• Family

    • Ala Abbas
    • Clairwil
    • Daily Rhino
    • Leon Green
    • Liberal Conspiracy
    • Sajini W
    • Sid’s blog
    • Sonia Afroz
    • Sunny on CIF
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Aqoul
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Blairwatch
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Butterflies & Wheels
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Clive Davis
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr StrangeLove
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feministing
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • Indigo Jo
    • Liberal England
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Humanist Editor
    • New Statesman blogs
    • open Democracy
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Septicisle
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Ariane Sherine
    • Desi Pundit
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Isheeta
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Real man’s fraternity
    • Route 79
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Smalltown Scribbles
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head
    • Ultrabrown



  • Technorati: graph / links

    Nick Griffin elected to European parliament


    by Sunny on 8th June, 2009 at 5:14 am    

    The BBC reports:

    Centre-right parties have done well in elections to the European Parliament at the expense of the left. Far-right and anti-immigrant parties also made gains, as turnout figures plunged to between 43 and 44%. The UK Labour Party, Germany’s Social Democrats and France’s Socialist Party were heading for historic defeats. Correspondents say the centre-right European People’s Party (EPP) looks set to continue to hold power in the parliament.

    To be honest, I’m more worried about Geert Wilders party coming second in Netherlands than the BNP getting two MEPs elected. They can’t do fuck-all with the MEPs other than employ a bunch of incompetent and brain-dead researchers. It’s hardly going to be the start of my repatriation back to the motherland (Hounslow) is it?

    I’d write more but I’m tired and need sleep. Feel free to swear at Nick Griffin below….



      |   Trackback link   |   Add to del.icio.us   |   Share on Facebook   |   Filed in: British Identity, Race politics




    128 Comments below   |   Add your own

    1. Random Guy — on 8th June, 2009 at 6:43 am  

      Looks like the media have done the job of ‘re-educating’ the population to go right. With voter apathy at an all-time high (any ideas on this?) there is no better time for racist scum to get elected.

    2. Diarmid — on 8th June, 2009 at 7:39 am  

      I find it puzzling that the BNP are allowed to exist, given the explicit racial basis of their membership as specified in their constitution. Has this been subject to legal challenge and if not, why not? My German wife tells me that this would certainly not be allowed under the German constitution.

    3. Naadir Jeewa — on 8th June, 2009 at 7:46 am  

      First of all: Fuck Nick Griffin.

      How much of what happened can be laid at the political parties that allowed a mild discourse of islamophobia to run rife to justify the curtailment of civil liberties, levering open a political opportunity to be exploited by the fascists?

      I talked to people who said “Britain is so liberal, but the minority have got their laws imposed over the majority” and then cited media distortions, urban myths, and downright lies about immigrant communities. It was politicians responsibility to talk truth on these matters, but they didn’t, because it was convenient at the time. It fit into the narrative of communities not integrating, justifying all kinds of interventions.

      It was never going to be enough to purely campaign on the back of “don’t vote the bnp.” The youth in ethnic communities have been largely lost by Labour over the 42-days thing.

    4. Raven — on 8th June, 2009 at 7:47 am  

      barshtards…

      What’s odious now is having to see NG and his chums all over the media. Having MEPs will give them a ‘legitimate’ platform, though perhaps better that they will now be engaged in debate and knocked down, rather than just be sniped at (as I have just done in the opening…ahem). I agree on Wilders though.

    5. Narinder Purba — on 8th June, 2009 at 8:14 am  

      What the fuck!!!

      I’m based in the north-east, so I’m fucking outraged by the fucking fucks who voted for the BNP up north. In Newcastle, where I currently live, the Mayoral elections saw the BNP get 3,398 votes, and the National Front 1,086! Fair enough people are dismayed by politics, but this is a tragedy.

      Sunny, I share your thoughts on the BNPs ability to transform these results into anything tangible, but regardless, it does fuel their own drive to be a political machine with greater, it attracts people to them more than ever, and it gives them more visibility in the media and community.

      I am speechless.

    6. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 8:18 am  

      Naadir Jeewa is right. the BNP are a bunch of no hoper misfits with zero organisation, few members (most of whom are street thugs with virtually no education)

      Left on their own they couldnt achieve squat as has been seen for the last 30-40 years

      So how did they end up winning European seats? Because sections of the media have been recruiting for them - a constant barrage of often fabricated and senstationalist stories about immigrants and Muslims. The BNP just had to sit back and watch the votes come in. The fact that these self same rags write articles criticising the BNP is irrelevant - the rest of their output supports them

    7. platinum786 — on 8th June, 2009 at 8:28 am  

      Good points made above, especially about the media effect. People like the tabloid media can run as many anti NBP campaigns as they like, but they are the ones giving airtime and the SPIN to stories that the BNP need.

      Everyone has a right to be anti immigration, but that does not given you a right to be pro racism. The government needs to control the media more and the stories they write but the problem with that is, it’s a very slippery slope.

    8. billericaydicky — on 8th June, 2009 at 8:28 am  

      I,ve just had the main anti BNP organiser in the West Midlands on the phone,he calls it very depressing, which given the amount of effort thrown at the BNP it certainly is.

      A concenus of the Hope Not Hate campaign around the country was that it would be close and it was. It is certainly a set back for not just the anti fascist movement but for allof us and the next battle will be at the local elections next year especially in Barking, Dagenham and points east where sixteen of their councillors are.

      We are paying the price for a number of things most of which were beyond our control like the economy, corruption, expenses etc. Much of the anger of those who voted BNP was against things which were preventable like racial quotas in every sphere of public life as advocated by OBV and the prosecuting of white people by the CRE for imagined racism. As ye sow so shall ye reap.

