Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

BNP. good or bad ? watch

  • View Poll Results: what do you think of the BNP?
    good - positive role models for everyone
    14
    8.00%
    ok, but could be better
    18
    10.29%
    bad - wannabee nazis with ****** for leader
    143
    81.71%

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Shall we start with going to visit, and supporting this guy:
    Just before this:

    The 270 victims (259 on the plane, 11 on the ground) were citizens of 21 nations.That is your great anti-islamic leader.
    :rofl:

    You can't blame Griffin for Lockerbie! and things have changed now islam is more of a danger now than then.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Or perhaps we could try his relations with this guy:

    Who became a wanted man in Italy after the 1980 bombing of Bologna train station which left 85 people dead and over 200 wounded.
    some time ago.

    things have changed

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Or perhaps if you are still not convinced, how about his friendship with this guy:

    A man currently in a senior, salaried position within the bnp, who in 1985 was injured by a nailbomb that he was carrying to the offices of the Workers' Revolutionary Party. Police found 10 grenades, seven petrol bombs and two detonators at his home, and is currently implicated in a conspiracy to murder people in positions in society.
    Is that enough for you?
    tsk tsk

    your behind "Eastmidlander"; Lecomber lost his position in party for the threats, his job is now done by someone else.

    why he is still in the party? don't know, he might have *something* on Griffin, but if it were true then police would be involved.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amon.)
    without the members the party is nothing.
    How many people are there on your little stormfront thread?
    10?

    I know they don't make the policys
    Exactly, so their opinion counts for nothing.

    well...thats just a load of crap.
    Nope, it's the truth.
    Sorry if that's a little painful for you, but it's a fact, and if it wasn't you could counter it, rather than just saying it's crap.
    It isn't crap is it?

    I think the BNP policy of voluntary repatriation is slightly different. (as in not just illegals)
    You think?
    That classic line from political lemmings.
    The conservative policy, that was in place right through out the Thatcher years wasn't just illegals.
    Did you see them flood out the doors?
    The policy is meaningless.
    It's just a sop to fool the dupes.

    it has one:
    All material published on these pages represents the personal views of the individual columnists and should not be taken to represent official BNP policy, which is decided by the Chairman after a period of ongoing consultation and discussion at the annual conference each November.
    Yes, we've seen that, and we know it's worth crap.
    Does it deny anything?
    No.
    You can parrot it again and again, but facts are facts.

    other parties are different.
    You're right there, they are credible for a start.

    i couldn't give a crap what Barnes says, hes not the leader, he does not make the policies.
    No, but his policies are approved by the leader, which makes him a darn site more powerful than you.

    They don't need "statements distancing themselves from the comments" because of the ****ing disclaimer!
    So show me where in the disclaimer it says that isn't policy?
    The manifesto says it is, the disclaimer doesn't disagree.
    And of course they need to distance themselves, look at us here discussing it.
    If they didn't want people to believe that was policy they would retract, or distance themselves.
    Do they?
    No
    Why not?
    Because it's policy.

    they don't think people are stupid enough to take it as party policy when they say it shouldn't be taken as party policy.
    But they don't say that, and if it wasn't policy then why is it in the manifesto?


    are you really that ****ing stupid that you continue to take it as policy when it clearly says its not?
    Are you really that ****ing stupid you take it as not policy when your chairman supports it, when it's on your website, and in your manifesto, just because some ignorant nobody, with no authority on a messageboard tells you it isn't?
    Son't call me stupid when you act like the biggest idiot on the planet.
    FFS it's your party and I obviously know more about it than you, so insults won't get you far.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amon.)
    :rofl:
    You find terrorist attacks funny do you?

    Idiot

    You can't blame Griffin for Lockerbie!
    I haven't, but he supported the guy behind it.

    and things have changed now islam is more of a danger now than then.
    That's why Lockerbie still remains the largest terrorist attack on this nation?
    How can it be worse now, when that was the worst ever?

