Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by effofex)
    The difference is that with other parties, acquisition of criminal convictions is grounds for expulsion.

    With the BNP, acquisition of criminal convictions is grounds for promotion.
    YOU AGAIN?!? I've had enough of you, seriously leave me alone I very much dislike you and your attitude.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Broderss)
    But can it not lead to serious cases of child rape and the like? Therefore a lesser form of it should be illegal.
    Paedophilia leads to child rape about the same amount that being a heterosexual male leads to conventional rape - i.e., there's a tiny, tiny percentage. The vast majority of paedophiles do not rape children, and hence, we never hear about them.

    100% of child molestors have turned out to be paedophiles, but that does NOT imply that 100% of paedophiles are child molestors. In the same that that nearly 100% of rapists of women are heterosexual males, but that doesn't imply that 100% of heterosexual males are rapists of women.

    Are they really deterred after normally serving half their sentence? And are other really deterred because of the perception of 'light' punishments?
    I didn't say that they should serve half their sentences and get light punishments. I said that the primary goal of the justice and prison system should be to ensure the safety of the public, rather than its primary goal being the punishment of criminals.

    British company doing well = better British economy. After all it is a British government in a British country, why can't it look after itself?
    Not necessarily. If a British company is ****, then it won't be able to export to anywhere, so it's profits will either decline, or be limited, regardless of how well protected it is by the government.

    So you have a limited economy, with consumers who are having the freedom to choose their own purchases taken from them by nationalists who are driven by nothing but pride?

    Again, British company doing well = better British economy. Money going out of Britain = bad for British economy.
    Companies limited to a low level of output + unhappy consumers = fail.

    But there are perhaps more 'bad' foreign workers, so the easiest solution is to stop all. Plus, a country has to protect its own, no?
    Hahahahahaha. You honestly think that Britain, which has less than 1% of the world's population has better workers than the other 6,630,000,000 people on the planet? You're an idiot.

    If you took everybody out of Britain, and replaced them only with 60 million of the world's best workers, you'd be lucky if 2% of them was British.

    It's not up to me, dude.


    :cool:
    You are defending these policies, yet when I question them, you shrug it off like 'meh, they're not MY policies'.

    If he is upset by this, then he should marry and get the benefits.
    Or maybe the benefits should go to him regardless of whether he's married or not. Maybe the benefit system should be based on the length of your relationship, rather than whether or not you're married. Idiot.

    Yes.
    Either justify your statements, or don't make them in the first place.

    The point is not to rely on other countries for weaponry for our defence and also to keep the money spent inside the country.
    This is nothing short of foolish. Why would you risk your defence by using shabby weaponry, while other countries get the very, very best of weaponry because they aren't idiots enough to let national pride get in the way of being an efficient and advanced nation?

    Done as best I can be bothered.
    Done quite terribly. Either you can't be bothered, or you are simply unable to rationally justify your statements. I suspect the latter.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Broderss)
    So, you're saying they're lying? I hope you're not being biased young lady.

    I just had hope that there was someone who could actually run this country properly, rather than the joke we have right now.

    And don't be sucked in by the media as they only echo what their audience believes, so you end up hearing what you want to hear. Thus, media is no more reliable than the BNP web page, perhaps even less so as echoing their audience is the media's only way to make any money.

    Biased?????

    Its not biased if its the truth.
    ALL POLITICIANS ARE LIARS

    So given a choice between a racist, homophobic liar,
    And a liar, its pretty much a no brainer.

    I see you haven't made any refference to their objections to homosexuality on the ''lets spread the good ******** of the BNP''

    How on earth could anything be as reliable or even les reliable than the BNP webpage.

    FFS thats as accurate as a fundamentalists view the world was created 5000 years ago.

    How can you possibly deny what the BNP has done and stands for.
    thats like ...DENYING THE HOLOCAUST...
    Funny that...
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Broderss)
    I'm trying to show you they are not completely racist, just in small parts.

    Deny that these are sensible.
    :confused:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phugoid)
    Paedophilia leads to child rape about the same amount that being a heterosexual male leads to conventional rape - i.e., there's a tiny, tiny percentage. The vast majority of paedophiles do not rape children, and hence, we never hear about them.

    100% of child molestors have turned out to be paedophiles, but that does NOT imply that 100% of paedophiles are child molestors. In the same that that nearly 100% of rapists of women are heterosexual males, but that doesn't imply that 100% of heterosexual males are rapists of women.
    Women can and do rape women too, you know.

    I didn't say that they should serve half their sentences and get light punishments. I said that the primary goal of the justice and prison system should be to ensure the safety of the public, rather than its primary goal being the punishment of criminals.
    This is a more effective method of ensuring safety because it deters possible criminals more so than currently.

    Not necessarily. If a British company is ****, then it won't be able to export to anywhere, so it's profits will either decline, or be limited, regardless of how well protected it is by the government.

    So you have a limited economy, with consumers who are having the freedom to choose their own purchases taken from them by nationalists who are driven by nothing but pride?



    Companies limited to a low level of output + unhappy consumers = fail.
    It's to help provide the best circumstances for a successful company to grow and remain dominant.

    Hahahahahaha. You honestly think that Britain, which has less than 1% of the world's population has better workers than the other 6,630,000,000 people on the planet? You're an idiot.

    If you took everybody out of Britain, and replaced them only with 60 million of the world's best workers, you'd be lucky if 2% of them was British.
    If they can improve education, social norms and skills training all focussed explicitly on British people, they can become an elitist workforce far better than any foreign workers whilst retaining their earned wages inside the UK and its economy.

    You are defending these policies, yet when I question them, you shrug it off like 'meh, they're not MY policies'.
    Meh, they're not my policies.

    Or maybe the benefits should go to him regardless of whether he's married or not. Maybe the benefit system should be based on the length of your relationship, rather than whether or not you're married. Idiot.
    Well, we can't go dishing out benefits to everyone now can we? That's like mindlessly giving a tax rebate to every single person. Ridiculous.

    Either justify your statements, or don't make them in the first place.
    When they're that simple, you only need common sense not justification from an intellectual.

    This is nothing short of foolish. Why would you risk your defence by using shabby weaponry, while other countries get the very, very best of weaponry because they aren't idiots enough to let national pride get in the way of being an efficient and advanced nation?
    Weaponry can be invested in solely in the UK to build more advanced, exclusive weaponry far more beneficial in times of war.

    Done quite terribly. Either you can't be bothered, or you are simply unable to rationally justify your statements. I suspect the latter.
    I think it's more the former, as when I have tried I have succeeded in providing exemplary arguments.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fatal_Microbes)
    Biased?????

    Its not biased if its the truth.
    ALL POLITICIANS ARE LIARS

    So given a choice between a racist, homophobic liar,
    And a liar, its pretty much a no brainer.

    I see you haven't made any refference to their objections to homosexuality on the ''lets spread the good ******** of the BNP''

    How on earth could anything be as reliable or even les reliable than the BNP webpage.

    FFS thats as accurate as a fundamentalists view the world was created 5000 years ago.

    How can you possibly deny what the BNP has done and stands for.
    thats like ...DENYING THE HOLOCAUST...
    Funny that...
    Don't make wisecracks about the holocaust. Millions of Jews murdered by a homosexual Austrian holds no comical value whatsoever ( :teehee: )

    To the point, how do you know all this? Have you conducted your own research? Oh, no, you've absorbed it from the media. Now, don't be sucked in by the media as they only echo what their audience believes, so you end up hearing what you want to hear. Thus, media is no more reliable than the BNP web page, perhaps even less so as echoing their audience is the media's only way to make any money.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    The BNP serves a thorough role as a "bogeyman", in addition to, ultimately (I hope), keeping the main parties in check.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Broderss)
    Women can and do rape women too, you know.
    That's why I said 'NEARLY 100%'.

    This is a more effective method of ensuring safety because it deters possible criminals more so than currently.
    Yes, but we're not talking about YOUR policy vs 'current' policy, we're talking about YOUR policy vs alternative policies that are better than both your policy and current policy.

    It's to help provide the best circumstances for a successful company to grow and remain dominant.
    The best circumstances for a company to grow and remain dominant will occur naturally if that company is economically capable of doing so. If it is not, it shouldn't be helped.

    If they can improve education, social norms and skills training all focussed explicitly on British people, they can become an elitist workforce far better than any foreign workers whilst retaining their earned wages inside the UK and its economy.
    You speak some amount of nonsense. You ACTUALLY believe that somehow being born in Britain makes you more likely to be better at EVERYTHING than an equivalent person born elsewhere.

    Idiot.

    Meh, they're not my policies.
    Stop defending them then. They are NONSENSE.

    Well, we can't go dishing out benefits to everyone now can we? That's like mindlessly giving a tax rebate to every single person. Ridiculous.
    Oh yes, so let's start inventing arbitrary criteria by which we decide whether or not somebody gets benefits, even though there's zero evidence to suggest that it will benefit the UK, or families, or society, and even though there's every evidence to suggest that most people whom we provide this benefit will ruin their marriage long before we see the supposed results you are expecting - which don't exist.

    Again, you're an idiot.

    When they're that simple, you only need common sense not justification from an intellectual.
    It is not whether or not a statement is 'simple' that decides whether it requires an explanation, it is whether or not it is bold.

    You statement is quite bold. It states, quite randomly, that anything British is, by definition, better than anything that is not British - including workers, food and companies.

    Either you justify that statement with evidence to suggest that this is always the case, or STFU and stop spouting nonsense.

    Weaponry can be invested in solely in the UK to build more advanced, exclusive weaponry far more beneficial in times of war.
    If that was the case, the government would already be doing it. They are outsourcing for a reason, and that reason is that there is better weaponry elsewhere.

    I think it's more the former, as when I have tried I have succeeded in providing exemplary arguments.
    No, you really, really haven't. All of your arguments have been presumptuous, starting from flawed and ill-justify premises, and using flawed logic to reach outrageous conclusions.

    You are the dunce of 'exemplary arguments'.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Broderss)
    Don't make wisecracks about the holocaust. Millions of Jews murdered by a homosexual Austrian holds no comical value whatsoever ( :teehee: )

    To the point, how do you know all this? Have you conducted your own research? Oh, no, you've absorbed it from the media. Now, don't be sucked in by the media as they only echo what their audience believes, so you end up hearing what you want to hear. Thus, media is no more reliable than the BNP web page, perhaps even less so as echoing their audience is the media's only way to make any money.
    Reiterating the same bs about unreliable media is bs in its self.

    Oh the media the media the media.

    Well I guess the media is the same as reading a text book by a professor, as opposed to talking to them personally.

    So where does the line get drawn.
    Speaking to a BNP member personally and having him confess personally to his crimes?

    Oh so its reliable if you if you speak to Nick Girffin and let him personally tell you how he's going to save the world???
    1. Get a grip on reality
    2. Understand that these nazi *******s are out for themseles
    3. understand that their website is MEDIA and that is just as unreliable as anything out there and the ******** you're preaching to me is a hyprocrisy.
    4. You evidently haven't spoken to a member of the BNP so again you don't have a leg to stand on on this one.
    5. The media reporting on an issue and the actual conviction of a BNP member are 2 different things so don't give me that ********
    6. Feel free to explore http://www.antifa.org.uk/ in your own time.
    7. Why am I wasting my time explaining how wrong you are, and that you don't have any valid argument for trusting a racist homophobic bunch of individuals on the basis of their own propaganda compared to me using personal experience to verify and corroberate what these racist homophobic morons truely stand for?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phugoid)
    That's why I said 'NEARLY 100%'.
    :rolleyes:

    Yes, but we're not talking about YOUR policy vs 'current' policy, we're talking about YOUR policy vs alternative policies that are better than both your policy and current policy.
    You might have mentioned that.

    The best circumstances for a company to grow and remain dominant will occur naturally if that company is economically capable of doing so. If it is not, it shouldn't be helped.
    Amazon?

    You speak some amount of nonsense. You ACTUALLY believe that somehow being born in Britain makes you more likely to be better at EVERYTHING than an equivalent person born elsewhere.

    Idiot.
    I am British, and quite frankly I am a lot better than most people of other nationalities.

    Stop defending them then. They are NONSENSE.
    Not from my point of view. If you remove all bias and prejudgements and even fear of becoming what you are told to hate you will realise these are sensible and credible.

    Oh yes, so let's start inventing arbitrary criteria by which we decide whether or not somebody gets benefits, even though there's zero evidence to suggest that it will benefit the UK, or families, or society, and even though there's every evidence to suggest that most people whom we provide this benefit will ruin their marriage long before we see the supposed results you are expecting - which don't exist.

    Again, you're an idiot.
    Irrelevant.

    It is not whether or not a statement is 'simple' that decides whether it requires an explanation, it is whether or not it is bold.

    You statement is quite bold. It states, quite randomly, that anything British is, by definition, better than anything that is not British - including workers, food and companies.

    Either you justify that statement with evidence to suggest that this is always the case, or STFU and stop spouting nonsense.
    I am British and I am better than anything or anyone I have come across.

    If that was the case, the government would already be doing it. They are outsourcing for a reason, and that reason is that there is better weaponry elsewhere.
    Oh, you mean the same government that lead Britain and the world into the worst recession in over 30 years? Yes...they are incompetent fools, in case you were unaware.

    No, you really, really haven't. All of your arguments have been presumptuous, starting from flawed and ill-justify premises, and using flawed logic to reach outrageous conclusions.

    You are the dunce of 'exemplary arguments'.
    I beg to differ on that. Maybe you just cannot comprehend.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    To the person who said about denying the holocaust.

    I question everything. I wasn't there and I've been shown no proof it happened, just fed into me since chilhood. Thinkabout that (I'm talking in general)
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Broderss)
    I don't care to argue politics, I'm just stating the facts. It's up to the individual's ignorance to either intelligently take on board and accept or completely disregard these facts. If you are the latter, I don't understand how you can make an informed judgement or stable argument.
    You aren't posting facts, you're posting policies. Policies aren't facts, and are open to disagreement. A few examples:

    (Original post by Broderss)

    Crime and Justice
    - Free the police and courts from the politically correct straitjacket which is stopping them from doing their jobs properly;
    - End the liberal fixation with the “rights” of criminals and replace it with concern for the rights of victims – and the right of innocent people not to become victims;
    - Re-introduce corporal punishment for petty criminals and vandals;
    - Restore capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers as an option for judges in cases where their guilt is proven beyond dispute (such as with DNA or other compelling evidence);
    - Make prisons more austere and make criminals serve their full sentences. Offenders will be made to understand that they are being punished and not rewarded with a state-subsidised holiday for their crimes;
    - Introduce automatic prison sentences for all repeat offenders;
    - Put police back on the streets and remove their current political correctness shackles;
    - Allow victims of crime full freedom to defend themselves and their property;
    - Grant anonymity to those accused of crimes until they are convicted;
    - Make police concentrate on real criminals and serve the public, not the government’s political aspirations;
    It has been proved time and time again that the death penalty does not act as a deterrent. There is ample evidence that criminals do not consider their punishments when they commit their crimes, because most of them genuinely believe they're going to get away with it. This is basic criminology. Prisons should therefore be focused on rehabilitation rather than retribution, which usually only serves to turn petty criminals into hardened thugs while they're doing time.

    Plus we already have perfectly decent laws on self defence and defence of property, and before you talk about cases where the property owner has been prosecuted, this has only happened something like 11 times in the last 15 years and there is usually some exceptional circumstance involving excessive force or something, like the guy who tied up a burglar, threw him in a pit and set him on fire.


    Education
    - The teaching of old-fashioned literacy skills (as opposed to clearly failed “modern” teaching methods);
    - The teaching of old-fashioned mathematics skills which have practical application to everyday life;
    - The teaching of a full curriculum of British history. This will instil in our young people knowledge of and pride in the history, cultures and heritage of the native peoples of Britain, and not the cherry-picked politically correct drivel being fed to children today;
    - The abolition of fees and the restoration of full grants to university students studying proper subjects (as opposed to fake "social sciences" );
    - The improvement of school food as proper meals have been shown to be linked to behaviour and achievement;
    What exactly is 'old-fashioned' mathematics? Pretty much all the maths taught in schools has been around for hundreds if not thousands of years and frankly if you haven't learned enough maths to get you through everyday life by the time you're 16 then you're probably a lost cause. Also what exactly is a 'fake' subject? How can a subject be 'fake'?
    Environment
    - The removal of unsightly overhead power lines from beauty spots and their burial underground;
    - The creation of a bulk transport tax regime that pushes supermarkets to supply more local and seasonal produce;
    - The encouragement of an extensive and rapid switchover to organic and low fossil fuel farming techniques;
    - The banning of the ritual slaughter of animals without pre-stunning, and the sale of such meat;
    - The elimination of the unhealthy, energy intensive and cruel factory farming of livestock;
    - The abolition of all “stealth taxes” and other charges on household rubbish collections;
    - Develop alternative transport fuels such as bio-diesel and hydrogen;
    - Develop renewable energy sources such as off-shore wind farms, wave, tidal and solar energy;
    - Investigate the feasibility of cutting-edge, intrinsically-safe, fast-breeder nuclear stations;
    - Invest in a high-speed, magnetic levitation, inter-city rail network;
    - Allow the building of a new privately-funded airport on reclaimed land in the Thames estuary to reduce the pressure on, and stop the constant expansion of, the South East’s airports;
    A lot of these are fair enough, but already happening anyway. But the idea of building a magnetic rail system in London is hopelessly ambitious at best.

    Overall this whole thread is completely ludicrous. You're basically trying to say "hey guys the BNP isn't that bad, you just have to completely ignore the glaring racism that they base themselves around!!". But why would I do that? Even if their other policies were amazing, why would I choose to ignore what is essentially their defining characteristic?
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Broderss)
    It would get them out of society a lot sooner and deter others from committing the same acts, which don't seem so bad currently because in most cases they get sentenced for only 12 years then released after 3 while being fed 3 meals a day, no work, no worries. The time of their life.
    Whilst the BNP has key members of their upper echelons who are proven racists with criminal convictions there is going to be no stopping accusations that they are a racist organisation.

    Their policies are far more targetted at poor white people. No one else.

    They have no idea of geopolitics nor economics nor the intricat nature of how these two led to the rise of the british empire in the first place.

    You don't even realise that in order to meet your aims you would need to break multiple international treaties.

    and then what would Britain be?

    A poor little country severely over crowded wih no industry, no raw materials and a service industry driven out be BNP policys.

    nice.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Haddock)
    You're basically trying to say "hey guys the BNP isn't that bad!!"
    That's exactly what I'm saying. The fact they are not completely based on racist against individuals and care more about protecting Britain as a standalone country rather than 'a member of the new world order', coupled with the ban of this ridiculous political correctness polluting society are the only reasons to vote for a party such as the BNP. Besides, them actually successfully removing all ethnic majorities from this country is about as feasible as that magnetic rail thing. Thus leaving a government with the UK's best interests not every other ******'s after being stripped of its racist impurities. I don't see how it can get better than that in all honesty.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jamie)
    Whilst the BNP has key members of their upper echelons who are proven racists with criminal convictions there is going to be no stopping accusations that they are a racist organisation.

    Their policies are far more targetted at poor white people. No one else.

    They have no idea of geopolitics nor economics nor the intricat nature of how these two led to the rise of the british empire in the first place.

    You don't even realise that in order to meet your aims you would need to break multiple international treaties.

    and then what would Britain be?

    A poor little country severely over crowded wih no industry, no raw materials and a service industry driven out be BNP policys.

    nice.
    But one more able to look after itself and become a great power again. Just like Britannia.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Well, i'm certainly with the BNP. BNP would be the only part I'd ever vote for. When is election day btw ^^, I need to make sure the BNP get my vote
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    whens election day guys, i need to make sure BNP get my vote
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Broderss)
    That's exactly what I'm saying. The fact they are not completely based on racist against individuals and care more about protecting Britain as a standalone country rather than 'a member of the new world order', coupled with the ban of this ridiculous political correctness polluting society are the only reasons to vote for a party such as the BNP. Besides, them actually successfully removing all ethnic majorities from this country is about as feasible as that magnetic rail thing. Thus leaving a government with the UK's best interests not every other ******'s after being stripped of its racist impurities. I don't see how it can get better than that in all honesty.
    Wow what a thorough response, thanks for addressing my points.

    :rolleyes:.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Broderss)
    That's exactly what I'm saying. The fact they are not completely based on racist against individuals and care more about protecting Britain as a standalone country rather than 'a member of the new world order', coupled with the ban of this ridiculous political correctness polluting society are the only reasons to vote for a party such as the BNP. Besides, them actually successfully removing all ethnic majorities from this country is about as feasible as that magnetic rail thing. Thus leaving a government with the UK's best interests not every other ******'s after being stripped of its racist impurities. I don't see how it can get better than that in all honesty.


    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Ok you really don't get it.
    You are a COMPLETE MORON.

    Just because they won't achieve kicking out the ''ethics''
    Doesn't mean they don't want to. So what they won't succeed...
    And you applaud that at hey look at the good things they will achieve.
    FFS labour were there for the ''poor'' the gap between the rich and poor increased.
    So hey, Labour said they'd stand up for the little guy and failed. Damn them trying to do good on the world.

    Yet you're saying vote for homophobic racists because they won't succed but they have good policies and so will fail on the racist ones?
    ACTUALLY WTF YOU'RE AN IDIOT.

    Why on earth would you want those bigots to run the country. other partys have just as good policies, so what they will fail. ALL PARTIES FAIL.
    Yet because the BNP can spout racist **** with ideals its okay to vote for them?

    **** it lets vote for the LOONY party....
    Jesus, you actually really really don't get it.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Broderss)
    But one more able to look after itself and become a great power again. Just like Britannia.
    Look back at when britain was top dog.
    We had the strongest navies in the world.
    We were technologically more advanced than any other nation
    We had better infrastructure than any other country
    we had access to vast resources - a key one being coal.
    Our industry was a world beater - top in manufacturing int he world.
    We were the financial centre in the world.


    We are now a barely in top ten in terms of naval power
    Technologically behind a huge number of countries.
    Our infrastructre is crumbling
    Our resources are depleted. Even our oil and gas fields will barely last a decade. Our fish stocks are non existent
    Our industry is either gone or sold of to foreign investors.
    There are other competeing financial centres that are rapidly finding favour such as singapore. Our own has been declining for years.


    If BNP have their way we will be as poor as we were in the 1970s pre-EU membership. How exactly will Britain become great. What do we have to offer the world?
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

955

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
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.