of the cult of individuality… I mean haven’t you read the UNICEF report on children 2007 yet and what it has to say about the UK?

Wikipedia is rubbish, and the article you posted is contested anyway.
the Sovereignty article is fully sourced with book references, and you are showing your hysterical prejudice again, I doubt you know anything about that site. Take your American-English and sloppy arguments elsewhere.

“Ben Part 2″
“Finally, the nationalist state that the BNP proposes is unworkable alongside their, and Jack’s, stances on Global Warming and the environment.”

Excuse me, the BNP’s policy is not my policy, I am not a BNP su

Would a nationalist party like the BNP be good (or better) for Britain?
Probably, as they have the best interests of their definition of ‘Britain’ at the centre of their political stance. The repatriation of immigrants is to return jobs and benefits to the ‘British’ people, they also plan to stop all foreign aid until the NHS has enough staff and beds to cater for everyone, and to only reinstate aid to countries that help with the repatriation policy. This would presumably end with the complete withdrawal of all aid, as the success of the policy would mean no more repatriation.
Further benefits would come from the limiting of foreign goods imported into the country, and the increase in volume of food produced by British farmers for British people (with an emphasis on quality over quantity).

As much as ‘jumping on bandwagons’ is concerned with promises about a country “free of pollution in all its forms”, improvements in public transport with simultaneous drops in fuel duty and speed camera numbers, this is surely only the same kind of rose-tinted promise made by any political party, and the result of democracy where the idea is a citizen will vote for the party most closely aligned with their beliefs.

However, the nationalist policies of cutting Britain off from foreign aid agreements, import and export agreements, and “peacekeeping activities” in foreign countries, with an aim to a British state of ‘armed neutrality’ are surely outdated and shortsighted.

The reduction of cheap imported goods to the benefit of British production would increase prices, as would a move to replace ‘efficient’ farming techniques (Britain produces about 60% of food needs with less than 2% of the labor force https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/uk.html) with less quantity but better quality techniques (as the law of supply and demand states that a lower quantity means that demands, and thus price, will increase). The reduction of imports would also harm international relations with trading partners, for instance Germany (from which, incidentally, the BNP would remove “all troops”) is both our largest import partner (at 12.8% of imports) and our second largest export partner (at 10.5% of exports). Other European nations such as France, the Netherlands and Belgium feature in the top 7 of both our import and export partners. Alongside withdrawal from the EU, it is hard to see how the BNP would keep its promise of a Europe “free to trade and cooperate whenever it is mutually beneficial” when it is hoping to drastically cut imports. Finally, the rise of China as a superpower means that Britain needs all the global competitiveness it can muster to stay afloat. An bullishly uncooperative trade policy would not help anyone.

Finally, the nationalist state that the BNP proposes is unworkable alongside their, and Jack’s, stances on Global Warming and the environment. This is possibly the biggest problem ever faced by humanity, and it needs the complete cooperation of all nations. Developing countries are increasing their CO2 output rapidly, and the abolishment of the systems of aid, a British presence and import agreements in these countries can only hinder the relations that are needed to combat the environmental impact of development. In a more striking example, the Kyoto protocol that is in place to help combat CO2 emissions was formed by the United Nations, a group concerned with international cooperation and human rights, issues which the BNP, with its nationalist aims and policies to bring back corporal and capital punishment, is directly opposed to. This kind of agreement, and any future agreements necessary to combat ecological disaster, are not possible with the politics espoused by a nationalist party.

I feel that your obsession with the ‘pseudo-liberal elite’ (i hope i got the quote right this time!) and the far left borders on delusional paranoia. Certainly, members of the far left wouldn’t consider either the BBC or Channel 4 as representative of their views. I feel that ‘Macarthyism’ is almost a sufficient label for your views: you see reds where there are no reds! This country has not ever had a government that could be described as far left, and I would contend that the far left (or even the left generaly since Attlee) has never had any significant influence on British policy making.