    Idiot.

    some time ago.
    And that makes it alright then?
    Better let all the convicts out of jail, as it was some time ago.
    :rolleyes:

    your behind "Eastmidlander"; Lecomber lost his position in party for the threats, his job is now done by someone else.
    Then why is he still recieving a salary?
    It's you that's behind, and this is your party, not mine.
    You really need to catch up.
    Why is a man, already convicted of offences involving explosives, who is implicated in trying to solicite acts of murder, still in your party and being paid?
    And why do you think that is ok, and I assume you do because you're trying to make excuses here.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    You find terrorist attacks funny do you?

    Idiot
    I find it funny you try and link Griffin to them.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    I haven't, but he supported the guy behind it.
    not after the attack.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    That's why Lockerbie still remains the largest terrorist attack on this nation?
    How can it be worse now, when that was the worst ever?

    Idiot.
    big yes, but bigger than 7/7, the madrid bombings and 9/11? no.

    idiot.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    And that makes it alright then?
    Better let all the convicts out of jail, as it was some time ago.
    :rolleyes:
    no because they did something wrong. Griffin did not.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Then why is he still recieving a salary?
    It's you that's behind, and this is your party, not mine.
    You really need to catch up.
    Why is a man, already convicted of offences involving explosives, who is implicated in trying to solicite acts of murder, still in your party and being paid?
    And why do you think that is ok, and I assume you do because you're trying to make excuses here.
    I already said I don't know why hes still in the party, people are not happy about it. He has been demoted though.

    why arent police involved if he tried to get people killed?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amon.)
    I find it funny you try and link Griffin to them.
    I haven't tried to link him to anything.
    The photos were there plain as the nose on your face.
    I didn't link him, he flew out there on his own.

    big yes, but bigger than 7/7, the madrid bombings and 9/11? no.
    Bigger than the gassing of 1 million kurds?
    Ooops, if we bring other things in your still wrong
    idiot.

    no because they did something wrong. Griffin did not.
    No he's blameless isn't he?
    Just hangs out wioth criminals and terrorists by accident?
    :rolleyes:


    I already said I don't know why hes still in the party, people are not happy about it. He has been demoted though.
    Are you really that stupid?
    He's still drawing the same wage, so who cares if his title has changed?
    You are still trying to defend it, and a moment ago you were trying to make out he wasn't even being paid anymore, when we know he is.
    The guy has been convicted on explosives charges.
    He's a grade A lunatic, and a right hand man of your leader.
    Your leader promoted the convicted criminal in the first place.
    Your leader pays the convicted criminals wages.
    He was convicted 20 years ago.
    It's not like this is some big surprise.
    He's been a convicted criminal for 20 years.
    How can you even claim your leader is this whiter than white thing when he's been employing him for 20 years, fully aware of the mans history?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    How many people are there on your little stormfront thread?
    10?

    Exactly, so their opinion counts for nothing.
    there opinion counts for everything. if members get annoyed they will elect a new leader.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Nope, it's the truth.
    Sorry if that's a little painful for you, but it's a fact, and if it wasn't you could counter it, rather than just saying it's crap.
    It isn't crap is it?
    no, hes a decent guy.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    You think?
    That classic line from political lemmings.
    The conservative policy, that was in place right through out the Thatcher years wasn't just illegals.
    Did you see them flood out the doors?
    The policy is meaningless.
    It's just a sop to fool the dupes.
    Cons have not got the balls to do it, bnp have. Theres a difference.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Yes, we've seen that, and we know it's worth crap.
    Does it deny anything?
    No.
    You can parrot it again and again, but facts are facts.

    You're right there, they are credible for a start.

    No, but his policies are approved by the leader, which makes him a darn site more powerful than you.

    So show me where in the disclaimer it says that isn't policy?
    The manifesto says it is, the disclaimer doesn't disagree.
    And of course they need to distance themselves, look at us here discussing it.
    If they didn't want people to believe that was policy they would retract, or distance themselves.
    Do they?
    No
    Why not?
    Because it's policy.