      I am afraid that we are now harvesting what has been sown by white haters like Simon Wooley and Lee Jasper who are sitting on the millions they have chiselled out of guilt tripped whites.

    9. Ravi Naik — on 8th June, 2009 at 8:40 am  

      There is no spin to this: this was a historic victory for the BNP, and I am particularly sad that the leader of the BNP was rewarded with a MEP seat. It also means that this whole “love not hate” approach from the 70s and 80s is useless to BNP voters who defected from other parties. We need to attack them based on three things: their appalling past performance, their lies and deception, and the dismal things BNP officials say (e.g. rape and infanticide).

      Marketing the BNP as the only racist and hatemongering party in Britain however, works for those Asians and Blacks who prefer to stay at home and not vote. I wonder how apathy from both groups affected the outcome.

      The BNP won two seats, but barely. In Yorkshire, they got less votes than in 2004. They can very easily lose both seats, provided that Labour puts their act together, and there is a new attack against the BNP that is more effective than what we have seen.

      And I have to say I was particularly pleased to see the Conservatives saying it was a sad day for British politics. Indeed.

    10. anj — on 8th June, 2009 at 8:53 am  

      I live in the North West and I feel sick. Saw him on the news this morning.

    11. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 8:55 am  

      Some interesting analysis from Nick Robinson at the BBC
      The BNP vote actually FELL -less people voted for them than last time- but the collapse in Labours vote let them in

      “Nick Griffin is now a Member of the European Parliament even though he won fewer votes than he did five years ago. That’s right, fewer.

      In 2004, the BNP in the North West polled 134,959 votes. In 2009, they polled 132,194. So, why did he win?

      In short, because of a collapse in the Labour vote from 576,388 in 2004 to 336,831 in 2009. In Liverpool, Labour’s vote dived by 15,000; in Manchester by almost 9,000; whilst in Bury, Rochdale and Stockport, its vote halved.

      The switch away from postal votes for all in the last Euro election in the region also led to a fall in turnout. Thus, the BNP could secure a higher share of the vote whilst getting fewer votes. ”

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2009/06/fewer_votes_for.html

      Anyway being a repository for anger and frustration is easy; now the BNP has to deliver. Their past perfomances as councillors dont give a great deal of hope for those sympathethic to them

    12. Adnan — on 8th June, 2009 at 9:04 am  

      Why don’t BNP voters choose UKIP ? BNP has a unique selling point and there are alternatives. Also, the UKIP vote does show that the BNP have not filled the void.

      Blaming the “race-relations industry” as Bill for BNP support does not wash.

      Griffin was on BBC Breakfast. He did not mention Muslims once, but mentioned Sikhs coming to him with problems (probably related to Muslim-Sikh tensions and “Muslims preying on our women” meme.

    13. Rumbold — on 8th June, 2009 at 9:19 am  

      Sorry Adnan- now out of the spam filter.

    14. Sunny D — on 8th June, 2009 at 9:28 am  

      What is wrong with everyone? We need to fight and stand up for ourselves and unite against the stupid BNP. We should have our own PRO-IMMIGRANT/ COLOURED /BRITISH ORGANISATION AND FIGHT FOREVER!!! and join forces ACROSS BRITIAN ,EUROPE AND THE WORLD with all other immigrants/minorites who are persecuted dut to colour/ “BACKGROUND” Look to America and their organisations like this for inspiration. If we carry on doing nothing the BNP AND FAR RIGHT WILL GET STRONGER as we are not together and organised. They have developed all these networks and despite there being millions of us in the UK we do nothing.

    15. Nick Cambell — on 8th June, 2009 at 9:53 am  

      Pork, maybe, just maybe the reason the “immigrant” got your job was because he was better at it than you. What makes you think you have a God given right to a job over somebody else based purely on the fact that you’re white and the other person isn’t?

    16. Rumbold — on 8th June, 2009 at 10:03 am  

      PORK:

      So you support the BNP’s pledge to deport non-whites who were born here then? They are not immigrants.

    17. Shamit — on 8th June, 2009 at 10:05 am  

      Pork -I guess you haven’t noticed the reduction in the number of votes for BNP.

      The number of thickos the thugs could persuade is reducing but it is still a sad day that we have so many racist bigots in this country.

      Define immigrant please?

    18. Rumbold — on 8th June, 2009 at 10:11 am  

      Excuse me?

    19. Rumbold — on 8th June, 2009 at 10:19 am  

      People are racist for a reason- but it doesn’t follow that said reason is a good one. People might be racist because they have been mugged a dozen times, or they might be racist because they view non-whites as inferior, or because of what they read in the papers.

    20. marvin — on 8th June, 2009 at 10:37 am  

      http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/this-is-how-the-nazis-started%2c-says-everyone-200906081810/

      “But experts insisted the BNP vote would disappear as soon as everyone could afford to go on holiday to Majorca again.”

    21. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 10:50 am  

      marvin your link is brilliant but inaccurate: it rather strangely focuses on anti-Jewish and completely ignores Islamophobia. The BNP have eschewed anti-jewish rhetoric, and indeed have Jewish members (Jews now being considered white), are rabidly pro-Israel and covet support from the community, in favour of anti-Muslims rhetoric (rather like your good self).

      One wonders why the Daily Mash and others cant bring itself to address the fact that the BNP’s target is Muslims. Can you explain Marvin?

