Muslim community leader who lied about BNP kidnap is illegal immigrant

[Hitman]

A Muslim community leader who falsely claimed he had been kidnapped by members of the British National Party was exposed last night as a suspected benefits cheat who was in this country illegally.
Noor Ramjanally, 36, told police that racist thugs had abducted him at knifepoint and threatened him with violence.
But his account was exposed as a lie by cameras fitted secretly outside his flat after earlier claims that he had received racist hate mail and that the family's home had been firebombed.
Footage revealed that on the day of the alleged kidnapping Ramjanally had left home by himself, and police established that he wandered around a branch of Homebase before dialling 999.

Yesterday he was given a two-year jail term after being convicted of perverting the course of justice.
However he was not in court - he had fled back to his native Mauritius after admitting he was in this country illegally, staying on after his tourist visa expired.
Before his trial at Chelmsford Crown Court, he sent police a taunting email from the Indian Ocean island, telling them: 'I am enjoying the sun.'
The authorities will now decide whether to seek his extradition to Britain to serve his sentence.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285884/Muslim-leader-claimed-kidnapped-BNP-members-jailed-pack-lies.html#ixzz0qa5s60cp



:rolleyes:

[Sharon]

What an idiot ;l ugh people.

[Fez]

If you're going to attack the BNP then do it with evidence and actual debate, don't make something up and be just a spoil sport, you're not exactly improving your image.

[Hitman]

If you're going to attack the BNP then do it with evidence and actual debate, don't make something up and be just a spoil sport, you're not exactly improving your image.
Can't tell if you're aiming that at me or the illegal immigrant... I assume the latter but it's how you worded it.

[Fez]

Can't tell if you're aiming that at me or the illegal immigrant... I assume the latter but it's how you worded it.

I'm aiming it at the 'muslim community leader', not you, sorry if it came across that way.

Hardly a leader.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I was going to comment but this comment I found on the mail website in response to this story spells out exactly what I think;


This is what makes me take with a pinch of salt any "racist" incident blamed on the BNP.

[Catzsy]

I was going to comment but this comment I found on the mail website in response to this story spells out exactly what I think;


Here are some of the most recent cases where BNP members have been convicted.
November 2008 Ian Hindle
Jailed for three years for having sex with a child

November 2008 Andrew Wells
Jailed for two years and three months after admitting engaging in sexual activity with a child and engaging in sexual activity in the presence of a child.

October 2008 Lockart Kneen
Fined £150 and £115 after being found guilty of two counts of racially and religiously aggravated harrassment for affixing anti-Islamic stickers to packages he sent out in the mail. He ran an operation selling BNP magazines on the Internet and sent out packages with stickers that read "no more mosques."

October 2008 Martin Glasgow
Chesterfield BNP fundholder Martin Glasgow is jailed for 12 months for a racist assault against an Asian man in June 2006.

October 2008 Anthony Weeks
Darlington BNP member Anthony Weeks is given a ten month jail sentence, suspended for two years, and ordered to pay £600 in compensation to his victim and order to do 80 hours community service after admitting racially aggravated assault against an Egyptian customer at his place of work, a local cash and carry. After telling his victim that he was a member of the BNP Weeks then shouted "All you foreigners should not be in my country" before punching him. He was spared jail after his victim spoke up for him. The judge stated that "but for Mr Noaman's intervention, you would have gone immediately to prison."

November 2007 Andrew Kendall
BNP supporter Andrew Kendall was given an 18 month conditional discharge and fined £200 for putting up a racially-offensive and threatening poster which showed three black men, the words read "Illegal immigrant murder scum" and contact details for the British National Party.

October 2007 Shaun Jones
Welsh BNP supporter Shaun Jones is given a six month community order for threatening polling booth staff on 4 May 2007 with a stick after being told he was not registered to vote. He ignored advice from staff who gave him a phone number to call to register and instead continued shouting and swearing at them until he was arrested. He was also made to pay £150 costs.

August 2007 Dominic Bugler
Bugler, the BNP candidate for Pelsall ward, Walsall, in the May 2007 elections is arrested and remanded in custody for the possession of an imitation firearm. He is later handed a two-year ASBO earned because he 'caused misery for residents through his violent and drunken behaviour' and which bans him from parts of Pelsall. The Aldridge and Brownhills Housing Trust won an eviction order against him too but he avoided this by moving of his own accord to a new address. Bugler also appeared in court charge with threatening behaviour towards his wife in late August and agreed to be bound over to keep the peace for 12 months for a sum of £200.

June 2007 Robert Bennett
Robert Bennett, the convicted gang rapist who oversaw the BNP leafletting campaign in Oldham in 2002, is arrested for his part in a assault on his next door neighbour which began when they ask his son David to leave a BBQ after he began using racist language. David attacked his neighbour after refusing to leave . He returned with his father and the pair subsequently attacked both the male and female neighbour. Robert Bennett who admitted affray was sentenced to 150 hours community service and £250 compensation whilst his son, who also pleaded guilty, was sentenced to 250 hours community service and ordered to pay £500 compensation.

May 2007 Jamie Sedgewick
Jamie Sedgewick, a BNP member from Morden is found guilty of screaming racist abuse at an Asian police officer as he was arrested whilst breaking up a fight at the Hideaway Bar, Kingston Road, in March 2006.

March 2007 David Copeland
The Appeal Court increases David Copeland's sentence to a minimum of 50 years. The London nail bomber, who had been an active member of the BNP, had originally been sentenced to a minimum term of 30 years for the three bombs he set off in 1999 which killed three people and injured 139 others.

February 2007 John Laidlaw
John Laidlaw is sentenced to life after going on a shooting spree in north London in May 2006. He shot Abu Kamara in Upper Street before accidentally shooting Emma Sheridan at Finsbury Park Tube station, as he aimed at a second man. Laidlaw had a string of previous convictions starting at the age of 14. They included property damage, public order offences and 16 counts of theft and possession of knives. He also carried out seven armed street muggings and had been in and out of jail several times. In October 2004 he attacked a black motorist, hurling racist abuse at him. A police report written after Laidlaw was arrested for the attack said he behaved violently in front of officers and was "foaming at the mouth". "In the presence and hearing of the black female gaoler the defendant made racist comments and remarks, stating he was a member of the BNP and that he hated all black people," the document says. He also said he was going to "kill all black people". He was convicted of racially aggravated actual bodily harm and using racist language.

February 2007 Robert Cottage
Robert Cottage, a BNP member and former council election candidate, pleads guilty to possessing explosives. He denies, however, as does his co-defendant David Jackson, conspiracy to cause an explosion. The jury are unable to agree a verdict. A retrial will take place in July.


January 2007 David Enderby
David Enderby, a BNP councillor in Redditch, is found guilty of assault on three members of his estranged wife's family. He is fined £100 for each assault and ordered to pay £100 costs. His wife later told the local newspaper that he had a history of domestic violence.


January 2007 Mark Bulman
Mark Bulman was jailed for five years for setting fire to Swindon's Broad Street mosque. He used a BNP leaflet as a fuse for his petrol bomb.


December 2006 Richard Mulhall
Richard Mulhall, the BNP's council group leader in Calderdale, was sentenced to do 200 hours of unpaid work on four counts of benefit fraud. Branding him "thoroughly dishonest", Recorder Felicity Davies said he only escaped jail because relevant legislation was not yet in force when he committed the offences. He was also ordered to pay £2,000 costs and to repay £603.18 in jobseekers' allowance. He had already repaid the housing benefit and council tax benefit. A jury had found him guilty in October of falsely claiming a total of £3,002.95 in benefits by concealing the fact that his partner was working.