    But they don't say that, and if it wasn't policy then why is it in the manifesto?
    what Barnes writes is not party policy.
    what the manifesto says is different to what Barnes writes.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Are you really that ****ing stupid you take it as not policy when your chairman supports it, when it's on your website, and in your manifesto, just because some ignorant nobody, with no authority on a messageboard tells you it isn't?
    Griffin never said he supported Barnes' crazy communist idea.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Son't call me stupid when you act like the biggest idiot on the planet.
    FFS it's your party and I obviously know more about it than you, so insults won't get you far.
    :rofl:

    Ever been to a meeting? ever spoken with members? ever spoken to Barnes himself?

    no didn't think so.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    I haven't tried to link him to anything.
    The photos were there plain as the nose on your face.
    I didn't link him, he flew out there on his own.
    yes he met the man
    no he didn't support the terrorist attack you link him to.


    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Bigger than the gassing of 1 million kurds?
    Ooops, if we bring other things in your still wrong
    idiot.
    irrelevent.

    Griffin didnt support that.

    why do you keep changing topics? I said things have changed since when he met the libian guy and now he realises the threat of islam.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    No he's blameless isn't he?
    Just hangs out wioth criminals and terrorists by accident?
    :rolleyes:
    he didn't know that lockabie was about to happen.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Are you really that stupid?
    He's still drawing the same wage, so who cares if his title has changed?
    You are still trying to defend it, and a moment ago you were trying to make out he wasn't even being paid anymore, when we know he is.
    The guy has been convicted on explosives charges.
    He's a grade A lunatic, and a right hand man of your leader.
    Your leader promoted the convicted criminal in the first place.
    Your leader pays the convicted criminals wages.
    He was convicted 20 years ago.
    It's not like this is some big surprise.
    He's been a convicted criminal for 20 years.
    How can you even claim your leader is this whiter than white thing when he's been employing him for 20 years, fully aware of the mans history?
    ? I already said I do NOT know why hes still in the party!

    he shouldn't be!

    now answer me:
    if its true, why are the police not involved? if he did try to get people killed they should be!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amon.)
    there opinion counts for everything. if members get annoyed they will elect a new leader.
    Prove it.

    no, hes a decent guy.
    No, he's a total loser.

    Cons have not got the balls to do it, bnp have. Theres a difference.
    Prove it.
    Show us how you are going to do it.
    Why do I have the feeling you can't show me any more repatriation than a conservative government could?

    what Barnes writes is not party policy.
    No, but what is in the manifesto is

    what the manifesto says is different to what Barnes writes.
    No, it's the same concept.

    Griffin never said he supported Barnes' crazy communist idea.
    Griffin never said he didn't.
    But they are on the website, and in the manifesto, and there is no denial, and the guy is still drawing a salary, so what are we meant to think?
    Let us wiegh things up.
    On one side we have a statement on a website, a manifesto, a man employed by your leader, and no retraction.
    On the other side you have a mate on stormfront that says it isn't so.
    Which side is more credible?

    Ever been to a meeting? ever spoken with members? ever spoken to Barnes himself?

    no didn't think so.
    Yes I have actually.
    I've attended meetings or rallies for most parties in this country, read all their manifestos, and read plenty of their literature.
    Now don't you feel even more stupid?
    Now the big question, have you?
    Bring me one scrap of evidence it isn't policy, and people might believe you, and a quote from an anonymous person on a messageboard, with a username like hitlerspenis88 doesn't count.

    Why do I have a feeling you won't be returning with any proof?
    Could it be because it's policy, but your to dense to even know what your party stands for?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Prove it.
    people got annoyed with Tyndall they elected Griffin instead. could do the same again.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    No, he's a total loser.
    no he's not.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Prove it.
    Show us how you are going to do it.
    Why do I have the feeling you can't show me any more repatriation than a conservative government could?
    :rofl:

    I can't believe you ask that! the problem with most people is that we have to prove we're NOT going to kick out all jews, blacks and asians to the gas chambers!

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    No, but what is in the manifesto is

    No, it's the same concept.
    it's not.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Griffin never said he didn't.
    But they are on the website, and in the manifesto, and there is no denial, and the guy is still drawing a salary, so what are we meant to think?
    Let us wiegh things up.
    On one side we have a statement on a website, a manifesto, a man employed by your leader, and no retraction.
    On the other side you have a mate on stormfront that says it isn't so.
    Which side is more credible?
    Barnes does not write policy. that's what it says on the website.