    22. mountain — on 8th June, 2009 at 10:51 am  

      Agree

    23. Narinder Purba — on 8th June, 2009 at 10:58 am  

      Pork - I can understand you feeling dismayed at being unable to find employment, but that is hardly a justification for supporting the BNP and moreover, for condoning racism, which is effectively what your argument is.

      Pork, being a racist isn’t a good human quality. What you are doing is distinguishing people by virtue of their colour and ethnicity, not of their moral values, work ethic, and personality. You are greatly mistaken in the opinion that immigrants swallow up jobs. It’s a distorted reality that you have come to believe as fact. You seem to easily swayed by the rhetoric of Nick Griffin, who has that Hitler like style of whipping up fervour while talking absolute crap.

      Step back and think about what you’re saying. Racism, in any shape or form is not acceptable. You really need to look at the wider picture and when it comes to finding work, sheer determination, drive, and resilience will do you good stead. The BNP are hardly going to bring you greater opportunities. Only you will.

    24. Narinder Purba — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:03 am  

      Pork - I can understand you feeling dismayed at being unable to find employment, but that is hardly a justification for supporting the BNP and moreover, for condoning racism, which is effectively what your argument is.

      Pork, being a racist isn’t a good human quality. What you are doing is distinguishing people by virtue of their colour and ethnicity, not of their moral values, work ethic, and personality. You are greatly mistaken in the opinion that immigrants swallow up jobs. It’s a distorted reality that you have come to believe as fact. You seem to easily swayed by the rhetoric of Nick Griffin, who has that Hitler like style of whipping up fervour while talking absolute crap.

      Step back and think about what you’re saying. Racism, in any shape or form is not acceptable. You really need to look at the wider picture and when it comes to finding work, sheer determination, drive, and resilience will do you good stead. The BNP are hardly going to bring you greater opportunities. Only you will.

    25. marvin — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:04 am  

      BNP’s target is all immigrants munir.

      They’ve recently been capitalising on the 7/7 attacks and numerous subsequent plots involving self-declared Muslims. They’ve used a picture of the bus ripped apart on their leaflets, so they can reign in people’s legitimate anger and use it to launch an all out assault on all immigrants, and of course including all Muslims. Muslims are an easy target because there are around 2,000 of self-declared Muslims in this country involved in terrorist activities (being monitored by MI5 anyway), hopelessly amateur or otherwise…

    26. mountain — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:06 am  

      i think Britain should be for Britons, i dont mean citizens i mean nationals people from other nationalities bring nothing but triuble what have they ever done for this country

    27. platinum786 — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:17 am  

      Pork, you might not be in work because you spell the work exageration, as;

      exaduration

      .

      I can understand why working class people find it hardest with immigration in Britain. White builders were losing their market share to asian builders who would under cut them. today the same Asian builders are losing their market share to Eastern european builders, who have under cut them. To survive you need to adapt.

      The fact of the matter is that the white man went worldwide when it suited him and took the worlds riches. You colonised most of the world, wiped out entire peoples in 3 continents (South America, North America and Australia). You didn’t want to be an Island state then.

      You want to get a job, compete. Become better than the guy who took your job, you have no god given right to survive.

    28. Boyo — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:17 am  

      Old fashioned class is behind the BNP’s victory. The historic suppression of discussion around immigration - largely by use of the racist smear - has resulted in the victory of a racist party. It is certainly not the media’s fault- there is simply a class of people, generally white and poor, who feel forgotten by the mainstream parties and threatened in a number of ways by immigration, something the middle classes who broadly benefit from it, neither understand, appreciate or really care about.

    29. Jai — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:18 am  

      though perhaps better that they will now be engaged in debate and knocked down,

      We need to attack them based on three things: their appalling past performance, their lies and deception, and the dismal things BNP officials say (e.g. rape and infanticide).

      I think that Raven and Ravi have both got it spot-on. This is the key.

      Also, I saw anchor Adam Bolton and William Hague both tearing Nick Griffin apart live on Sky News at nearly midnight last night. And Griffin dug an increasingly deep hole for himself the more his lies, policies, “projections” and conspiracy theories were exposed and challenged by his two adversaries.

      I find it puzzling that the BNP are allowed to exist, given the explicit racial basis of their membership as specified in their constitution. Has this been subject to legal challenge and if not, why not?

      I’ve wondered about this too. You can’t imagine the KKK “rebranding” themselves and being allowed to stand as a “legitimate” political party in the United States, for example.

    30. Jai — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:21 am  

      The fact of the matter is that the white man went worldwide when it suited him and took the worlds riches. You colonised most of the world, wiped out entire peoples in 3 continents (South America, North America and Australia). You didn’t want to be an Island state then.

      Without wishing to tar all white people with the same brush, I think that in the case of racists like the BNP and their supporters in the wider population, this is a major factor behind all the paranoia on their part about “invasions”, “the country being taken over by foreigners”, etc etc.

      There’s more than a little bit of “psychological projection” going on.

    31. Narinder Purba — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:29 am  

      Exaggeration is the correct spelling, not one g.

      Although I loathe the idea of the BNP having more air time, I do see it being important to have them involved in proper heavyweight debate. It’s good for discourse, and as Jai asserts, it exposes their mantra for being pathetic, illogical, and downright racist.