Surely it is the job of any free press to investigate political parties and identify where there programme for power (ie the manifesto) differs from their publicly stated viewpoints. It is absurd to suggest, as you have, that the BBC and channel 4 are acting illegitimately by filming senior members of the BNP making comments that are clearly racist in nature. The whole point of an independent free press is that they do this. Would you argue that it was illegitimate for the BBC to expose the extremely suspect evidence that Labour provided for the Iraq war? Or that Channel four shouldnt question ministers on the fact that large amounts of money have been spent on the NHS with questionable results? It is nonsense to claim that it is not legitimate for independent media broadcasters to investigate political parties. Regardless of the bias of the media, if there is actual footage of the BNP making racist comments, how is that explained by the ‘far left’ bias of the media? Surely if Griffin makes comments claiming “Islam is a wicked religion” or whatever it was that he said (I’d like to point out that these quotes have been conspicuously paraded in my own personal experience by members of his own party at BNP rallies, and was repeated by him during his trial) then this is evidence enough that he is racist (or prejudiced against all the followers of a specific religion, or however it pleases you to phrase it). You repeatedly refer to the BNP manifesto as a reliable source for their strategic thinking, and yet you claim that the ‘pseudo-liberal elite’ encourage immigration in order to oppress the working class. Was this in the labour manifesto? I certainly don’t remember reading it. I don’t think it would have been much of a vote winner!

The idea Islam is a wicked religion is Clearly Bollocks (CB as I would like to phrase it). I am an Atheist, and deplore the involvement of religion in politics, but to claim that Islam is any worse than any other religion is CB. The BNP claim themselves as champions of Christian values dont forget! Whilst Islamic ‘fundamentalism’ (an extremely dodgy term in itself) has been associated with violence due to recent events, the same conclusion about Christianity could easily be reached by following the claims by Bush that god told him to invade Iraq, and by Blair that god will judge him on the invasion. Violence in the name of the religion is nothing new (see the crusades!), and Islam can in fact offer much to the international community.
Iran is a case in point. Despite the demonising of Mr Ahmedinejad (who is not a nice man) Iran has repeatedly reached out to the US in order to reach a peaceable agreement. Indeed, part of the reason the Ahmedinejad came to power was the failure of the previous president, Mr Khatami, a reformist who believed in the neccessity of a civil society, to fulfill his promises over rapprochement (sp?) with the west. The Americans rejected his overtures because of the legacy of the 1979 revolution, in which Us business interests were damaged. The current spiritual leader of the revolution, mr Khamenei (I think I’ve spelt that roughly right) condemns Nuclear weapons as un-Islamic, and has criticised Ahmedinejad for provoking the West. This contrasts with our current government, which is intent on retaining nuclear weapons for itself. The current furore over the Iran supplying weapons to the Shia militias in Iraq is a clear example of self righteous American hypocracy. If it is true that these weapons where provided by the Iranian government (which is not certain), then this is certainly not unexpected. The US has been unrelentingly hostile to Iran since 1979, and supplied Sadam Hussien’s Iraq with Chemical weapons in order to try and defeat them in the 1980-88 war. The Iranian government would not be unjustified in considering itself in an undeclared war with the US. It is crucial for the West to realise that Iran society is not monolithic and doest not consist solely of Ahmedinijads. There is a a huge movement towards reform that is especially popular with the young. (I realise this may have strayed from the point somewhat but nevermind)

With regards to the holocaust denial business – the idea had not occurred to me, but surely you must see that that your argument is pathetically weak here. I would be among the first to claim that the massacre of Armenians by the young turk regime constituted genocide, and that the cleansing of Tutsis by Hutus in Rwanda was an atrocity. Furthermore, I do not believe that the fact of the murder of 6 million Jews under Hitler’s regime means that the Israeli state should be given carte blanche on Palestinian territory, but that makes absolutely no difference to the fact that the BNP have denied the holocaust as a justification for their own anti-semitism. (the term semites refers to a much larger group of people including Arabs, but this is irrelevant. I use the term anti-semitism to refer specifically to discrimination against jews).