    (Original post by EastMidlander)
    Yes I have actually.
    I've attended meetings or rallies for most parties in this country, read all their manifestos, and read plenty of their literature.
    Now don't you feel even more stupid?
    Now the big question, have you?
    Bring me one scrap of evidence it isn't policy, and people might believe you, and a quote from an anonymous person on a messageboard, with a username like hitlerspenis88 doesn't count.

    Why do I have a feeling you won't be returning with any proof?
    Could it be because it's policy, but your to dense to even know what your party stands for?
    You have been to BNP meetings which are secret and only for party members? :rolleyes:

    If we're going by what members on Stormfront say, Barnes is not even a member of the party! (I don't know if that is true, I didn't ask him).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amon.)
    yes he met the man
    Yes we know he met and supported islamic terrorists.
    We've seen the pics already.

    no he didn't support the terrorist attack you link him to.
    I didn't say he supported the act, but he did support the man behind much global terrorism, both before and after his meeting.

    irrelevent.
    Is that short hand for ooops, you realise you are wrong and don't have an argument?

    why do you keep changing topics?
    I don't.
    You made the claims.
    I showed that even when you changed criteria you were still wrong.
    That's not changing topics.

    I said things have changed since when he met the libian guy and now he realises the threat of islam.
    No, you said islamic terrorism was worse, I showed it wasn't.
    I showed that the biggest terrorist atrocity on our soil, carried out by your leaders friend, was back then, and not now, and that if you want to expand it outside of this country it was still worse back then than now, but your little leader still ran off to have tea with the terrorists.
    They laughed at him to, by all accounts, perhaps that's why he hates them now?

    he didn't know that lockabie was about to happen.
    No, but he knew he was sitting down with a man who was funding terrorism, that was costing innocent lives.

    ? I already said I do NOT know why hes still in the party!

    he shouldn't be!
    So there is no defence for your leader supporting known criminals?

    now answer me:
    if its true, why are the police not involved? if he did try to get people killed they should be!
    Perhaps they are?
    Do you have exclusive access to their enquiries?
    They have already interviewed Joe Owens, so it's an ongoing investigation.
    Perhaps they are interviewing other people to see how many people within the bnp were involved with this?
    Who knows?
    (well the cops do, but I don't)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amon.)
    people got annoyed with Tyndall they elected Griffin instead. could do the same again.
    Prove it.

    no he's not.
    Prove it.

    I can't believe you ask that! the problem with most people is that we have to prove we're NOT going to kick out all jews, blacks and asians to the gas chambers!
    So in short you can't prove it?
    So in short the policy is meaningless?
    Like I said above.
    *yawn*


    Barnes does not write policy. that's what it says on the website.
    Show me where it says that Barnes does not write any policy on the website.
    I bet you can't.

    If we're going by what members on Stormfront say, Barnes is not even a member of the party! (I don't know if that is true, I didn't ask him).
    You actually don't know a lot about your party, that much is evident.
    Who cares if he's a member or not, he's a fully paid employee, allowed to write on the website, and contribute to the party.
    He clearly has more influence than you.
    So he's not stupid enough to part with a membership fee, like you are, that actually puts him up in my estimations, but it doesn't change a thing.
    I notice you couldn't actually provide one scrap of evidence that wasn't policy.
    Nice duck, but no cigar.
    So we now accept the evidence says it is policy?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Flux)
    Some of you may be interested to read this article, ok the spectator is not the pinacle of respected newspapers, but it is more towards the mainstream than the BNP site.

    http://www.spectator.co.uk/article.php?id=7616

    It is very neutral and maybe will serve to show you that the BNP is not a bunch of people walking round in Nazi uniforms seig heiling at passers-by.
    Strawman.
    I don't think anyone has suggested they are walking around in uniforms seig heiling passers-by.
    They are associated with criminals and terrorists though, have policies that appear to be similar to ones written by five year olds on the back of a colouring in book, and are a bunch of losers, lead by an anti-semitic loser, who doesn't even have the balls to admit it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Flux)
    You could always try reading it.
    http://www.spectator.co.uk/article.php?id=7616
    I have done, it still doesn't change the facts.

    Actually people on this forum frequently suggest that.
    And some people suggest that we are descended from martians.
    Minute minorities do not interest me.
    Most people don't claim that, but they do understand the truth about the bnp.
    It's no good arguing against a selective view, it's reality and facts we need.