    32. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:36 am  

      marvin
      “BNP’s target is all immigrants munir. ”

      No marvin its all non white people. The vast majority of non white people in the UK are not “immigrants”

      “They’ve recently been capitalising on the 7/7 attacks and numerous subsequent plots involving self-declared Muslims. They’ve used a picture of the bus ripped apart on their leaflets, so they can reign in people’s legitimate anger and use it to launch an all out assault on all immigrants, and of course including all Muslims. Muslims are an easy target because there are around 2,000 of self-declared Muslims in this country involved in terrorist activities (being monitored by MI5 anyway), hopelessly amateur or otherwise…”

      Marvin British Muslims arent immigrants. This is the rhetoric of the BNP.

      You appear to be suggesting that they may have a point. The point is the BNP have achieved their unprecedented success by targetting and demonsing Muslims. Not Jews, Not Sikhs, Not Hindus. Muslims. Those who do likewise, such as yourself, are cut from the same cloth even though their motivations may be different.

    33. chairwoman — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:37 am  

      “The fact of the matter is that the white man went worldwide when it suited him and took the worlds riches. You colonised most of the world, wiped out entire peoples in 3 continents (South America, North America and Australia). You didn’t want to be an Island state then.”

      I very much doubt that the WWC of the time benefited much from the looting. It took them out of rural poverty, and put them instead in urban poverty.

    34. arthur — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:37 am  

      Munir
      Has it not occurred to you that whatever electoral success the odious bullies of the BNP have been able to achieve stems directly from the existence in our society of a hard core of violent extremists fundamentally antipathetic to the traditional British values of tolerance and freedom of thought and expression?
      Sixty years ago a psychopathic Austrian Corporal became the leader of a fringe political party and led a civilised nation into the abyss.
      The sooner peaceful believers in Islam repudiate those extremists who conceal their murderous hatred of Western society behind a shameful pretence of religious belief, the sooner will the BNP be deprived of the fear that they rely upon.
      A plague on all the extremists - both the random suicide bombers and the miserable fascists - these are the people we should all be united in combatting.
      And if we can do so without resorting to filthy language - so much the better.

    35. chairwoman — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:42 am  

      “ou appear to be suggesting that they may have a point. The point is the BNP have achieved their unprecedented success by targetting and demonsing Muslims. Not Jews, Not Sikhs, Not Hindus. Muslims. Those who do likewise, such as yourself, are cut from the same cloth even though their motivations may be different.”

      The BNP are sly and insidious. Yes, they have indeed put Muslims in the front line this time, and I do believe they have a Jewish member. They, at one time, also had a Sikh member. They used to parade the two idiots before the national press at carefully selected intervals.

      But, and it is an extremely big but, they do not consider us white, and Marvin is right, should they get to power, the same fate, whatever that may be, awaits us all. Muslim, Jew, Sikh, Hindu, Black and Brown. They hates us my preciouss.

    36. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:44 am  

      Jai
      “There’s more than a little bit of “psychological projection” going on.”

      Likewise with Islamophobes. When you hear an American say “Islam is violent and wants to take over the world” he or she is projecting. There are hundreds of thousands of US troops in Baghdad not vice versa and there are US troops stationed in over a hundred different countries

      Likewise when you hear them say “Muslims are trying to take over and change our lifestyle/laws”. this of course is what western powers are doing and have been doing in Muslim lands

    37. platinum786 — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:53 am  

      the BNP are cunts. They play people against each other. They know there is anti Muslim feeling in the Jewish and Sikh communities, they use that to single out Muslims as “the problem”. Muslim Bashing is more acceptable right now than gay bashing, jew bashing, black bashing etc.

      If they were to come into power, eventually they’d revert to type.

    38. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:55 am  

      arthur

      “Has it not occurred to you that whatever electoral success the odious bullies of the BNP have been able to achieve stems directly from the existence in our society of a hard core of violent extremists fundamentally antipathetic to the traditional British values of tolerance and freedom of thought and expression?”

      Not really since we had decades of Irish extremists blowing us up and dont recall huge numbers of people voting for parties to expel Irish people from these lands.

      “The sooner peaceful believers in Islam repudiate those extremists who conceal their murderous hatred of Western society behind a shameful pretence of religious belief, the sooner will the BNP be deprived of the fear that they rely upon.”

      You are engaging in the same collective blame the BNP do!! That all Muslims must be held responisble for the acts of terrorists. Dont recall the Irish being asked this. Ah the joys of being an ethnic minority.

      Its also pretty hypocritical to demand Muslims repudiate extremists whle non-Muslims are voting in increasing numbers for Nazis!!!

    39. emory — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:00 pm  

      munir:

      it rather strangely focuses on anti-Jewish and completely ignores Islamophobia. The BNP have eschewed anti-jewish rhetoric, and indeed have Jewish members (Jews now being considered white), are rabidly pro-Israel and covet support from the community, in favour of anti-Muslims rhetoric (rather like your good self).

      I don’t think you are any different from the Sikh communalists who voted for the BNP on the strength of their anti-Islam ticket.

      I have no doubt that if the BNP were a “legitimate democratic racist party” whose only policy was a single-issue anti-Jewish platform, communlaist Islamists like yourself would be putting your support behind it.

    40. Hantsboy — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:02 pm  

      I’ve wondered about this too. You can’t imagine the KKK “rebranding” themselves and being allowed to stand as a “legitimate” political party in the United States, for example.
      Jai

      There is a huge historical difference between the USA and Britain -or indeed other European countries and it is this.
      The indigenous population of Europe is white caucasian.
      The European immigrants however were opportunistic land grabbers who took land from the Native Amerindians.
      They also used slave African labour from almost the start of their colonisation.
      So the descendants of Europeans in the US have no moral ground to object to others among whom they now live.
      Europe was overwhelmingly white until extremely recently. The huge influx of non Europeans into this ancient long standing culture and population has naturally created a lot of tension.

