|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 15, 2024 18:29:44 GMT
Lefties accuse whoever triggers lefties as far right.
Control immigration…far right
Trans women are really men …far right
Multiculturalism isn’t working …Nazi grade far right .
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Aug 15, 2024 19:54:25 GMT
Lefties accuse whoever triggers lefties as far right. Control immigration…far right Trans women are really men …far right Multiculturalism isn’t working …Nazi grade far right . It should work both ways
Uncontrolled migration .............. far left Silencing J K Rowling..................far left Silencing anti Multiculturalism far left
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Aug 16, 2024 4:54:49 GMT
I find it almost unbelievable that so many posters set out to defend the far Right. But then again there were Brits and French who were willing to fight alongside of the Nazis, so maybe not so surprising after all. Whatever people are if they are legal, and many you call far right are indeed legal, then they have a right to air opinions. Inventing comparisons does not help the democratic process and once again what makes anyone we have discussed 'far right'? The BNP have many Leftish policies, the only policy that seems to create ire among the great and the good is the belief that Britain and Britons have a right to choose who resides with them. That belief is held by almost all other Nations in the world. Indeed:
|
|
|
|
Post by aristaeus on Aug 16, 2024 12:43:00 GMT
Well the BNP was founded by a literal neo-Nazi, so there's a big clue there about whether the BNP is/was racist. The Democratic party in the US was proslavery in the 1860s, do we consider that they are that now. Most parties in the UK were discussing Eugenics with serious intent before the war but we consider them free from all tarnishing with that movement. Why is it only the BNP that cannot be allowed to escape from their history. What you have to show is what did they propose in 2010 that was neo-Nazi, racist or fascist. I do keep asking The BNP did not allow black people to be a member in 2010. So yeah, racist. The leader in 2010 was Nick Griffin, who joined the BNP while Tyndell (the neo-Nazi) was still leader. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 16, 2024 13:25:54 GMT
The Democratic party in the US was proslavery in the 1860s, do we consider that they are that now. Most parties in the UK were discussing Eugenics with serious intent before the war but we consider them free from all tarnishing with that movement. Why is it only the BNP that cannot be allowed to escape from their history. What you have to show is what did they propose in 2010 that was neo-Nazi, racist or fascist. I do keep asking The BNP did not allow black people to be a member in 2010. So yeah, racist. The leader in 2010 was Nick Griffin, who joined the BNP while Tyndell (the neo-Nazi) was still leader. The black police association did not allow white people to vote and white people could only join as associate members and as far as can be discerned still do not have a vote. The BNP and the BPA were constituted under exactly the same laws before 2010 but only the BNP were taken to court. Strange that? The leader in 2010 was Nick Griffin who changed the BNP from what it was under Tyndall which is exactly why Tyndall did not see eye to eye with Griffin. Do you wish to try again with what the BNP actually proposed as policy or does that not matter when you call them names. |
|
|
|
Post by aristaeus on Aug 16, 2024 14:26:15 GMT
The BNP did not allow black people to be a member in 2010. So yeah, racist. The leader in 2010 was Nick Griffin, who joined the BNP while Tyndell (the neo-Nazi) was still leader. The black police association did not allow white people to vote and white people could only join as associate members and as far as can be discerned still do not have a vote. The BNP and the BPA were constituted under exactly the same laws before 2010 but only the BNP were taken to court. Strange that? The leader in 2010 was Nick Griffin who changed the BNP from what it was under Tyndall which is exactly why Tyndall did not see eye to eye with Griffin. Do you wish to try again with what the BNP actually proposed as policy or does that not matter when you call them names. Was the BNP not allowing black people to join racist? Yes or no? |
|
|
|
Post by aristaeus on Aug 16, 2024 14:33:14 GMT
The BNP did not allow black people to be a member in 2010. So yeah, racist. The leader in 2010 was Nick Griffin, who joined the BNP while Tyndell (the neo-Nazi) was still leader. The black police association did not allow white people to vote and white people could only join as associate members and as far as can be discerned still do not have a vote. The BNP and the BPA were constituted under exactly the same laws before 2010 but only the BNP were taken to court. Strange that? The leader in 2010 was Nick Griffin who changed the BNP from what it was under Tyndall which is exactly why Tyndall did not see eye to eye with Griffin. Do you wish to try again with what the BNP actually proposed as policy or does that not matter when you call them names. The National Black Police Association isn't a political party. It's not saying 'oh, here's some exclusive club that black people can join and white people can't, because we hate white people' - it's saying 'sometimes, people of colour will have different experiences to white people, and as such, they may need different support during employment'. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Aug 16, 2024 14:41:01 GMT
The black police association did not allow white people to vote and white people could only join as associate members and as far as can be discerned still do not have a vote. The BNP and the BPA were constituted under exactly the same laws before 2010 but only the BNP were taken to court. Strange that? The leader in 2010 was Nick Griffin who changed the BNP from what it was under Tyndall which is exactly why Tyndall did not see eye to eye with Griffin. Do you wish to try again with what the BNP actually proposed as policy or does that not matter when you call them names. The National Black Police Association isn't a political party. It's not saying 'oh, here's some exclusive club that black people can join and white people can't, because we hate white people' - it's saying 'sometimes, people of colour will have different experiences to white people, and as such, they may need different support during employment'. Translation: It's not fascist when we do it. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 16, 2024 14:58:17 GMT