Thank you for Avon for putting the point of the socially constructed nature of ethnicity and nationhood far more cogently than I could ever manage. You have it spot on! Poverty and deprivation in this country is best tackled by measures that address the distribution of wealth, tackle crime in a meaningful and constructive way (not by just banging everyone in jail until our prisons are full) and by correcting people’s prejudices. Your approach seems to be to blame everything on immigrants and homosexuals and kick them out. To me this is CB.

With regards to your diatribe on sexual relations, in my opinion you are welcome to marry a teapot if you wish, but I doubt that a significant percentage of the population of our society share such desires. You may notice that I specified ’sexual relationships’ and so the question of you marrying your friends does not come into the equation. Whether you accept it or not some people are attracted to members of the same sex, and this is not some sort of illness. I stand by my remarks on the absurdity of declaring the decline of the family is responsible for societal ills, especially with regards to homosexual couples, because the phenomenon of gay couples adopting of children is recent and small scale and so cannot be held responsible for problems in our society. The idea that society is falling apart because people are gay is, to me, CB. Would you claim that heterosexual relationships are wrong because in many cases domestic violence is present? This can clearly have negative effects on children.
I suggest that you take your nose out of people’s personal relationships.

This is the absolutely the last post I will make on this subject, but I would like to point out that at no point have advocated the silencing or banning of the BNP. I believe that they are an obnoxious, hateful and racist organisation that discriminate against people purely on the basis of the colour of their skin or the religion they adhere to, and they adopt tactics of violence and intimidation where it suits them. However I believe that they can and should be defeated at the ballot box. When and where party members have broken the law they should be brought to justice through the proper procedures, but otherwise their hateful policies should be defeated through revealing the truth of the party’s racial discrimination.

I realise that I have been low on sources throughout this piece, but it took me long enough to write the damn thing without trawling the internet for sources I know exist! Watch the secret agent for gods sake. And your criticism of peer-reviewed sources like wikipedia is somewhat discredited when you yourself have referenced sovereignity.org, or whatever it was, which was clearly ideologically inclined towards a fierce defense of nationalism and anti-europeanism. (Let alone immigration from elsewhere).

The term fascist is obviously contested, but if you object to this label for the BNP then a simpler one will do: Racist.

Would a nationalist party like the BNP be good (or better) for Britain?
Probably, as they have the best interests of their definition of ‘Britain’ at the center of their political stance. The repatriation of immigrants is to return jobs and benefits to the ‘British’ people, they also plan to stop all foreign aid until the NHS has enough staff and beds to cater for everyone, and to only reinstate aid to countries that help with the repatriation policy. This would presumably end with the complete withdrawal of all aid, as the success of the policy would mean no more repatriation.
Further benefits would come from the limiting of foreign goods imported into the country, and the increase in volume of food produced by British farmers for British people (with an emphasis on quality over quantity).

As much as ‘jumping on bandwagons’ is concerned with promises about a country “free of pollution in all its forms”, improvements in public transport with simultaneous drops in fuel duty and speed camera numbers, this is surely only the same kind of rose-tinted promise made by any political party, and the result of democracy where the idea is a citizen will vote for the party most closely aligned with their beliefs.

However, the nationalist policies of cutting Britain off from foreign aid agreements, import and export agreements, and “peacekeeping activities” in foreign countries, with an aim to a British state of ‘armed neutrality’ are surely outdated and shortsighted.

The reduction of cheap imported goods to the benefit of British production would increase prices, as would a move to replace ‘efficient’ farming techniques (Britain produces about 60% of food needs with less than 2% of the labor force https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/uk.html) with less quantity but better quality techniques (as the law of supply and demand states that a lower quantity means that demands, and thus price, will increase). The reduction of imports would also harm international relations with trading partners, for instance Germany (from which, incidentally, the BNP would remove “all troops”) is both our largest import partner (at 12.8% of imports) and our second largest export partner (at 10.5% of exports). Other European nations such as France, the Netherlands and Belgium feature in the top 7 of both our import and export partners. Alongside withdrawal from the EU, it is hard to see how the BNP would keep its promise of a Europe “free to trade and cooperate whenever it is mutually beneficial” when it is hoping to drastically cut imports. Finally, the rise of China as a superpower means that Britain needs all the global competitiveness it can muster to stay afloat. An bullishly uncooperative trade policy would not help anyone.