      Hence the rise of ‘the Far Right’ or whatever you choose to call them.

      BNP are not going to go away.

    41. Naadir Jeewa — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:05 pm  

      Just to clarify, the BNP are just as anti-Black, anti-Jew, anti-Sikh, anti-Indian etc… as they are anti-Muslim. It’s just that the media misreporting and the climate of fear developed around the issue of Muslim communities integrating provided the political opportunity for the BNP to claim legitimacy.

      I also wonder to what extent the British public free-rode on the core BNP voters, i.e. saying “I’ll just let someone else vote BNP for me.”

    42. Rumbold — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:05 pm  

      Jai:

      “I’ve wondered about this too. You can’t imagine the KKK “rebranding” themselves and being allowed to stand as a “legitimate” political party in the United States, for example.”

      Well, we have to make a distinction between ‘belief’ and ‘action’. Are the BNP a racist party? Yes. Should merely being racist be enough to disqualify you from forming a legal political party? No, I don’t think it should.

      If BNP were to consistantly engage in criminal activities with the full backing of the BNP leadership, then there would be a case for banning the party. Otherwise you are just criminalising them for their beliefs, which, however unpleasant they might be, is a very bad road to go down. People need to be free to believe what they want, as long as they do not call for violence against others.

      If we want to start criminalising people for their beliefs, then where do we stop?

    43. Rumbold — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:07 pm  

      Munir:

      As others have pointed out, the BNP feeds on whatever hate they can find. Today it is Muslims, tomorrow it will be Jews again. In the eyes of the BNP, you are all subhuman.

    44. bananabrain — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:10 pm  

      i’m not even sure it’s to do with being “white” - certainly i myself would not qualify as such, being distinctly swarthy… either way, anyone jewish who voted for the bnp would have to be the stupidest person in the history of judaism. we all hear this thing about the bnp having jewish voters because they are “rabidly pro-israel” - firstly, has anyone any real stats (i.e. not thrown around as if they were real) on jewish voting for the bnp (see my first point) and secondly, you do know that the reason the bnp like the idea of israel is that it gives the jews somewhere to be sent back to, so we are not over here taking their jobs and their women and running their financial system and media. i don’t know a single jewish person that can’t tell you the date we were expelled last time - 1290, in fact. we were only allowed back in by cromwell.

      b’shalom

      bananabrain

    45. arthur — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:12 pm  

      Munir
      If you read what I wrote you can hardly accuse me of hypocrisy. I am never likely to give my vote to the BNP and those fascists misrepresent the British people in precisely the same way that terrorists pervert the name of religion.
      Harmony and unity demands that we all unequivocally condemn the forces of hatred and violence in our society.
      Remember there is always the danger that silence can be seen to signify assent.

    46. simon — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:13 pm  

      “Just to clarify, the BNP are just as anti-Black, anti-Jew, anti-Sikh, anti-Indian etc… as they are anti-Muslim. It’s just that the media misreporting and the climate of fear developed around the issue of Muslim communities integrating provided the political opportunity for the BNP to claim legitimacy.”

      There are jewish members in the BNP

    47. chairwoman — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:15 pm  

      “i don’t know a single jewish person that can’t tell you the date we were expelled last time - 1290, in fact.”

      And left to drown on a sandbank just off the English coast!

    48. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:18 pm  

      emory

      “I don’t think you are any different from the Sikh communalists who voted for the BNP on the strength of their anti-Islam ticket.

      I have no doubt that if the BNP were a “legitimate democratic racist party” whose only policy was a single-issue anti-Jewish platform, communlaist Islamists like yourself would be putting your support behind it.”

      Never. I dont have any issue with Jewish people. I have an issue with the state of Israel and its treatmnet of the Palestinians but can distinguish between the two. I have an issue with Jewish Islamophobes as I do with Muslim islamophobes, Sikh Islamophobes and Athiest Islamophobes.

      If a party ran on an anti-Israeli occupation tivket Id ceratinly be interested in supporting it. But not an anti-jewish one. Despite the despearate efforts of zionists there isnt an integral anti-Jewish elemnt in Islam or amongst Muslims (quite the opposite). This is not the case with white nationalists. Id submit that misguided Sikhs who support the BNP are also playing on historical elements of anti-Muslimism contained in the Sikh religion as well as memories of partition and its horrors.

      In any case your propisition is impossible and counter intuitive: if a racist party were running on an anti-Jewish platform (and Jewish people are white Europeans) they would necessarily be anti brown and black people

    49. chairwoman — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:19 pm  

      Look here Chaps and Chapesses, can we call a moratorium on who’s hated the most by the BNP, and just concentrate on being united against them?

      Please.

    50. chairwoman — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:23 pm  

      Munir - White-ish.

    51. Andy — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:25 pm  

      The elephant in the room of Islamic extremism and continual propagation of race based identity politics has had the cumulative effect of gestating support for the BNP. All those who scream ‘Islamophobia’ whenever the issue of Islamic extremism and its roots in Britain is raised are part of the problem for trying to stigmatise the confrontation of this form of supremacism and separatism. The continual mainstreaming of identity-politics provided the perfect vehicle for those who wanted to appropriate that bandwagon for the cause of ‘white identity’.

    52. emory — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:26 pm  

      munir

      I don’t think you’re being very honest.

      In any case your propisition is impossible and counter intuitive: if a racist party were running on an anti-Jewish platform (and Jewish people are white Europeans) they would necessarily be anti brown and black people

      I think you are forgetting that muslims can be white too. And that a white British muslim convert is less of a “problem” to the BNP than a white jew.

    53. Andy — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:31 pm  

      Lets remember that anti-semitic racism is mainstream amongst Muslim ‘moderates’. When an Islamic communalist like Inayat Bunglawala who is obsessed with Jewish conspiracies is the supposed face of moderate Islam, and a respected and elevated spokesman, we have big, big problems, because the well is poisoned. You cannot speak about being anti-racist, when racists stand on your platform. Griffin in the past allied himself with Islamic extremists because they shared one thing — an obsessive hatred of Jews. All this shows is his complete opportunism.

      The Left has allowed the well to be poisoned by racists and bigotry already.

    54. Bobby — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:36 pm  

      Id submit that misguided Sikhs who support the BNP are also playing on historical elements of anti-Muslimism contained in the Sikh religion as well as memories of partition and its horrors.

      There is no ‘anti Muslimism’ in the Sikh religion munir, you bigot.

      Lets cut the crap. There is no support for the BNP amongst Sikhs. It may feed the paranoid fantasies of people like munir to imagine that there are, but I fought the NF and the BNP in Southall and Handsworth, and a couple of senile idiots who Nick Griffin bought lunch for do not represent Sikhs in the UK. So drop this shit immediately or else I am going to start responding with some home truths about attitudes to non Muslims within the Muslim community in the UK.

      Stop slandering Sikhs and Sikhism munir, I am warning you now.

    55. Bobby — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:38 pm  

      As others have pointed out, the BNP feeds on whatever hate they can find. Today it is Muslims, tomorrow it will be Jews again. In the eyes of the BNP, you are all subhuman

      Exactly Rumbold. Unfortunately I think munir has his own agenda and is an opportunist himself.

    56. platinum786 — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:41 pm  

      lol…. home truths….hahaha

      It’s super to see this argument unfold…. the BNP hate me more, no, the BNP hate me more…

    57. Bobby — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:42 pm  

      I don’t think you are any different from the Sikh communalists who voted for the BNP on the strength of their anti-Islam ticket.

      Stop this idiotic fantasy about Sikhs voting for the BNP. Sikhs have been at the forefront of anti-fascist, anti-racist, and anti NF/BNP activity since the 1960s. Sikhs have been knifed, beaten up and even killed by the NF/BNP tendency. Sikhs are opposed to them because they are racists. For you to repeat this lie, this fantasy brewed by Nick Griffin, is a slander on Sikhs in the UK, and representative of extant prejudices within the interlocuter than any basis in reality.

      Stop this slander of Sikhs immediately. Deal with the BNP. I am warning all of you to desist this slander of Sikhs in the UK.

    58. Kulvinder — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:44 pm  

      So i guess im the only one not particularly fussed?

      I’m always curious at the venom the BNP attract; it goes without saying i disagree with most of what they say but they’re hardly a dominant political force. Hysterical nonsense about the BNP coming into power is about as realistic as those who believe Bakri Mohammed and his ilk could realistically ‘fly the black flag of islam over no10′

      I can’t help but have a tittle of sympathy for them. The egg throwing and violence that seems to occur in their presence is quite frankly obscene. The black and asian people in particular who join in are morons, there is after all little better advertisment for the barbarians at the gate than the apeish barbarians disrupting a legal gathering during a democratic process.

      Still if Nick Griffin had to be elected to a parliament id happily let him into one that sits in two foreign countries and has no practical power worth talking about.

    59. Bobby — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:44 pm  

      lol…. home truths….hahaha

      Are you one of those who wishes to transfer prejudices onto a lie about Sikh support for the BNP in Britain? If not, then don’t laugh. I have had enough of this idiotic slander.

    60. Halima — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:45 pm  

      it’s a disgrace on all of us - the broader British public that this is the outcome, surely we’re all smarter than that - the left and the right.

    61. emory — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:48 pm  

      Bobby, Sikhs have been, as you say, at the forefront of the anti-racist/anti-fascist movement in this country, as have Muslims. But please note that I mentioned “Sikh communalists” not “Sikhs” in general.

    62. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 12:55 pm  

      Andy
      “Lets remember that anti-semitic racism is mainstream amongst Muslim ‘moderates’.”

      And Islamophobic Muslim-hate is mainstream amongst Jewish “moderates”

      The difference being they have a far wider reach

    63. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:02 pm  

      Andy
      “When an Islamic communalist like Inayat Bunglawala who is obsessed with Jewish conspiracies is the supposed face of moderate Islam”

      Do you have any examples of his obsession? This comment is laughable given Jewish writers and publishers like Richard Desmond, Mel Phillips, Daniel Pipes or David T and many others who have an obsession with Muslims. leaving aside “Eurabia” by Bate Yor the modern protocols.

      ” Griffin in the past allied himself with Islamic extremists because they shared one thing — an obsessive hatred of Jews. All this shows is his complete opportunism.”

      And now he is allying with Jewish extremists with an obssesive hatred of Muslims.

      http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/index.php?link=template&story=274

    64. bananabrain — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:07 pm  

      Jewish people are white Europeans

      no. at least half of us are *not*. you seem unable to get this through your skull however many times i point it out. presumably it comes under the heading of “inconvenient truths”.

      And Islamophobic Muslim-hate is mainstream amongst Jewish “moderates”

      no. it isn’t. you cannot make such an assertion without backing it up. and, no, i wouldn’t call mel phillips a “moderate” either.

      b’shalom

      bananabrain

    65. Jai — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:16 pm  

      Hantsboy,

      The huge influx of non Europeans into this ancient long standing culture and population has naturally created a lot of tension.

      Let’s make one glaring fact very clear: The population of the United Kingdom is approximately 90% white.

      Let me repeat that: 90%.

      “Huge influx of non-Europeans” ? Not quite. Not when — again — the population of Britain is still 90% white, after over 60 years of immigration from non-European countries, and considering that (for example) the birthrate regarding children born to UK-born British Indians generally isn’t different to that amongst the white population.

      And if you think that Europe as a whole has “always” had a) a broadly homogenous culture, b) little or no cultural, diplomatic or trade contact with non-European regions of the world prior to the colonial era, and c) no intermarriage with non-Europeans involving the inhabitants of the Mediterraean regions in particular…..then you need to brush up on your knowledge of classical European history (especially the parts involving the Romans and the Greeks) before you start throwing around inappropriate and misinformed references about “this ancient longstanding culture”.

    66. Kulvinder — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:18 pm  

      Not really since we had decades of Irish extremists blowing us up and dont recall huge numbers of people voting for parties to expel Irish people from these lands.

      *sigh*

      At least try and understand the context of politics in the past. Nick Griffin and the BNP were anti-ira in years gone by, and there was a general anti-irish sentiment in the UK - the ubiquitous story of the landlord wanting ‘no irish, no niggers and no dogs’ gives an idea of which groups were unwelcome. That anti-irish sentiment was not only found in the political sphere but in sport as well.

      The historic prejudice against the Irish hasn’t been so much about expelling them (though protestant landowners in the 19th century desired that) so much as subjugating them and keeping the land.

    67. Kulvinder — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:19 pm  

      And Islamophobic Muslim-hate is mainstream amongst Jewish “moderates”

      Just to be clear, are you as idiotic as those you oppose or are you just trolling?

    68. Diarmid — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:20 pm  

      Rumbold said:

      “Well, we have to make a distinction between ‘belief’ and ‘action’. Are the BNP a racist party? Yes. Should merely being racist be enough to disqualify you from forming a legal political party? No, I don’t think it should.”

      I agree, but the BNP restrict those who can join on racist grounds. And given that they are eligible to receive public funds, surely this ought to be illegal.

    69. Jai — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:20 pm  

      Jewish people are white Europeans

      That would certainly be news to all those Indian Jewish people who migrated to Israel after the formation of the state post-WW2.

      anti-Muslimism contained in the Sikh religion

      What Bobby said in #50 & #53.

    70. Jai — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:23 pm  

      Rumbold,

      Well, we have to make a distinction between ‘belief’ and ‘action’. Are the BNP a racist party? Yes. Should merely being racist be enough to disqualify you from forming a legal political party? No, I don’t think it should.

      If BNP were to consistantly engage in criminal activities with the full backing of the BNP leadership, then there would be a case for banning the party. Otherwise you are just criminalising them for their beliefs, which, however unpleasant they might be, is a very bad road to go down. People need to be free to believe what they want, as long as they do not call for violence against others.

      If we want to start criminalising people for their beliefs, then where do we stop?

      As far as you know, are openly racist organisations allowed to stand as political parties in the United States ?

    71. Random Guy — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:24 pm  

      Bananabrain @ 60, my own personal experience backs up what munir is saying.

      Also, I would think that the majority of Jewish people in the UK are more viewed as “Europeans” or “White” in comparison to your average ethnic minority Muslim, Sikh or Hindu.

      STILL, I would like to agree with previous posters here and just unequivocally say, FUCK the BNP now and forever - I don’t really care for these petty inter-communal squabbles and discussions going on here. Also, to the posters who have the audacity to blame Muslims for the BNP coming to power - seriously, take a hike.

    72. Refresh — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:26 pm  

      I really can’t be bothered going through this thread. For me this is a culmination of fearmongering by the media, by the government and people generally not engaging brain with the messages being flashed to them daily in the papers and nightly on TV. And of course most importantly the failure of the government to remain engaged with their own electoral base.

      The way forward has got to be to change the narrative, and realise we are all in it together. And to stress the working class is non-racial. The issues that ‘white’ working class face are the same ones faced by muslim working class, jewish working class and so it goes.

      We all have a job to do to engage within our own communities and across; along with the Trade Union movement and any other civil groupings.

      So cut out the divisive talk, or don’t even bother to pass comment on your concerns about the BNP. They would be worthless.

    73. platinum786 — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:37 pm  

      Bobby, I was laughing at your response. For a fella to claims to have fought to NF in Slough it seems hilarious. You must be at least 30-40 years old, yet the response was a bit childish.

      Assume for a second that Munir was being anti Sikh, by you making good on your threat of being Anti Muslim, that would have made his comments okay, or nullified them? I think we all can safely agree that is not the case.

      Finally, I obviously in no place to provide garuntees, but I don’t think Munir meant that sikhism is anti Muslim. What he meant is probably that the BNP choose to exploit the historical problems between the Sikh and Muslim communities. I know in our local community they tried by spreading leaflets in local Gudwara’s about Muslim guys apparently trying to force sikh girls to convert to Islam, by drugging them. The leaflets were distributed and were traced to the BNP. How they got to the Gudwaras, who knows, maybe someone wanted to settle a score with a Paki and thought it a good way of spreading hate, maybe they got left at the door? I don’t know, but they did create suspicion.

    74. Jai — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:41 pm  

      The BNP are sly and insidious. Yes, they have indeed put Muslims in the front line this time, and I do believe they have a Jewish member. They, at one time, also had a Sikh member. They used to parade the two idiots before the national press at carefully selected intervals.