    You are entitled to your opinion, childish as it may be.
    It's not an opinion, it's facts, as shown in this thread.
    The childish thing is to try and claim it's an opinion in an effort to defend it.

    Oh, you seem very keen on telling people who disagree with you to prove all their points, so if you could kindly do the same it would be much appreciated.
    Scroll up.
    Now do you have any evidence to refute any of it?
    *waits*
    Why do I have a feeling you are not going to come back with anything solid, just more spin?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Flux)
    Resorting to calling people "losers" the moment your argument begins to weaken is definately an expression of your opinion, and not a solid fact.
    This comes from the guy that calls people childish?
    Perhaps you can show me where it's broken down old boy, or are you just thrashing around again?
    It seems you run big on excuses.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Flux)
    Well refuting it is going to be difficult, look....
    I suggest impossible, seeing as it's fact.

    Tell me what the associations are and then maybe I will able to refute it once we both know what you are talking about.
    As I said before.
    Scroll up.
    It's not that hard.

    I think the onus is on you to produce a five year old's colouring in book with policies similar to those of the BNP written on it.
    Being a bit literal arn't we?
    Now what was that word you used again?
    Childish?

    And as for claiming that calling people losers constitutes solid indisputable fact, well, I think that says a lot about you.
    Well that was a yawn and a half.
    I asked you to back stuff up, and you came back and wasted my time.
    Do we take that as an admission, or are you going to have another stab at it?
    This does seem to be a bnp policy on this site.
    Talk ****, and fail to back it up.
    And this is how you are going to grow beyond 0.7%?
    Sorry, I'm not impressed.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Flux)
    Some of you may be interested to read this article, ok the spectator is not the pinacle of respected newspapers, but it is more towards the mainstream than the BNP site.

    http://www.spectator.co.uk/article.php?id=7616

    It is very neutral and maybe will serve to show you that the BNP is not a bunch of people walking round in Nazi uniforms seig heiling at passers-by.
    The Sextator, a serious magazine? Don't make me laugh.

    And it's "Sich Heil" by the way.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    did no-one watch the bbc fly on the wall documentary that was on a while ago???
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Flux)

    I love it when the BNP can hold the moral high ground
    The BNP can never take any sort of high ground. No racist can.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Flux)
    You are entitled to your opinion, childish as it may be.
    (Original post by Flux)
    You are of course correct, the BNP do have associations with criminals
    And there was me thinking it was a childish opinion.
    :rolleyes:

    but then so do every other party. If you like I can provide you with a list as long of labour members and councillors who have serious criminal convictions.
    No thanks, we already know that all parties have wrong 'uns in their ranks.
    It hardly justifies anything though, does it?
    "He killed someone first, so it's alright if I do"?
    The question is why do you keep yours, and why do your members try to defend them?

    I love it when the BNP can hold the moral high ground
    Well tell me the day it happens and we might all enjoy it too.
    :rolleyes:
    Let's face it, 0.7% of the vote.
    Why?
    The real answer is bad leadership, shonkey characters, and crap policies, isn't it?
    I know it's obviously your party, but be constructive here, work with me.
    This nation, right now, is full of people who do not support the levels of immigration we've seen in recent times, they feel their culture is being eroded, there are millions who would support a "nationalist" or "patriotic" party, that put Britain first.
    I'm sure if such a party truely existed it could gain 20+% of the vote.
    So why only 0.7% of the vote for the bnp?
    It's because of who runs it, and the bad choices made by the leadership, isn't it?
    Flip-flopping ex-tin pot nazis, with criminal links, and bad policies.
    If it was my party I'd want to sort the crap out, not defend it endlessly, when it's obviously wrong.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The BNP can never take any sort of high ground. No racist can.
    It's OK for blacks to stick together for their common good, for Asians to stick together for their common good, for Chinese to group based on ethnicity but for ethnic whites to even alude to shared interest makes lefties fall apart in fits of self flaggelation and spurt out recieved propaganda hook words like 'impure'. There's a huge hole in democracy and it's reserved for those who do not wish to be displaced by third world immigrants allowed in by people who live a millions miles from any vibrant area.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.