Finally, the nationalist state that the BNP proposes is unworkable alongside their, and Jack’s, stances on Global Warming and the environment. This is possibly the biggest problem ever faced by humanity, and it needs the complete cooperation of all nations. Developing countries are increasing their CO2 output rapidly, and the abolishment of the systems of aid, a British presence and import agreements in these countries can only hinder the relations that are needed to combat the environmental impact of development. In a more striking example, the Kyoto protocol that is in place to help combat CO2 emissions was formed by the United Nations, a group concerned with international cooperation and human rights, issues which the BNP, with its nationalist aims and policies to bring back corporal and capital punishment, is directly opposed to. This kind of agreement, and any future agreements necessary to combat ecological disaster, are not possible with the politics esposed by a strongly nationalist party.

I’ll be happy to respond to your very selective, very subjective, prescriptive diatribe and point out the flaws when I have more time.
However, I don’t think you have any reasonable grounds to accuse me of hatred, other than hatred of censorship, and of disingenuous misrepresentation.
There is nothing to be gained by pushing these issues underground: whatever position you take on this debate, it is in everybody’s interests that it is brought out into the open and resolved, lest it fester and lead to an unpleasant future.

“If you care about people in your community, work to advance their material condition and defend them from the predations and exploitation of the powerful - big business and the state - not from their equally preyed upon neighbours.”

What is a community? A socially constructed categorisation. Who is part of my community? Who decides is is part of my community? Who decides what I am allowed to think, say, and discuss?

John Hall.

1. You don’t know that these are BNP members even if they say they are.
2. It doesn’t actually break YUSU’s No Platform policy, as was explained to you.
3. YUSU’s No Platform policy is in direct contravention of University policy; and thus is invalid, and must be challenged in the interests of free speech.

It is actually, not so much the BNP that stirs up racial tension, but ironically, the NUS (to which YUSU is affiliated), who deliberately characature the BNP as a bogeyman and indulge in ethnically divisive campaigns in order to boost their legitimacy as a political organisation, e.g.: the “black student campaign”, http://www.nusonline.co.uk/campaigns/blackstudentscampaign/ classifies south and east and west asians (caucasian Arabs) as “black” and apparently excludes “white” students. This is divisive and polarising, and fundamentally racist; the implicit inferration is that racism is something that is done by “white” people to non-white people, which divisive and polarising on the basis of ethnicity.

“this” as in allowing Nouse to place :
“john winston beatson Says:

January 24th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
the B.N.P. are the only British political party who has the welfare British working class people.

stop all these lies about them, if any one has any proof about any criminal activity in the B.N.P. ranks or policies then expose them to the law enforces.

if you don’t like them or their policies then stand against them at the polls

as an ex steelworker/lorrydriver of Sheffield i joined them because i believe in them to secure a future for the British Nation”

on it’s website breaks YUSU’s no platform policy as it gives a voice to a BNP member.

I agree you can have identical views to the BNP and not be associated - but these are scummy views if one is associated or not.

I believe this not because of what the media has told me, but what the BNP has told me through their campaigning methods. The BNP like to stir up racial tensions for political gain - this is how they electorally operate and I disagree with this.

Much of its core personnel were involved in the NF or Third Positionist groups in the 1970s and 1980s, being influenced by Italian neo-fascists like Roberto Fiore. These groups were openly neo-nazi.