November 2006 Darren Francis
BNP member Darren Francis is given a five-year restraining order after being found guilty of harassing Sally Keeble, the MP for Northampton North.

September 2006 Robert McGlynn
Robert McGlynn, a Swansea BNP activist, is fined £200 plus £200 costs for shouting racist abuse at an Asian woman. He was convicted on evidence from a passer-by. He later loses his appeal against conviction and is ordered to pay a further £140 in costs.


July 2006 Allen Boyce
The former National Front Remembrance Day parade bugler Allen Boyce, 73, now a BNP supporter, receives a two-year suspended sentence for giving bomb-making instructions to Terry Collins, a BNP member, who was sentenced to five years in 2005 for conducting a racist hate campaign against the Asian community in Eastbourne.

May 2006 Angela Clarke
A former BNP councillor Angela Clarke is fined £200 for resisting arrest during a fracas.

May 2006 Kevin Hughes
Kevin Hughes, who acted as election agent for the BNP Redditch councillor David Enderby in May 2006, is sentenced to 30 months in prison for assaulting an Iraqi asylum seeker. The sentence is later reduced to two years on appeal.


February 2006 Stephen Bailey
Stephen Bailey, a Lincoln BNP activist, is convicted of 35 charges of criminal damage and 19 of arson. He set fire to sheds, litter bins and a car and is believed to have vandalised more than 80 cars by slashing tyres and damaging bodywork. Bailey was arrested after police seized computer equipment and documents from his home.

November 2005 Roderick Rowley
Roderick Rowley, a former BNP candidate in Coventry, is imprisoned for 15 months after admitting 14 charges of making, distributing or possessing obscene images of children. He is also ordered to register as a sex offender for ten years.

May 2005 Karl Hanson
Karl Hanson is fined £400 for possessing heroin and crack cocaine. News of his arrest broke a few days before the May 2005 local elections in which he was a BNP candidate in Huddersfield.

April 2005 John Cope
John Cope, a Cheshunt BNP member and election candidate, is fined £750 and ordered to pay £104 costs for harassing an anti-racist campaigner.

March 2005 Terry Collins
Terry Collins, a BNP member, is sentenced to five years in prison for a year-long campaign of terror against Asian families in Eastbourne. He claims the BNP "brainwashed" him. Collins, a former Territorial Army soldier, admitted charges of arson, racially aggravated harassment and criminal damage. He also admitted the possession of bullets found in his home and asked for 11 further offences of racially aggravated criminal damage to be taken into account.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Here are some of the most recent cases where BNP members have been convicted.
November 2008 Ian Hindle
Jailed for three years for having sex with a child

November 2008 Andrew Wells
Jailed for two years and three months after admitting engaging in sexual activity with a child and engaging in sexual activity in the presence of a child.

October 2008 Lockart Kneen
Fined £150 and £115 after being found guilty of two counts of racially and religiously aggravated harrassment for affixing anti-Islamic stickers to packages he sent out in the mail. He ran an operation selling BNP magazines on the Internet and sent out packages with stickers that read "no more mosques."

October 2008 Martin Glasgow
Chesterfield BNP fundholder Martin Glasgow is jailed for 12 months for a racist assault against an Asian man in June 2006.

October 2008 Anthony Weeks
Darlington BNP member Anthony Weeks is given a ten month jail sentence, suspended for two years, and ordered to pay £600 in compensation to his victim and order to do 80 hours community service after admitting racially aggravated assault against an Egyptian customer at his place of work, a local cash and carry. After telling his victim that he was a member of the BNP Weeks then shouted "All you foreigners should not be in my country" before punching him. He was spared jail after his victim spoke up for him. The judge stated that "but for Mr Noaman's intervention, you would have gone immediately to prison."

November 2007 Andrew Kendall
BNP supporter Andrew Kendall was given an 18 month conditional discharge and fined £200 for putting up a racially-offensive and threatening poster which showed three black men, the words read "Illegal immigrant murder scum" and contact details for the British National Party.

October 2007 Shaun Jones
Welsh BNP supporter Shaun Jones is given a six month community order for threatening polling booth staff on 4 May 2007 with a stick after being told he was not registered to vote. He ignored advice from staff who gave him a phone number to call to register and instead continued shouting and swearing at them until he was arrested. He was also made to pay £150 costs.

August 2007 Dominic Bugler
Bugler, the BNP candidate for Pelsall ward, Walsall, in the May 2007 elections is arrested and remanded in custody for the possession of an imitation firearm. He is later handed a two-year ASBO earned because he 'caused misery for residents through his violent and drunken behaviour' and which bans him from parts of Pelsall. The Aldridge and Brownhills Housing Trust won an eviction order against him too but he avoided this by moving of his own accord to a new address. Bugler also appeared in court charge with threatening behaviour towards his wife in late August and agreed to be bound over to keep the peace for 12 months for a sum of £200.

June 2007 Robert Bennett
Robert Bennett, the convicted gang rapist who oversaw the BNP leafletting campaign in Oldham in 2002, is arrested for his part in a assault on his next door neighbour which began when they ask his son David to leave a BBQ after he began using racist language. David attacked his neighbour after refusing to leave . He returned with his father and the pair subsequently attacked both the male and female neighbour. Robert Bennett who admitted affray was sentenced to 150 hours community service and £250 compensation whilst his son, who also pleaded guilty, was sentenced to 250 hours community service and ordered to pay £500 compensation.

May 2007 Jamie Sedgewick
Jamie Sedgewick, a BNP member from Morden is found guilty of screaming racist abuse at an Asian police officer as he was arrested whilst breaking up a fight at the Hideaway Bar, Kingston Road, in March 2006.

March 2007 David Copeland
The Appeal Court increases David Copeland's sentence to a minimum of 50 years. The London nail bomber, who had been an active member of the BNP, had originally been sentenced to a minimum term of 30 years for the three bombs he set off in 1999 which killed three people and injured 139 others.

February 2007 John Laidlaw
John Laidlaw is sentenced to life after going on a shooting spree in north London in May 2006. He shot Abu Kamara in Upper Street before accidentally shooting Emma Sheridan at Finsbury Park Tube station, as he aimed at a second man. Laidlaw had a string of previous convictions starting at the age of 14. They included property damage, public order offences and 16 counts of theft and possession of knives. He also carried out seven armed street muggings and had been in and out of jail several times. In October 2004 he attacked a black motorist, hurling racist abuse at him. A police report written after Laidlaw was arrested for the attack said he behaved violently in front of officers and was "foaming at the mouth". "In the presence and hearing of the black female gaoler the defendant made racist comments and remarks, stating he was a member of the BNP and that he hated all black people," the document says. He also said he was going to "kill all black people". He was convicted of racially aggravated actual bodily harm and using racist language.

February 2007 Robert Cottage
Robert Cottage, a BNP member and former council election candidate, pleads guilty to possessing explosives. He denies, however, as does his co-defendant David Jackson, conspiracy to cause an explosion. The jury are unable to agree a verdict. A retrial will take place in July.


January 2007 David Enderby
David Enderby, a BNP councillor in Redditch, is found guilty of assault on three members of his estranged wife's family. He is fined £100 for each assault and ordered to pay £100 costs. His wife later told the local newspaper that he had a history of domestic violence.


January 2007 Mark Bulman
Mark Bulman was jailed for five years for setting fire to Swindon's Broad Street mosque. He used a BNP leaflet as a fuse for his petrol bomb.


December 2006 Richard Mulhall
Richard Mulhall, the BNP's council group leader in Calderdale, was sentenced to do 200 hours of unpaid work on four counts of benefit fraud. Branding him "thoroughly dishonest", Recorder Felicity Davies said he only escaped jail because relevant legislation was not yet in force when he committed the offences. He was also ordered to pay £2,000 costs and to repay £603.18 in jobseekers' allowance. He had already repaid the housing benefit and council tax benefit. A jury had found him guilty in October of falsely claiming a total of £3,002.95 in benefits by concealing the fact that his partner was working.

November 2006 Darren Francis
BNP member Darren Francis is given a five-year restraining order after being found guilty of harassing Sally Keeble, the MP for Northampton North.

September 2006 Robert McGlynn
Robert McGlynn, a Swansea BNP activist, is fined £200 plus £200 costs for shouting racist abuse at an Asian woman. He was convicted on evidence from a passer-by. He later loses his appeal against conviction and is ordered to pay a further £140 in costs.


July 2006 Allen Boyce
The former National Front Remembrance Day parade bugler Allen Boyce, 73, now a BNP supporter, receives a two-year suspended sentence for giving bomb-making instructions to Terry Collins, a BNP member, who was sentenced to five years in 2005 for conducting a racist hate campaign against the Asian community in Eastbourne.

May 2006 Angela Clarke
A former BNP councillor Angela Clarke is fined £200 for resisting arrest during a fracas.

May 2006 Kevin Hughes
Kevin Hughes, who acted as election agent for the BNP Redditch councillor David Enderby in May 2006, is sentenced to 30 months in prison for assaulting an Iraqi asylum seeker. The sentence is later reduced to two years on appeal.


February 2006 Stephen Bailey
Stephen Bailey, a Lincoln BNP activist, is convicted of 35 charges of criminal damage and 19 of arson. He set fire to sheds, litter bins and a car and is believed to have vandalised more than 80 cars by slashing tyres and damaging bodywork. Bailey was arrested after police seized computer equipment and documents from his home.

November 2005 Roderick Rowley
Roderick Rowley, a former BNP candidate in Coventry, is imprisoned for 15 months after admitting 14 charges of making, distributing or possessing obscene images of children. He is also ordered to register as a sex offender for ten years.

May 2005 Karl Hanson
Karl Hanson is fined £400 for possessing heroin and crack cocaine. News of his arrest broke a few days before the May 2005 local elections in which he was a BNP candidate in Huddersfield.

April 2005 John Cope
John Cope, a Cheshunt BNP member and election candidate, is fined £750 and ordered to pay £104 costs for harassing an anti-racist campaigner.

March 2005 Terry Collins
Terry Collins, a BNP member, is sentenced to five years in prison for a year-long campaign of terror against Asian families in Eastbourne. He claims the BNP "brainwashed" him. Collins, a former Territorial Army soldier, admitted charges of arson, racially aggravated harassment and criminal damage. He also admitted the possession of bullets found in his home and asked for 11 further offences of racially aggravated criminal damage to be taken into account.

I didn't dispute that the BNP havent had thugs within, as I have said before; the party has a large presence of thugs much like the Labour Party did in the 1980s - you know when they called workers scabs at the picket lines and smashed anybodys face in who attempted to go back to work? As for racism and all of that issue, while the BNP are racist so is the Labour Party but people such as yourself like to post in threads like this acting on the moral highground when you and your party is on the exact level as Nick Griffin and the BNP. You support racial policies, Labour implements them. Nick Griffin supports racial policies, the BNP wants to implement them.

Do not come posting in BNP threads like the guardian angel of fairness and equality, because your views are anything but equal and fair.

[Fez]

I didn't dispute that the BNP havent had thugs within, as I have said before; the party has a large presence of thugs much like the Labour Party did in the 1980s - you know when they called workers scabs at the picket lines and smashed anybodys face in who attempted to go back to work? As for racism and all of that issue, while the BNP are racist so is the Labour Party but people such as yourself like to post in threads like this acting on the moral highground when you and your party is on the exact level as Nick Griffin and the BNP. You support racial policies, Labour implements them. Nick Griffin supports racial policies, the BNP wants to implement them.

Do not come posting in BNP threads like the guardian angel of fairness and equality, because your views are anything but equal and fair.

I don't think Catszy even posted an opinion, only the list of thuggish activities that the BNP have indulged in. I'd go as far to do that myself, although I've been busy.

And don't act like you're on the moral high-ground by stating what is fair and equal.

[Catzsy]

I didn't dispute that the BNP havent had thugs within, as I have said before; the party has a large presence of thugs much like the Labour Party did in the 1980s - you know when they called workers scabs at the picket lines and smashed anybodys face in who attempted to go back to work? As for racism and all of that issue, while the BNP are racist so is the Labour Party but people such as yourself like to post in threads like this acting on the moral highground when you and your party is on the exact level as Nick Griffin and the BNP. You support racial policies, Labour implements them. Nick Griffin supports racial policies, the BNP wants to implement them.

Do not come posting in BNP threads like the guardian angel of fairness and equality, because your views are anything but equal and fair.

I can post in any thread I like Dan and your views are completely one-sided as well. That's politics for you. Just showing that your constant rant about the Guardian would be far more credible if you didn't stick up for the Mail all the time. No moral high ground I just posted facts that the Mail seem to ignore.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I don't think Catszy even posted an opinion, only the list of thuggish activities that the BNP have indulged in. I'd go as far to do that myself, although I've been busy.

And don't act like you're on the moral high-ground by stating what is fair and equal.

Oh but I do know what is equal and what isnt - as I will explain in the reply to Rosie near the end. You see, here on this forum and in politics in general we have people such as Rosie (perhaps even yourself) and others who post in BNP threads about racism, thuggish behaviour and all manners of things alleged and true to the BNP. Now as I said before; I accept the BNP is racist and thuggish and have made that clear a number of times. My views on equality and fairness have remained the same throughout, no matter what the political party involved beliefs are.

However what I will not sit back and be silent on is the idea that you can all get away with slandering the BNP whilst at the same time preaching the Conservative Party and more so the Labour Party. The Labour Party, Conservative Party and the British National Party all have racist policies which range on immigration, candidate shortlists and membership requirements.


I can post in any thread I like Dan and your views are completely one-sided as well. That's politics for you. Just showing that your constant rant about the Guardian would be far more credible if you didn't stick up for the Mail all the time. No moral high ground I just posted facts that the Mail seem to ignore.

Indeed you can post in any thread but you must expect a reply Rosie, which you often give the impression that you are not keen on, hence why you constantly dish out lines like you just have done such as 'I can post in any thread I like Dan' - yes well lets settle this once and for all, I have never said you cannot post on certain topics. I will also not accept from you or anybody else that I somehow rant about the newspapers, infact time and time again it is me who the one who attempts to divert the topic away from the newspaper issue and onto the issue at hand; be it immigration, political correctness, justice or the European Union. I know what thread you are referring to though, and that was one of the only times I have attacked the Guardian newspaper and why? - because I am sick to my back teeth of the only reply on this forum being 'OMG DAILY MAIL RUBBISH'.

I mean to prove my point you just cannot help yourself can you because yet again in your reply just now you have had another go at the Daily Mail despite the fact the comment was from a member of the public on the comment board, not the Daily Mail. Give the newspaper slanting a rest - its boring, tiresome and repetitive. I will now get back to your post and the actual topic instead of playing on your diversions about newspapers and your right to post in threads which I have never disputed.

I have made it very clear in my post which you seemed to have ignored clearly, you cannot go around preaching about the British National Party and its views or actions (remember Gordon Browns staff calling a bullying helpline because hes that bad? - but you denied it predictably!). You yourself support candidate shortlists based on race or gender from what I remember from the debate we had. Although it didnt really reach its conclusion so i'll bring it up again; you (and others) say the BNP is racist for having had a whites-only membership policy - but the Labour and Conservative Parties either have or support having candidate shortlists based on sexuality, race or gender - so why is the Labour Party so much more on the moral highground than the BNP is?

The difference between my idea of fairness and your own is that I think everyone should be treated fairly regardless of sexuality, race or gender - your idea and the idea of the Labour Party on the other hand is that if you are black, asian, gay or a woman you are more worthy of a position because of them factors - that is not fairness or equality, so dont pretend it is and more to the point; dont speak down on a party (the BNP) which takes the same line of thinking as yourself and your own party but only the other way around.

[Fez]

Oh but I do know what is equal and what isnt - as I will explain in the reply to Rosie near the end. You see, here on this forum and in politics in general we have people such as Rosie (perhaps even yourself) and others who post in BNP threads about racism, thuggish behaviour and all manners of things alleged and true to the BNP. Now as I said before; I accept the BNP is racist and thuggish and have made that clear a number of times. My views on equality and fairness have remained the same throughout, no matter what the political party involved beliefs are.

However what I will not sit back and be silent on is the idea that you can all get away with slandering the BNP whilst at the same time preaching the Conservative Party and more so the Labour Party. The Labour Party, Conservative Party and the British National Party all have racist policies which range on immigration, candidate shortlists and membership requirements.


But we don't say anything about the Tory Party, Labour Party etc. being racist? We're criticising the BNP, and I'm not in support of any of the major political parties you 'call out'. I'll ask you this then, if Labour are worse than the BNP then how come there aren't threads about them? Of course, you've shown us sources and I agree with the fact that all of the major political powers have some form of inequality or racial relations.. but if we all do agree on that... then why do we only have threads against the BNP?

Obviously it's in popular political culture that "BNP IS RACIST.", but if the true fact is that Labour, for example, is racist; then why don't we have threads against them? Why don't you raise the issue?

I have nothing against you, Dan, but you do seem to take the elitist point of view sometimes. But I do respect your political dominance over us little pencil pushers. I'm joking of course.

[-:Undertaker:-]

But we don't say anything about the Tory Party, Labour Party etc. being racist? We're criticising the BNP, and I'm not in support of any of the major political parties you 'call out'. I'll ask you this then, if Labour are worse than the BNP then how come there aren't threads about them? Of course, you've shown us sources and I agree with the fact that all of the major political powers have some form of inequality or racial relations.. but if we all do agree on that... then why do we only have threads against the BNP?

Obviously it's in popular political culture that "BNP IS RACIST.", but if the true fact is that Labour, for example, is racist; then why don't we have threads against them? Why don't you raise the issue?

I have nothing against you, Dan, but you do seem to take the elitist point of view sometimes. But I do respect your political dominance over us little pencil pushers. I'm joking of course.

That is my exact point - you (as in a lot of people on here and outside HxF in general) all dont say anything about the Labour Party or Conservative Party because you either support them (as is the case with Rosie) or that they are accepted as the oh-so-clean-we-cant-do-anything-wrong-party - this is wrong. We only have threads on the British National Party because we either have people such as Hitman exposing some of the lies attributed to the party which is always hit back by the likes of Rosie who refuse to accept that the BNP might actually be in the right for once or we sometimes have people who attack the BNP and pretend they themselves are the champions of equality and fairness and that the BNP is the only one in the wrong.

I do raise the issue, i've done it before with Rosie and i'm trying to bring it back up again because the last time it got debated it seemingly didnt get through/wasnt agreed upon. I will not sit back on here while people from the Labour Party or Conservative Party attack the BNP for being thugs, racists, homophobes and sexist - when infact they are all as bad as one another.

That is my point; the BNP, Conservative Party and Labour Party are all as bad as one another when it comes to this area and its time people accepted this, rather than dribbling on about the Daily Mail which has no relevance to the topic.

My view isnt elitist at all, its consistent.

[Bun]

I didn't dispute that the BNP havent had thugs within, as I have said before; the party has a large presence of thugs much like the Labour Party did in the 1980s - you know when they called workers scabs at the picket lines and smashed anybodys face in who attempted to go back to work? As for racism and all of that issue, while the BNP are racist so is the Labour Party but people such as yourself like to post in threads like this acting on the moral highground when you and your party is on the exact level as Nick Griffin and the BNP. You support racial policies, Labour implements them. Nick Griffin supports racial policies, the BNP wants to implement them.

Do not come posting in BNP threads like the guardian angel of fairness and equality, because your views are anything but equal and fair.

WHY THE HELL ARE YOU SO BLIND AND ONE SIDED?! how do you survive in liverpool with your delusional opinions?!



btw i'm sorry for personally attacking you but you make me so mad man, so so mad!

[-:Undertaker:-]

WHY THE HELL ARE YOU SO BLIND AND ONE SIDED?! how do you survive in liverpool with your delusional opinions?!



btw i'm sorry for personally attacking you but you make me so mad man, so so mad!

Alright then, make sure you reply to this if you are prepared to be so cold in what you throw at me;

How is the BNP racist or sexist and the Labour Party not racist or sexist when the Labour Party also has imposed women-only candidate shortlists on seats across the country? - my point is, why are the BNP the ones in the wrong and not your beloved Labour Party?

Often you have put Labour in your signature and often you have posted little comments towards me, so now its time for you to respond properly. The most maddening thing of all is when people post little comments like that, but cant seem to dispute the facts so I really am looking forward to a response from you which tackles the question i've posed.

We have also had David Miliband voting for Diane Abbott in the Labour Party leadership contest because she is black and a woman, surely, as David Miliband also now discriminates based on race or sex - he is just as bad as Nick Griffin and his lot?

[Catzsy]

Oh but I do know what is equal and what isnt - as I will explain in the reply to Rosie near the end. You see, here on this forum and in politics in general we have people such as Rosie (perhaps even yourself) and others who post in BNP threads about racism, thuggish behaviour and all manners of things alleged and true to the BNP. Now as I said before; I accept the BNP is racist and thuggish and have made that clear a number of times. My views on equality and fairness have remained the same throughout, no matter what the political party involved beliefs are.

However what I will not sit back and be silent on is the idea that you can all get away with slandering the BNP whilst at the same time preaching the Conservative Party and more so the Labour Party. The Labour Party, Conservative Party and the British National Party all have racist policies which range on immigration, candidate shortlists and membership requirements.



Indeed you can post in any thread but you must expect a reply Rosie, which you often give the impression that you are not keen on, hence why you constantly dish out lines like you just have done such as 'I can post in any thread I like Dan' - yes well lets settle this once and for all, I have never said you cannot post on certain topics. I will also not accept from you or anybody else that I somehow rant about the newspapers, infact time and time again it is me who the one who attempts to divert the topic away from the newspaper issue and onto the issue at hand; be it immigration, political correctness, justice or the European Union. I know what thread you are referring to though, and that was one of the only times I have attacked the Guardian newspaper and why? - because I am sick to my back teeth of the only reply on this forum being 'OMG DAILY MAIL RUBBISH'.

I mean to prove my point you just cannot help yourself can you because yet again in your reply just now you have had another go at the Daily Mail despite the fact the comment was from a member of the public on the comment board, not the Daily Mail. Give the newspaper slanting a rest - its boring, tiresome and repetitive. I will now get back to your post and the actual topic instead of playing on your diversions about newspapers and your right to post in threads which I have never disputed.

I have made it very clear in my post which you seemed to have ignored clearly, you cannot go around preaching about the British National Party and its views or actions (remember Gordon Browns staff calling a bullying helpline because hes that bad? - but you denied it predictably!). You yourself support candidate shortlists based on race or gender from what I remember from the debate we had. Although it didnt really reach its conclusion so i'll bring it up again; you (and others) say the BNP is racist for having had a whites-only membership policy - but the Labour and Conservative Parties either have or support having candidate shortlists based on sexuality, race or gender - so why is the Labour Party so much more on the moral highground than the BNP is?

The difference between my idea of fairness and your own is that I think everyone should be treated fairly regardless of sexuality, race or gender - your idea and the idea of the Labour Party on the other hand is that if you are black, asian, gay or a woman you are more worthy of a position because of them factors - that is not fairness or equality, so dont pretend it is and more to the point; dont speak down on a party (the BNP) which takes the same line of thinking as yourself and your own party but only the other way around.

No I was merely pointing out the error of the mail which you seem to think is 100% accurate. If you poke at any papers all the time then you should expect it too. Convicted criminals have absolutely nothing to do with the philosophy of the labour party and you are just using a diversionary tactic again which has nothing to do with the main topic of the thread which is the mail glossing over how many of the BNP have been convicted for racism. They are nothing like the labour party - find one of them convicted for racism, please. I also have a right to my opinion even if you say I haven't - the two issues are totally unrelated.

[-:Undertaker:-]

No I was merely pointing out the error of the mail which you seem to think is 100% accurate. If you poke at any papers all the time then you should expect it too.

Point out one example in the history of my posts where I have attacked a paper first.


Convicted criminals have absolutely nothing to do with the philosophy of the labour party and you are just using a diversionary tactic again which has nothing to do with the main topic of the thread which is the mail glossing over how many of the BNP have been convicted for racism. They are nothing like the labour party - find one of them convicted for racism, please.

Racism does, because both the Labour Party, Conservative Party and the British National Party have policies/leading figures who are in favour of sexist and racist policies and methods. No Labour Party members such as Diane Abbott or David Miliband (your next leader who you'll not doubt be voting for come next election) are convicted of racism and why is that? - because they discriminate and say things in favour of minorities and not the majority which is the white population.

This really grinds my gears, you and your party think discriminating against white people/straight people is perfectly fine all in the name of 'diversity and equality' but cannot stand to have somebody do exactly the same just the other way around.


I also have a right to my opinion even if you say I haven't - the two issues are totally unrelated.

Find me one example where I have said you are not allowed a right to your opinion - you see you keep saying this over and over again in every thread as though thats the justification for your side of the discussion but the fact is I have never said anything of the sort.

[Catzsy]

Point out one example in the history of my posts where I have attacked a paper first.



Racism does, because both the Labour Party, Conservative Party and the British National Party have policies/leading figures who are in favour of sexist and racist policies and methods. No Labour Party members such as Diane Abbott or David Miliband (your next leader who you'll not doubt be voting for come next election) are convicted of racism and why is that? - because they discriminate and say things in favour of minorities and not the majority which is the white population.

This really grinds my gears, you and your party think discriminating against white people/straight people is perfectly fine all in the name of 'diversity and equality' but cannot stand to have somebody do exactly the same just the other way around.



Find me one example where I have said you are not allowed a right to your opinion - you see you keep saying this over and over again in every thread as though thats the justification for your side of the discussion but the fact is I have never said anything of the sort.

Yes I will answer your questions in detail later but for now find me one labour party member who has been convicted of racism which is the main topic of this thread.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Yes I will answer your questions in detail later but for now find me one labour party member who has been convicted of racism which is the main topic of this thread.

I have never said a Labour Party member has been convicted of racism, I am saying that the opinions within the Labour Party and the methods of those leading figures within the party are racist and sexist. You are totally ignoring what I said on purpose, my question to you yet again is; why is it ok for Diane Abbott to make comments based on race and sex when Nick Griffin cannot do the same?

Why is the likes of Diane Abbott any better than Nick Griffin in your eyes?
Is it because they wear a red rossette as opposed to a navy one?

Please do tell.

[Bun]

Alright then, make sure you reply to this if you are prepared to be so cold in what you throw at me;

How is the BNP racist or sexist and the Labour Party not racist or sexist when the Labour Party also has imposed women-only candidate shortlists on seats across the country? - my point is, why are the BNP the ones in the wrong and not your beloved Labour Party?

Often you have put Labour in your signature and often you have posted little comments towards me, so now its time for you to respond properly. The most maddening thing of all is when people post little comments like that, but cant seem to dispute the facts so I really am looking forward to a response from you which tackles the question i've posed.

We have also had David Miliband voting for Diane Abbott in the Labour Party leadership contest because she is black and a woman, surely, as David Miliband also now discriminates based on race or sex - he is just as bad as Nick Griffin and his lot?

it's not sexism, it's affirmative action, positive discrimination. yes, it's highly criticised but has both it's pros and cons. the bnp are racist 'cos they don't like ethnic minorities in our country, which is completely different? :S

i just get sick and tired of having debates with you when you're so hellbent on reppin' ukip 24/7. you like to see yourself as somebody who is fair and democratic, when really you just want to make ukip look as good as possible. thus, i end up winding you up for my own amusement.

[-:Undertaker:-]

it's not sexism, it's affirmative action, positive discrimination. yes, it's highly criticised but has both it's pros and cons. the bnp are racist 'cos they don't like ethnic minorities in our country, which is completely different? :S

i just get sick and tired of having debates with you when you're so hellbent on reppin' ukip 24/7. you like to see yourself as somebody who is fair and democratic, when really you just want to make ukip look as good as possible. thus, i end up winding you up for my own amusement.

Hang on, so its ok because its got a different name coined by the Labour Party into making people such as yourself believe its perfectly fine? So its fairly alright to discriminate against white straight men but not the other way around, well heres news for you - neither way is fine and for you or the party you support to call the BNP names like racist, homophobic or sexist is the height of hypocrisy, it really is but I doubt it'll make much of an impression on you - this is where the tribal idea for Labour comes from, because i've never actually met anybody who supports Labour who stands their ground whilst sticking to their morals and who has some sort of common sense-consistency in their views.

UKIP on the other hand has nothing (sod all, jack all) to do with this debate, we were going along quite fine without them being mentioned but you had to go and spoil it didnt you darling, although next I guess we'll have Rosie complaining that I bring UKIP up too often.

If you discriminate against sex, you are sexist.
If you discriminate against race, you are a racist.

Why does this only apply to Nick Griffin and the British National Party?

I want to know why Nick Griffin and his lot are any different to those in the Labour Party such as Harriett Harman, Diane Abbott or David Miliband.

[Bun]

Hang on, so its ok because its got a different name coined by the Labour Party into making people such as yourself believe its perfectly fine? So its fairly alright to discriminate against white straight men but not the other way around, well heres news for you - neither way is fine and for you or the party you support to call the BNP names like racist, homophobic or sexist is the height of hypocrisy, it really is but I doubt it'll make much of an impression on you.

UKIP on the other hand has nothing (sod all, jack all) to do with this debate, we were going along quite fine without them being mentioned but you had to go and spoil it didnt you darling, next we'll have Rosie complaining that I bring UKIP up too often.

christ on a bike, how do you know i even agree with affirmative action? you don't. the bnp ARE racist and homophobic. there is a huge difference from having racist ideologies and making sure minorities feel represented, i don't see how you can possibly link them?

nah, you never directly mentioned ukip but you'll happily sit there and call labour and conservatives racist and moan about the eu when really ukip are just a bunch of xenophobes who thinks the eu is undemocratic. and don't call me darling, kiddo.

[-:Undertaker:-]

christ on a bike, how do you know i even agree with affirmative action? you don't. the bnp ARE racist and homophobic. there is a huge difference from having racist ideologies and making sure minorities feel represented, i don't see how you can possibly link them?

nah, you never directly mentioned ukip but you'll happily sit there and call labour and conservatives racist and moan about the eu when really ukip are just a bunch of xenophobes who thinks the eu is undemocratic. and don't call me darling, kiddo.

I have said the BNP are racist but you have just ignored that to post some smart reply, how can I link them? - very simple really.

I discriminate against a person/s because of their race, I am a racist.
I discriminate against a person/s because of their sex, I am a sexist.
I discriminate against a person/s because of their sexuality, I am a homophobe.

Now do you agree or disagree with that? yes/no??

As for the European Union, lets not even go there but I would advise you read up on it, considering its never been elected or asked for i'd say its pretty undemocratic, wouldnt you? - or are you that confused now with conflicting party loyalty and common sense that you now dont even know what the meaning of democracy is, let alone racism.

[Catzsy]

Point out one example in the history of my posts where I have attacked a paper first.

I didn't say you had attacked a paper first but you seem to rely on 'right wing' papers that only see it from one side
so you don't have a balanced perspective. Also, any posts that are against the mail are for that reason and they don't get personal about the member who reads the paper like you do. Example:
http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=649262&p=6531982#post6531982

A great contribution there. So anyway, what newspaper do you read (i'll hazard a guess) - is it the Guardian while your sipping your nettle tea talking to your social worker/teacher friends about how everything is Margaret Thatchers fault? ..or are you just still caught up in Obamarama


by Undertaker Racism does, because both the Labour Party, Conservative Party and the British National Party have policies/leading figures who are in favour of sexist and racist policies and methods. No Labour Party members such as Diane Abbott or David Miliband (your next leader who you'll not doubt be voting for come next election) are convicted of racism and why is that? - because they discriminate and say things in favour of minorities and not the majority which is the white population. This really grinds my gears, you and your party think discriminating against white people/straight people is perfectly fine all in the name of 'diversity and equality' but cannot stand to have somebody do exactly the same just the other way around.

No they don't - they have no policies in respect of race like you are always trying to say which is the issue here not woman who are actually a majority in this country although I do not have anytime for Dianne Abbot myself. The BNP is a facist and racist organisation who got their just rewards in the last election. Where is the hard evidence to substantiate your claims here?



Find me one example where I have said you are not allowed a right to your opinion - you see you keep saying this over and over again in every thread as though thats the justification for your side of the discussion but the fact is I have never said anything of the sort.

Comments like these:

dont speak down on a party (the BNP) which takes the same line of thinking as yourself and your own party but only the other way around.

have made it very clear in my post which you seemed to have ignored clearly, you cannot go around preaching about the British National Party and its views or actions


The fact is I can and I don't tell you not to say - I may not agree with your opinions but I defend the right for you to express them.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I didn't say you had attacked a paper first but you seem to rely on 'right wing' papers that only see it from one side
so you don't have a balanced perspective. Also, any posts that are against the mail are for that reason and they don't get personal about the member who reads the paper like you do. Example:
http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=649262&p=6531982#post6531982

Wow you used the one example I referred to in the first place! Of course I rely on right-wing papers, just as you yourself are biased towards the left - its called having an opinion, afterall you always defend your right to an opinion even when that right is not under attack.

That post anyway was partly a joke, nettle tea has nothing to do with the Guardian and its just a sterotype, just as i'm sure many (including myself) associate the Daily Mail with immigration, the Telegraph with the Conservative Party and so forth. I can take a joke and can joke myself, but as usual its taken wayyyy out of context.


No they don't - they have no policies in respect of race like you are always trying to say which is the issue here not woman who are actually a majority in this country although I do not have anytime for Dianne Abbot myself. The BNP is a facist and racist organisation who got their just rewards in the last election. Where is the hard evidence to substantiate your claims here? Diane Abbott - complained that the leadership race was made of 'pale' straight males - imagine if Nick Griffin complained that he was seeing too many black females about.

David Miliband - voted for Diane Abbott to make the race seem more 'diverse' - imagine if Nick Griffin voted for somebody based on their racial greed, sexuality or gender.

So why Rosie, are Labour any better than the BNP?


Comments like this:
I don't tell you not to say - I may not agree with your opinions but I defend the right for you to express them.

That is debate clearly, theres a difference between me saying 'you cannot/should not speak down on a party such as the BNP' and what I would say if I was disputing your right to say it which would be 'Rosie, you dont have any right to an opinion' - so to conclude, its debate not orders.

[Catzsy]

Wow you used the one example I referred to in the first place! Of course I rely on right-wing papers, just as you yourself are biased towards the left - its called having an opinion, afterall you always defend your right to an opinion even when that right is not under attack.

That post anyway was partly a joke, nettle tea has nothing to do with the Guardian and its just a sterotype, just as i'm sure many (including myself) associate the Daily Mail with immigration, the Telegraph with the Conservative Party and so forth. I can take a joke and can joke myself, but as usual its taken wayyyy out of context.

Diane Abbott - complained that the leadership race was made of 'pale' straight males - imagine if Nick Griffin complained that he was seeing too many black females about.

David Miliband - voted for Diane Abbott to make the race seem more 'diverse' - imagine if Nick Griffin voted for somebody based on their racial greed, sexuality or gender.

So why Rosie, are Labour any better than the BNP?

That is debate clearly, theres a difference between me saying 'you cannot/should not speak down on a party such as the BNP' and what I would say if I was disputing your right to say it which would be 'Rosie, you dont have any right to an opinion' - so to conclude, its debate not orders.

Sources for these statements although I can imagine her saying that tbh. She should stay in presenting. Again what you say about David Milliband is absolute tosh. He did not vote for her because she was female or black he voted for her to get a Left wing candidate on the ballot paper. Right, Dan all political parties including UKIP are better than the BNP because they are a racist and Facist organisation - that is the answer. Sorry it comes over as us not having a right to our opinion - I am sure many oter members will agree with that as well. The last thing debates should do is get personal.

[Bun]

I have said the BNP are racist but you have just ignored that to post some smart reply, how can I link them? - very simple really.

I discriminate against a person/s because of their race, I am a racist.
I discriminate against a person/s because of their sex, I am a sexist.
I discriminate against a person/s because of their sexuality, I am a homophobe.

Now do you agree or disagree with that? yes/no??

As for the European Union, lets not even go there but I would advise you read up on it, considering its never been elected or asked for i'd say its pretty undemocratic, wouldnt you? - or are you that confused now with conflicting party loyalty and common sense that you now dont even know what the meaning of democracy is, let alone racism.

I discriminate against a person/s because of their race, I am a racist. agree
I discriminate against a person/s because of their sex, I am a sexist. agree
I discriminate against a person/s because of their sexuality, I am a homophobe. well, discrimination against homosexuals. but i won't get fussy over that.

however you missed something out, not all discrimination is negative. women shortlisting is positive discrimination, as it encourages female representation and thus more women feel represented. i think something really needs to be done to balance out male, pale and stale parliament, so it can catch up with the rest of society, or are you against that?

alright alright let's see:
european parliament - elected
european council - head of states and therefore, elected
european commission - nominated by the elected member states from each country, and approved by the elected european parliament

so no, sounds nice 'n democratic to me

oh and don't tell me what i do and do not know

[-:Undertaker:-]

Sources for these statements although I can imagine her saying that tbh. She should stay in presenting. Again what you say about David Milliband is absolute tosh. He did not vote for her because she was female or black he voted for her to get a Left wing candidate on the ballot paper. Right, Dan all political parties including UKIP are better than the BNP because they are a racist and Facist organisation - that is the answer. Sorry it comes over as us not having a right to our opinion - I am sure many oter members will agree with that as well. The last thing debates should do is get personal.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jun/09/labour-diane-abbott-leadership-race
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/13/diane-abbott-leadership-bid

With help from unlikely sources, Diane Abbott (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/diane-abbott) made it on to the ballot to contest the Labour (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/labour) leadership, where the backbencher – admittedly Cambridge educated herself – will take on four white, male Oxbridge educated ex-cabinet ministers who were all special advisers before becoming MPs.David Miliband (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/davidmiliband), one of the contenders, transferred his nomination to Abbott, the leftwing MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington, this morning, 24 hours after acting Labour leader Harriet Harman did the same in an attempt to get a woman on to the ballot.

The man clearly transferred his vote over to Abbott to seem like a good guy whos trying to get a diverse leadership race, you dont vote for a rival for the sake of it. The concept of the BNP, again, you are sweeping it under the carpet - why is the BNP racist and the Labour & Conservative Partys not when they all in some form or other discriminate against people based on their sexuality, race or gender. It is all wrong, it should be based on merits, not the colour of your skin or the gender you were born. If UKIP ever move to candidate shortlists based on race or gender, i'll class them as in exactly the same league as Labour, the Conservatives and the BNP.


I discriminate against a person/s because of their race, I am a racist. agree
I discriminate against a person/s because of their sex, I am a sexist. agree
I discriminate against a person/s because of their sexuality, I am a homophobe. well, discrimination against homosexuals. but i won't get fussy over that.

however you missed something out, not all discrimination is negative. women shortlisting is positive discrimination, as it encourages female representation and thus more women feel represented. i think something really needs to be done to balance out male, pale and stale parliament, so it can catch up with the rest of society, or are you against that?

Well you obviously do not agree because to then, only a few sentences after you've 'agreed' with me - dismantled your own argument in favour of what you call 'positive discrimination' - yes I am against people being placed into jobs based on their gender, race or sexuality, just as I am opposed to anybody being knocked back in life because of their sexuality, gender or race. Why should somebody be given a job based on their race, gender or sexuality?

There is no such thing as positive discrimination, because in doing so you discriminate negativly against the other side (be it white or black) - in South Africa under apartheid they could have called it 'positive discrimination' in favour of whites, but you dont agree with that i'm sure?


alright alright let's see:
european parliament - elected
european council - head of states and therefore, elected
european commission - nominated by the elected member states from each country, and approved by the elected european parliament

so no, sounds nice 'n democratic to me

oh and don't tell me what i do and do not know

European Parliament - no real legislative powers, is only consultative.
European Council - no elections held for the Council President, body not elected anyway and therefore is not democratic.
European Commission - not elected by the public and must act in line with the needs of the EU, not national interests.
ECJ - unelected and unaccountable.
All - unelected and unaccountable.

Thats democracy is it?

[Catzsy]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jun/09/labour-diane-abbott-leadership-race
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/13/diane-abbott-leadership-bid



The man clearly transferred his vote over to Abbott to seem like a good guy whos trying to get a diverse leadership race, you dont vote for a rival for the sake of it. The concept of the BNP, again, you are sweeping it under the carpet - why is the BNP racist and the Labour & Conservative Partys not when they all in some form or other discriminate against people based on their sexuality, race or gender. It is all wrong, it should be based on merits, not the colour of your skin or the gender you were born.


If UKIP ever move to candidate shortlists based on race or gender, i'll class them as in exactly the same league as Labour, the Conservatives and the BNP.

Nowhere does it say he voted for her nomination because she was a woman and black, Dan. He voted to get a left wing candidate in to do some damage to Ed Balls campaign - thats the way I see it. There are no shortlists based on race - that is against the law. How many times do I have to say that as well? The only exception was all woman shortlists were exempt from the Sexual Discrimination Act for awhile but I believe that has been repealed as well.

[Bun]

Well you obviously do not agree because to then, only a few sentences after you've 'agreed' with me - dismantled your own argument in favour of what you call 'positive discrimination' - yes I am against people being placed into jobs based on their gender, race or sexuality, just as I am opposed to anybody being knocked back in life because of their sexuality, gender or race. Why should somebody be given a job based on their race, gender or sexuality?
so you do not believe that something needs to be done to make parliament more representative towards the population after centuries of male dominance?


There is no such thing as positive discrimination, because in doing so you discriminate negativly against the other side (be it white or black) - in South Africa under apartheid they could have called it 'positive discrimination' in favour of whites, but you dont agree with that i'm sure?
yes and that's a con of it. i haven't said i agree with it, although it does increase representation.



European Parliament - no real legislative powers, is only consultative.
European Council - no elections held for the Council members.
European Commission - not elected by the public and must act in line with the needs of the EU, not national interests.
ECJ - unelected and unaccountable.
All - unelected and unaccountable.
That democractic is it?
european parliament can reject bills lol?
european council are the head of states of each 27 countries respectively, that's democratic enough for me
commission is elected by elected ministers and approved by an elected parliament
judges are appointed by elected governments, which is part of the power we give them in the mandate upon being elected

[ifuseekamy]

Maybe we should extradite him and appropriately punish him under Shariah Law. I believe treason warrants execution.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Nowhere does it say he voted for her nomination because she was a woman and black, Dan. He voted to get a left wing candidate in to do some damage to Ed Balls campaign - thats the way I see it. There are no shortlists based on race - that is against the law. How many times do I have to say that as well? The only exception was all woman shortlists were exempt from the Sexual Discrimination Act for awhile but I believe that has been repealed as well.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4368035.stm
http://operationblackvote.wordpress.com/2010/01/10/mps-back-all-black-shortlists-for-party-selections/
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7149096.ece
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/black-shortlists-would-create-political-apartheid-801230.html

Harriet Harman has been calling for them and its been done but not 'offically' so it doesnt upset the grassroots of the party. Of course Miliband voted for her to make himself look good, he could have voted for any other candidate if he was so eager to give everybody such a chance at the leadership but he voted for Diane Abbott . I mean the fact you are denying it is really astounding even when hes said himself "It's an important day for diversity. I believe in the politics of debate and dialogue." - http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/06/10/labour-leadership-election-david-miliband-nominates-left-winger-diane-abbott-115875-22323150/

The fact you have members and ministers of your party (same goes for other parties as well) who are openly pushing for apartheid policies to me is just as bad as the BNP who are also only talking about their ideas on discrimination against blacks and asians. I take it then, you place Labours current leader Harriet Harman, on the same level as Nick Griffin?

As for the rules changing, nothing has changed - Harman is preparing to change the rules of the party already so that half of the cabinet are female. The woman and the entire lot of them are nothing but marxist despots.


so you do not believe that something needs to be done to make parliament more representative towards the population after centuries of male dominance?

So you want to demolish democratic choice in voting for members of parliament?

A woman should get to parliament on her own merit, much like Mrs Thatcher did back in the days where the Conservative aristocracy tried to prevent her from doing so. Being a male, a female, gay, straight, black, asian, green or blue does not matter. If we live in a democracy then all thats matters is that the party chooses freely who to nominate as a candidate and the electorate makes the final decision about who goes to parliament. I suppose we should turn it around and put you in a scenario;

You apply for a job and have three A* grades and perform with flying colours in the interview.
A woman applies for the same job and she has only one A* grade and struggles in the interview.

Would you be happy surrendering your place to her in the name of diversity and representation?


yes and that's a con of it. i haven't said i agree with it, although it does increase representation.

The problem is that is doesnt increase representation. Black people do not all share the same views, nor do asians, gays, straights, whites and so forth - parliament is not about how many black faces you can fit in, its about representative views and by imposing these apartheid regulations and laws onto parties and the country in general - you infringe democracy and create exactly the same system that existed in South Africa.


european parliament can reject bills lol?
european council are the head of states of each 27 countries respectively, that's democratic enough for me
commission is elected by elected ministers and approved by an elected parliament
judges are appointed by elected governments, which is part of the power we give them in the mandate upon being elected

Saddam Hussein and his administration appointed their military chief - is that democratic enough for you?
Tsar Nicholas II appointed Pyotr Stolypin as his Prime Minister - was that your concept of democracy in work?
Mao appointed Lin Biao as his eventual successor - was that your concept of democracy at work?

A dictator and his parliament can elect eachother as much as they like, and afterall they can just say exactly what you have been saying "I've been elected by my local communist party" or "the parliament has elected me so I have democratic accountability" - the difference between the role of EU commissioners, and the European President compared to the role of say, speaker of the house in the United Kingdom is that the role of speaker is an internal role and does not influence policy on behalf of the majority of the general populace, the EU roles on the other hand do and serve as the government of Europe as I believe the Prodi commission made clear all them years ago.

The European Parliament can only reject certain pieces of legislative acts, I will have to read up on the statistics I have somewhere. There are regulations, directives and some other forms of bills - there is one or more type which can be bypassed past the parliament not to mention the fact all European law has supremacy over the British parliament - a parliament which was elected by the people of the United Kingdom to serve their interests and protect the consitution of this sovereign country. British MEPs make up just under 10% of the EU parliament, how can any piece of legisture coming from Brussels be democratically passed anyway when more than 90% of that decision was taken by MEPs from another country?

The Commission is also not democratic at all, when has anybody of the general public ever been asked to vote for a EU commissioner? - never. Do you not wonder why EU commissioners who hold them posts are ex-communists from the USSR or are convicted embezzlers and criminas - because they are appointed (yes appointed and not elected) by themselves and their friends hence where the term the EU gravy train comes from. None of these commissioners have been elected by the public and thus are not accountable by the people - the commission is the government of the union and is appointed by the parliament - that would be like the British parliament appointing our own government rather than the general public and thus it is not democratic at all.

The video below is just a quick run-through of some of the EU commissioners and their criminal records, another video exists should you wish to watch it of the communists within the commission being exposed. How ironic really, the communists we not elected in the USSR where many of them served and now they are not elected in the same body, just based on the other side of Europe!

I mean its so obvious to anyone whos studied the USSR who at least glanced at it, the similarties between the Soviet Union and the European Union - the last President of the USSR himself (Mr Gorbachev) even said he could not work out why western leaders were trying to create the exact same thing on the other side of Europe as the monster they had spent decades campaigning, preaching and even fighting against. The words come from those who were involved in the former USSR itself and here is just one example out of many; http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865 + not to mention Valclav Klaus who is sitting President of the Czech Republic, a national hero who fought against Soviet domination of his country and is warning of the same occuring within the European Union.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npU3g5YnD4A


The European Council on the other hand and its President Herman Van Rompuy (who wants world government and has made that pretty clear, heck hes even said it himself) is supposed to be the figurehead of the European project, a man whos paid more than Obama and David Cameron - he is also unelected but has been appointed. This is where the difference comes in, your idea of democracy is somebody being appointed on your behalf (just like Communist China, Communist Cambodia, Cuba.. the list goes on) whereas my idea is actual democracy where the majority of the electorate vote for who they want to hold that office.

To finish it off, these offices were created without any democratic accountability whatsoever, although I guess they have some partial accountability becase the French said no, the Dutch said no and the Irish said no. The British people on the other hand where not even given a say on whether they wanted a President of Europe, let alone Mr Van Rompuy who most people would walk past in the street and be none the wiser.

How sad that we fought two world wars to stop this happening, and some of the young such as yourself just disregard it all.

[MattFr]

so you do not believe that something needs to be done to make parliament more representative towards the population after centuries of male dominance?


Is this serious? Nothing should be done to make parliament more "representative". Males are dominant in parliament because we voted them in, that's democracy. Heard of that? Parliament should passively become more "representative"; if women want to be part of it, they can bloody well earn it and get elected because of their core values and principles, not because it's the hip new thing to chose women over men.

Oh, and because you need telling again, since you ignore pretty much everything Dan says, discriminating against men to make parliament more "representative" is sexist. How can you slate the BNP when parties such as the Labour party are so sexist? This thread just radiates flawed logic.

[Catzsy]

@Dan. What you quoted - two are completely out of date and two are suggestions by the parties for implementation. Now if this is passed by parliament then it has been voted for by a majority of 'white middle class' males. It may be tough for you to swallow but that's life whether you think it is fair or unfair and all the ranting in the world is not going to stop it. David Milliband said 'diversity' not 'culteral diversity' - he meant as I said before to get a 'left winger' on the ballot sheet.Harriet Harman is a complete one off and not representative of the views of most women - she is too much.

Marxists despots? Now you really are talking a complete load of rubbish worthy of Nigel Farage and Nick Griffin - it doesn't pay to get too emotional when discussing politics :P.

@ MattFr - not flawed logic at all because BNP are a facist and racist organisation supported by a very small minority. I wonder why on earth we even give them the time of day on here. Yes, Males are more dominant in parliament because they were voted in and it is these same people who will decide it if it changes whether it is popular or not with members of the public who hold the stronger right wing view because that is democracy in action as well.

[Bun]

I NEVER ******* SAID I SUPPORTED IT?!