The black police association did not allow white people to vote and white people could only join as associate members and as far as can be discerned still do not have a vote. The BNP and the BPA were constituted under exactly the same laws before 2010 but only the BNP were taken to court. Strange that? The leader in 2010 was Nick Griffin who changed the BNP from what it was under Tyndall which is exactly why Tyndall did not see eye to eye with Griffin. Do you wish to try again with what the BNP actually proposed as policy or does that not matter when you call them names. The National Black Police Association isn't a political party. It's not saying 'oh, here's some exclusive club that black people can join and white people can't, because we hate white people' - it's saying 'sometimes, people of colour will have different experiences to white people, and as such, they may need different support during employment'. The BNP do not have the power of arrest. You are saying here is an exclusive club for black people that works in the interests of and for black people specifically and if that club works against the interests of white people well white people cannot have a club to address that even if their own experience is different. Why would a political party be a separate issue, a black only political party was proposed way back either in teh 90s or noughties to my recall but it did not get off the ground. There is a home to black politics called OBV which seeks specific political power for BAME people in the political process and is funded in part by government. Dianne Abbott on first taking her seat was taken to task by, of all people, Cyril Smith for saying she hoped to work for her black constituents effectively (the actual quote escapes me) but Smith put her right by saying she should work for all her constituents. Racism is the act of treating individuals differently dependent on their ethnicity to create advantage for one over the other. For some reason the left cannot get tat through their thick skulls and support it. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Aug 16, 2024 17:08:27 GMT
The black police association did not allow white people to vote and white people could only join as associate members and as far as can be discerned still do not have a vote. The BNP and the BPA were constituted under exactly the same laws before 2010 but only the BNP were taken to court. Strange that? The leader in 2010 was Nick Griffin who changed the BNP from what it was under Tyndall which is exactly why Tyndall did not see eye to eye with Griffin. Do you wish to try again with what the BNP actually proposed as policy or does that not matter when you call them names. The National Black Police Association isn't a political party. It's not saying 'oh, here's some exclusive club that black people can join and white people can't, because we hate white people' - it's saying 'sometimes, people of colour will have different experiences to white people, and as such, they may need different support during employment'. Would there be any problem with a National White Police Association? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Aug 16, 2024 17:45:10 GMT
The black police association did not allow white people to vote and white people could only join as associate members and as far as can be discerned still do not have a vote. The BNP and the BPA were constituted under exactly the same laws before 2010 but only the BNP were taken to court. Strange that? The leader in 2010 was Nick Griffin who changed the BNP from what it was under Tyndall which is exactly why Tyndall did not see eye to eye with Griffin. Do you wish to try again with what the BNP actually proposed as policy or does that not matter when you call them names. Was the BNP not allowing black people to join racist? Yes or no? Yes in an identical way that the BPA not allowing white people to vote was racist and the way positive action is racist and teaching of critical race theory is racist and any association of black Asian or Uncle Tom Cobley associations are racist. Being racist is not a moral question if it is allowed in some circumstances so in respect of the BNP only why was it wrong? |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Aug 16, 2024 18:00:26 GMT
The Democratic party in the US was proslavery in the 1860s, do we consider that they are that now. Most parties in the UK were discussing Eugenics with serious intent before the war but we consider them free from all tarnishing with that movement. Why is it only the BNP that cannot be allowed to escape from their history. What you have to show is what did they propose in 2010 that was neo-Nazi, racist or fascist. I do keep asking The BNP did not allow black people to be a member in 2010. So yeah, racist. The leader in 2010 was Nick Griffin, who joined the BNP while Tyndell (the neo-Nazi) was still leader. A lot of whataboutery as usual. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Aug 16, 2024 20:55:36 GMT
That comment ^ exposes your political naivety and just how easily you can fool yourself. I bet even Adolf Hitler never thought for a moment that he was an extremist, that's just the way humans are. Are you seriously saying that the author of Mein Kamf , the architect of the hunger plan , holocaust , invasion of Western Europe and USSR didnt think that his ideas were extreme? Are you that utterly moronically, idiotically stupid? Is there somewhere in your fevered little head that compares people who are against excessive immigration with Hitler ? What idiocy . You haven't read Mein Kampf have you I have I can't match your opinion with reality It's fairly obvious Hitler and several of his right hand men DIDNT find his ideas extreme Others might find them extreme, or well over the top But Hitler ? He just found them necessary |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Aug 16, 2024 21:01:20 GMT
Are you seriously saying that the author of Mein Kamf , the architect of the hunger plan , holocaust , invasion of Western Europe and USSR didnt think that his ideas were extreme? Are you that utterly moronically, idiotically stupid? Is there somewhere in your fevered little head that compares people who are against excessive immigration with Hitler ? What idiocy . You haven't read Mein Kampf have you I have I can't match your opinion with reality It's fairly obvious Hitler and several of his right hand men DIDNT find his ideas extreme Others might find them extreme, or well over the top But Hitler ? He just found them necessary Nope. “ desperate times call for desperate measures“ Hippocrates . Are you saying that Hippocrates was so stupid that he didn’t know what desperate means . Equally are you saying that Hitler thought that if something was necessary the solution couldn’t be defined as extreme ? |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Aug 17, 2024 3:39:51 GMT
The Democratic party in the US was proslavery in the 1860s, do we consider that they are that now. Most parties in the UK were discussing Eugenics with serious intent before the war but we consider them free from all tarnishing with that movement. Why is it only the BNP that cannot be allowed to escape from their history. What you have to show is what did they propose in 2010 that was neo-Nazi, racist or fascist. I do keep asking I find it almost unbelievable that so many posters set out to defend the far Right. But then again there were Brits and French who were willing to fight alongside of the Nazis, so maybe not so surprising after all. I find it unbelievable that so many voters set out to vote for the insane left. But I suppose this is what you get for giving the vote to those too stupid to see the consequences of their actions. |
|