But don’t take my word for it, take theirs:

- “I’d never say this on camera, the Jews have been thrown out of every country including England. It’s not just persecution. There’s no smoke without fire.” (Mark Collett, their Youth leader, here: http://www.channel4.com/news/2003/special_reports/young_nazi_proud.html )

- “The TV footage of dozens of ‘gay’ demonstrators flaunting their perversion in front of the world’s journalists showed just why so many ordinary people find these creatures so repulsive.” Nick Griffen after the bombing of the Admiral Duncan in Soho (Spearhead magazine, June 1999, p364)

He also wrote a rather nauseating pamphlet called ‘Who are the Mindbenders?’ in which he argued the British media was controlled by Jews.

The party until a few years ago had a policy of ‘forced repatriation of ethnic minorities’, that is, expelling non-white people from the country. It has been recentley instead suggesting ‘voluntary repatriation’, but this is (as recent investigations by the Guardian revealed) part of their strategy of concealing their ideological commitment to further their electoral ambitions (with the ulitmate aim of having a strong political base in place for a crisis period).

Ah, but I imagine the party’s fellow travellers here are already reaching for their keyboards - these don’t match the definition of fascism offered!

Well, Gentile’s definition is not sufficient; fascism has a statist aspect, but that definition omits large swathes of Fascist ideology and political practice, not least because it was written in..um.. *1932*, that is a year before the Nazi’s came to power in Germany. That is rather convinient, since much of the BNP’s biological racism is more traceable to the Nazis than Italian fascism, and the Nazis had a similiar approach of part-concealing their ideological goals for electoral gain (those goals including genocide). The concept of an organic nation, with ‘aliens’ constructed as threatening Other to it is also a feature of Fascism.

The definition offered also ignores that right from the beginning Fascism in Italy and Germany recieved support from major industrialists; industrial capital was a major force backing the movement. You repeatedly refer to the BNP’s support for the “White Working Classes”, rather neglecting the significant point that all Fascist movements have consistently and systematically eliminated labour & trade union movements upon assuming power - hardly looking out for the working class, but then Nazi’s believe in an indivisible organic nation organised hierarchically, not class equality.

You discuss ‘nations’ or ethnic units as if these were some kind of discrete categories. These concepts are in fact social constructions, articulated socially between human beings. Archaic notions like ‘bloodlines’ are irrelevant to social life, and your crude use of the term ‘Phenotype’ and biological categorisation ignores that 1. Genetic variation across the world is, geography permitting, gradual not discrete but more importantly 2. All human beings are individuals with consciousness - crude notions of ‘racial characteristics’ or differences arising from where and to who someone is born deny that person’s agency.

Perhaps rather than treating socially constructed categorisations such as race, ethnicity, nation as objective and determining you should recognise that all people are human beings, no matter where they are by chance born on the earth, and hatred or fear of constructed ‘Others’ is irrational, stupid and when acted upon, evil.

If you care about people in your community, work to advance their material condition and defend them from the predations and exploitation of the powerful - big business and the state - not from their equally preyed upon neighbours.

Where are the BNP comments then?

Besides, the “No Platform” policy breaks University rules on discrimination on the basis of political views.
I shall be writing to the Equal Opportunities section of the University to raise this issue.

It’s also fundamentally absurd, as clearly you don’t have to be associated with the BNP to express identical views.

John Winston did say on January 24th, 2007 at 1:27 pm, “as an ex steelworker/lorrydriver of Sheffield i joined them because…”

Therefore this breaks YUSU’s no platform to the BNP policy as Nouse is funded by and is a part of YUSU.

“No Platform refers to public speaking events or dedicated interviews. Anyway No Platform is a counter productive policy, the best way to beat the BNP to take them in public and expose them as the fascists they really are.”

The No Platform policy is an example of Fascism.

Fascism:

In an article in the 1932 Enciclopedia Italiana, written by Giovanni Gentile and attributed to Benito Mussolini, fascism is described as a system in which “The State not only is authority that governs and moulds individual wills with laws and values of spiritual life, but it is also power which makes its will prevail abroad. …For the Fascist, everything is within the State and … neither individuals or groups are outside the State. …For Fascism, the State is an absolute, before which individuals or groups are only relative.”

Source: