for this party Islam is the new Judaism. But theyre still the same racists.
I’m confused. Islam has been the party calling for the Jews to be killed all over the West for the past month or so - not the BNP. Have you paid any attention to the anti-Israel rallies that we’ve documented here? Didn’t the BNP come out in support of Israel against the Palestinians?
Say what you want about their “whites only” policy (the indigenous British are white, in case you didn’t know), but I think it’s pretty much impossible to draw a moral equivalence between the Jews of 1938 Europe and the Muslims of 21st century Europe. The latter are the ones calling for the deaths of Jews, not the BNP. Muhammad himself was a rabid Jew-killer. Funny that you don’t seem to be able to pay attention to all of the “Death to Jews” rallies fomented by the Muslims over the past 4 weeks, but you can show up on these threads to draw these ridiculous comparisons.
Were the BNP actually Nazis, as the term is historically understood, they would be rallying in support of the Palestinians with the Muslims, as other European Nazi groups have done. Given all of the negative things Winston Churchill had to say about Islam, no doubt you’d be condemning him as well, were he alive today.
I know how loathsome it is for a group of white people to stick up for themselves, however. We certainly can’t have that.
Why does it have to be about colour, religion or country? Why can we not just talk about people regardless of where they are from or what colour their skin is? Why is that so difficult?[/quote]
Because you fucking liberals have been using race as a means to divide up the British people for decades. You like to play both sides of the field. First you use race as a means to create divisions in society as a means to gaining power. Then you want to play this “why can’t we all get along bullshit” after you have created a situation of discord.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
PB-Crawl wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Things change over time. ie Nick Griffin changed his position on the Holocaust back in 2006.
lol waaay back in 2006, what a bold move.
nominating someone who is non-british/white doesn’t mean you’re not racist becuase you only did so believing they’re 100% “assimilated” into white British culture, i.e. a white person.
reeks of sambo
a few good gems off the BNP website
“British Nationalism - the only way out of the global chaos.” It’s like Germany all over again.
“he introduction of a system of voluntary resettlement whereby those immigrants who are legally here will be afforded the opportunity to return to their lands of ethnic origin.” Hah voluntary.
John Tyndall-“Mein Kampf is my bible”
deputy leader Richard Edmonds- “We are 100 per cent racist, yes”
Do you have a link to those gems from the BNP website?
I did found this link for Edmonds.
Further controversy came in 1993 when he told The Guardian’s Duncan Campbell that ‘we [the BNP] are 100% racist’.
Edmonds held the position of National Organiser until 1999 when he was forced to resign following the victory of Nick Griffin in the leadership election.
comments made waaay back in the late 90s so they dont count right?
I didn’t say those comments don’t count. But it does appear that afterwards he was forced out of the party when the present leader Nick Clegg became the party leader.
What I have noticed is they have changed their rhetoric and have gone much more mainstream. They have been able to gain members because Labour has refused to listen to the indigenous peoples legitimate concerns about Labour policy of unrestricted immigration and the Tories don’t appear to be interested in doing much different if they come to power.
You are ignoring the fact that when anyone questions what Labour is doing to their homeland they are soundly denounced as a racist and xenophobes which therefore makes them unworthy of listening to.
Here is today’s latest example of people being called xenophobes by Labour.
Wildcat strikes threaten to escalate after Lord Mandelson calls protests ‘xenophobic’
He had earlier rebuked an interviewer asking questions about workers’ concerns, saying: “Stop feeding this xenophobia.”
In Britain calling people who disagree with Labour racist has become so commonplace the term has lost much of it’s meaning. It is now a label of political affiliation as much as anything else.
Back in December Labour made it legal for employers to discriminate on basis of skin color when hiring. So why is it that you don’t call Labour a racist party? Surely they must be a more racist party than the BNP if they are using their position of power to see to it that actual discrimination on basis of skin color is legal, sanctioned by the government and taking place. So why the double standard?
for this party Islam is the new Judaism. But theyre still the same racists.
Not at all. The Jews are a distinct ethnic racial group. Islam is an ideology. You can’t accuse of racism for being opposed to an ideology that promotes hatred and prejudice as a way to serve god. Besides the Jews do not behave like the Muslims do and they never had the numbers to change the countries demographics and destroy the culture.
Did you even read the telegraph piece? Seems like if you did you didn’t understand it, best stick to the Mail. Shorter words and more pictures.[/quote]
Did you read what I wrote? I said that anyone who questions what Labour is doing to Britain is called a racist or a xenophobe.
What is going on with the wildcat strikes has nothing to do with race or xenophobia. The Italians are Caucasians just like the British.
The reason why the British are striking over the Italian workers being imported to do the work at the factory has nothing to do with their race or ethnicity.
It has everything to do with EU work rules which are being exploited by big business in order to undercut the going wage for a British worker in Britain doing that kind of work.
Labour and Tory have lied to the people in order to fuck them over in favor of big business, that is what the EU is for. Big business benefits from being able to bring in Labour from lower wage countries, but if anyone complains about it they get slammed as racist.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Fuck you. The Klan was formed for the purpose of disenfranchising American citizens and they have an extensive history of violence. The BNP was formed as a response to a governmental policy of mass immigration from the third world that was dispossessing working class families from their homes. So the comparison is not basically accurate.
The BNP was formed to give a front to neo-nazi activities that date back to Mosely and beyond. the comparison is accurate, deal with it.
By Mosley I assume you mean Oswald Mosley. Mosley was active way back in the 40’s. That was over 60 years ago. Labour and Tories aren’t like they were back then. Neither is the modern BNP which was founded in 1980. Things change over time. ie Nick Griffin changed his position on the Holocaust back in 2006.
Do you think he changed his position truly and honestly in his heart or do you think that he was advised to say some different things in order to win votes?
I don’t know what he has going on in his heart. What I do know is that he has seriously toned down his rhetoric. You should learn about some of the democrat friends of Barak Obama.
I’m barely scratching the surface on that subject by the way.
I also know that his party has been making significant gains in membership and support. Not all the new support by the way is coming from the whites.
I guess to you being a hateful bigoted racist gay basher is fine as long as you say the right things…
No I don’t think it’s fine. But let’s be honest here. British politics are all about politics of hate. In their own way the old gang parties are very hateful and they have done a lot worse things than the BNP ever has. [/quote]
The old school parties are bad enough but to claim they are worse than the BNP is something that I cannot go along with.
And you don’t need to try and hit me with Anti Obama material, he strikes me as similar to Tony Blair, great smile, not a lot of integrity behind it. (I hope I am wrong on this and to be fair I didn’t follow the US presidential race that closely.)
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
PB-Crawl wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Things change over time. ie Nick Griffin changed his position on the Holocaust back in 2006.
lol waaay back in 2006, what a bold move.
nominating someone who is non-british/white doesn’t mean you’re not racist becuase you only did so believing they’re 100% “assimilated” into white British culture, i.e. a white person.
reeks of sambo
a few good gems off the BNP website
“British Nationalism - the only way out of the global chaos.” It’s like Germany all over again.
“he introduction of a system of voluntary resettlement whereby those immigrants who are legally here will be afforded the opportunity to return to their lands of ethnic origin.” Hah voluntary.
John Tyndall-“Mein Kampf is my bible”
deputy leader Richard Edmonds- “We are 100 per cent racist, yes”
Do you have a link to those gems from the BNP website?
I did found this link for Edmonds.
Further controversy came in 1993 when he told The Guardian’s Duncan Campbell that ‘we [the BNP] are 100% racist’.
Edmonds held the position of National Organiser until 1999 when he was forced to resign following the victory of Nick Griffin in the leadership election.
comments made waaay back in the late 90s so they dont count right?
I didn’t say those comments don’t count. But it does appear that afterwards he was forced out of the party when the present leader Nick Clegg became the party leader.
What I have noticed is they have changed their rhetoric and have gone much more mainstream. They have been able to gain members because Labour has refused to listen to the indigenous peoples legitimate concerns about Labour policy of unrestricted immigration and the Tories don’t appear to be interested in doing much different if they come to power.
You are ignoring the fact that when anyone questions what Labour is doing to their homeland they are soundly denounced as a racist and xenophobes which therefore makes them unworthy of listening to.
Here is today’s latest example of people being called xenophobes by Labour.
Wildcat strikes threaten to escalate after Lord Mandelson calls protests ‘xenophobic’
He had earlier rebuked an interviewer asking questions about workers’ concerns, saying: “Stop feeding this xenophobia.”
In Britain calling people who disagree with Labour racist has become so commonplace the term has lost much of it’s meaning. It is now a label of political affiliation as much as anything else.
Back in December Labour made it legal for employers to discriminate on basis of skin color when hiring. So why is it that you don’t call Labour a racist party? Surely they must be a more racist party than the BNP if they are using their position of power to see to it that actual discrimination on basis of skin color is legal, sanctioned by the government and taking place. So why the double standard?
for this party Islam is the new Judaism. But theyre still the same racists.
Not at all. The Jews are a distinct ethnic racial group. Islam is an ideology. You can’t accuse of racism for being opposed to an ideology that promotes hatred and prejudice as a way to serve god. Besides the Jews do not behave like the Muslims do and they never had the numbers to change the countries demographics and destroy the culture.
Did you even read the telegraph piece? Seems like if you did you didn’t understand it, best stick to the Mail. Shorter words and more pictures.
Did you read what I wrote? I said that anyone who questions what Labour is doing to Britain is called a racist or a xenophobe.
What is going on with the wildcat strikes has nothing to do with race or xenophobia. The Italians are Caucasians just like the British.
The reason why the British are striking over the Italian workers being imported to do the work at the factory has nothing to do with their race or ethnicity.
It has everything to do with EU work rules which are being exploited by big business in order to undercut the going wage for a British worker in Britain doing that kind of work.
Labour and Tory have lied to the people in order to fuck them over in favor of big business, that is what the EU is for. Big business benefits from being able to bring in Labour from lower wage countries, but if anyone complains about it they get slammed as racist.
[/quote]
Xenophobia doesn’t need to be white against black. The workers are on strike because they are concerned that their jobs are going to people from other countries. They have an issue with the company and the employees because they are not British.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
PRCalDude, they took 7 ‘white’ guys with a rare surname from small villages in yorkshire who had no knowledge of their ancestors ever living anywhere but yorkshire (for anyone who doesn’t know small villages in Yorkshire, we are talking places where people grow up live and die without ever visiting a major city.)
They traced back their mitochondrial DNA and were able to prove that within the last 2,000 years they had ancesotrs from West Africa. [/quote]
It’s interesting that you would say that. Because when I was randomly assaulted on a tube station platform waiting to get on a train I didn’t need a DNA check to figure out if the ancestors of the guy who attacked me were from Africa.
You are deliberately trying to cloud the issue by bringing up DNA tests. You are describing men who for all intents and purposes were assimilated into the population and would normally be identified as belonging to the English tribe.
What has been done to Britain is it is being made multi-tribal so that the people no longer have a sense of shared heritage from which they can derive unity.
[quote]
My point is that to start making policies based on the colour of someones skin is an absolute nonsense. [/quote]
If it’s nonsense why did the Queens speech back in December say that discriminating on basis of color in hiring will now be legal?
[quote]
Anyone who starts talking about the indigenous people of the Britain has no knowledge of the history of Britain. [/quote]
You are the one who doesn’t know what he is talking about. The British used to be a fairly homogeneous people with a strong sense of shared heritage and group unity where people could readily tell that they were from the same tribe.
[quote]
Mind you, you are the guy who thinks that all Muslims are guilty of terrorism by association and it is fine to lock them up without trial. [/quote]
Not at all. What PRCal has done here is help to educate people about Islam. You just don’t like the fact that he doesn’t toe line with PC ideology by telling lies about Islam so people won’t think it’s as bad as it really is.
Sifu, Britain has always been multi tribal, you only have to go to watch ManU play Leeds to see that. Breaking up the Ethnic divides within countries is a good thing. We are part of a global community.
Decisions made in one country massively affect people in other countries. Old concepts of untiy from shared heritage are exactly that, old and outdated. People need to stop trying to cling to the past.
I can’t comment on the Queen’s speach in December I didn’t watch it. Funnily enough it didn’t make Mexican TV and I couldn’t be arsed to youtube it. The queen is another totally outdated concept (though she is good for tourism.)
Britain has one of the longest and most varied histories of imigration of any country in the world, concepts of a homogenous community with a shared heritage date back to wartime propaganda more than any real golden age.
I don’t like the fact that PR denies any wrong in his own church whilst pointing out all the ills of Islam.
The original discussion was what to do with Guantanamo. I freely admit that I have no idea. PR thinks (unless I have misread his posts) that they should stay locked up indefinitely. Many other people on here seem to be suggesting that they should let them all go. What is your suggestion?
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Fuck you. The Klan was formed for the purpose of disenfranchising American citizens and they have an extensive history of violence. The BNP was formed as a response to a governmental policy of mass immigration from the third world that was dispossessing working class families from their homes. So the comparison is not basically accurate.
The BNP was formed to give a front to neo-nazi activities that date back to Mosely and beyond. the comparison is accurate, deal with it.
By Mosley I assume you mean Oswald Mosley. Mosley was active way back in the 40’s. That was over 60 years ago. Labour and Tories aren’t like they were back then. Neither is the modern BNP which was founded in 1980. Things change over time. ie Nick Griffin changed his position on the Holocaust back in 2006.
Do you think he changed his position truly and honestly in his heart or do you think that he was advised to say some different things in order to win votes?
I don’t know what he has going on in his heart. What I do know is that he has seriously toned down his rhetoric. You should learn about some of the democrat friends of Barak Obama.
I’m barely scratching the surface on that subject by the way.
I also know that his party has been making significant gains in membership and support. Not all the new support by the way is coming from the whites.
I guess to you being a hateful bigoted racist gay basher is fine as long as you say the right things…
No I don’t think it’s fine. But let’s be honest here. British politics are all about politics of hate. In their own way the old gang parties are very hateful and they have done a lot worse things than the BNP ever has.
The old school parties are bad enough but to claim they are worse than the BNP is something that I cannot go along with. [/quote]
The BNP is not in power and making policy that is detrimental to people, the old gang are. People have died and more are going to die because of them.
[quote]
And you don’t need to try and hit me with Anti Obama material, he strikes me as similar to Tony Blair, great smile, not a lot of integrity behind it. (I hope I am wrong on this and to be fair I didn’t follow the US presidential race that closely.)[/quote]
I must admit that in the first video he was extremely biased and anti-Obama. but damn your dismissal of it is something else! Though not a surprise.
[quote]My argument is that they are representative of a proportion of the the current inmates in Guantanamo. The job of sorting who is terrorist from who was just in the wrong place at the wrong time is pretty much impossible so you are left with lock them all up or let them all go.
Both have major disadvantages to me. To you, lock them all up is the only way to go. [/quote]
Quite the contrary. I’ve been advocating for their release for the past month at least - preferably in NYC, Washington DC, or any of the other places where whiterpeople infatuated with GTMO detainees are to be found. London sounds like another good place.
As for the guy who wanted to go see how the mujahideen were doing over there in Afghanistan and ended up in GTMO: bummer. Some people are just really, really stupid, I guess. Proud servant of the queen, no doubt.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
My argument is that they are representative of a proportion of the the current inmates in Guantanamo. The job of sorting who is terrorist from who was just in the wrong place at the wrong time is pretty much impossible so you are left with lock them all up or let them all go.
Both have major disadvantages to me. To you, lock them all up is the only way to go.
Quite the contrary. I’ve been advocating for their release for the past month at least - preferably in NYC, Washington DC, or any of the other places where whiterpeople infatuated with GTMO detainees are to be found. London sounds like another good place.
As for the guy who wanted to go see how the mujahideen were doing over there in Afghanistan and ended up in GTMO: bummer. Some people are just really, really stupid, I guess. Proud servant of the queen, no doubt. [/quote]
I took your point to be sarcastic, sorry, didn’t realise you were serious.
If pushed, I think releasing ‘terrorists’ is probably less of an issue than continuing to lock up innocent people given that Guantanamo works as a recruiting tool for hate groups all over the world.
The US was rounding up anyone they could grab regardless of whether they had been involved in fighting or not, they were also locking up people who had been handed over to them by the Northern Alliance who had their own agendas.