      They’re playing that old game of “Divide and Rule”, folks.

    75. Shamit — on 8th June, 2009 at 1:47 pm  

      Jai

      “As far as you know, are openly racist organisations allowed to stand as political parties in the United States ?”

      The answer to your question would be no. Any organisation by default cannot exclude anyone from membership due to Equal Rights Act and various other legislations as well as successive Presidential Executive Orders.

      Klu Klux Klan, to be a political party (therefore a public organisation by default) have to let Blacks and other minorities in the party. Thats a non starter.

    76. bananabrain — on 8th June, 2009 at 2:19 pm  

      Bananabrain @ 60, my own personal experience backs up what munir is saying.

      then back it up with some evidence. i see nothing of the sort.

      Also, I would think that the majority of Jewish people in the UK are more viewed as “Europeans” or “White” in comparison to your average ethnic minority Muslim, Sikh or Hindu.

      i’m not disputing that, actually. i would even say that that is how the majority of jewish people in this country view themselves. because, of course, the majority of jewish people in this country are ashkenazi and therefore white and european. ‘OWEVAIR, i’m talking about the bald assertion that “jewish people ARE white and european” - because that jest ain’t so. half the population of israel are from the islamic world and plenty from africa and asia to boot. there is also, lest we forget, a sizeable minority of indian/iraqi jews like myself in the UK, but, naturally most other BMEs have never met one.

      as if it matters either way to anyone but the bnp. sheesh.

      b’shalom

      bananabrain

    77. Jai — on 8th June, 2009 at 2:35 pm  

      Shamit,

      The answer to your question would be no. Any organisation by default cannot exclude anyone from membership due to Equal Rights Act and various other legislations as well as successive Presidential Executive Orders.

      Klu Klux Klan, to be a political party (therefore a public organisation by default) have to let Blacks and other minorities in the party. Thats a non starter.

      Thanks for the explanation, mate.

      So am I correct in understanding that, unlike the United States, due to a loophole in the British legal system the BNP can exist as a legitimate political party and legally exclude non-white people from joining it ?

      Or does no such “loophole” actually exist and the BNP are therefore actually breaking the law ?

    78. Boyo — on 8th June, 2009 at 2:40 pm  

      “It’s super to see this argument unfold…. the BNP hate me more, no, the BNP hate me more…” Yeah, funny how “the juice” have become Jewish all of a sudden.

      Islamism is a gift to the BNP, as the BNP is to Islamists - all fascists together. Both despise “the other” - anyone who is not them - the only difference is its possible to convert to Islam (although Islamophobia is still “racist”, naturally).

      They both use the Holocaust for their political purposes… indeed Islamist anti-semitism has its roots in the propaganda developed by the Nazis, which was developed by the Czarist secret police… and both feed on ignorance, thuggery and grievance.

      There’s certainly no worse said by the BNP about Muslims than supposed Muslims have regularly said of Jews on PP. But Islam is of course only an idea, while you can’t change your race, can you.

      Or am I confusing the two?

    79. platinum786 — on 8th June, 2009 at 2:53 pm  

      You can still be juice of you like…

    80. chairwoman — on 8th June, 2009 at 2:55 pm  

      Jews come in many hues. Some are Black, some like, bananabrain are Brown, I could come from anywhere round the rim of the Mediterranean, and my daughter is a blue eyed redhead, although the eastern Mediterranean is one of the few places that red hair originates from.

      But according to the BNP, none of us are white, and we are all ‘mud people’.

    81. chairwoman — on 8th June, 2009 at 2:58 pm  

      Islamophobia - Means fear of Islam, not hatred of Israel.

    82. Random Guy — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:04 pm  

      Bananabrain @ 72: Personal experience, dinner/gathering situation. Shocking “terrorists” comment made, random discussions being overheard etc.

      I don’t really want to go into details, but suffice to say that my impressions are that it is just as bad in these circles as many say it is in muslim circles.

    83. thabet — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:07 pm  

      For people interested, here are some numbers from a Ch4/YouGov poll:
      http://www.channel4.com/news/media/2009/06/day08/yougovpoll_080609.pdf
      (Cover story: http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/domestic_politics/who+voted+bnp+and+why/3200557)

      Page seven makes for alarming reading…

    84. thabet — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:10 pm  

      ‘Muslim’ is probably just a code word for ‘them’.

      Other people who have been, or still included, in this category are: Catholic, Irish, Jew, black, immigrant, single mother, etc.

    85. Adnan — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:20 pm  

      So, “phobia” as in used in “xenophobia” is just a “fear” rather than “hatred” ?

    86. chairwoman — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:25 pm  

      Adnan - Actually and literally yes.

      Unfortunately people use words incorrectly and that becomes the norm.

    87. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:33 pm  

      munir
      “Jewish people are white Europeans”

      bananabrain
      “no. at least half of us are *not*. you seem unable to get this through your skull however many times i point it out. presumably it comes under the heading of “inconvenient truths”.”

      BB I am aware that worldwide jewry is not predominantly white (though given Mel Phillips says the goal of Islam from day one has been to exterminate the Jews Im not sure how there could so many millions from Muslim lands) but we are talking about the UK (you know BNP?) where they are.

      “And Islamophobic Muslim-hate is mainstream amongst Jewish “moderates””

      bananabrain
      “no. it isn’t. you cannot make such an assertion without backing it up”.

      I believe I provided the names

      “and, no, i wouldn’t call mel phillips a “moderate” either.”

      No Mel Phillips isnt “a moderate”- but she is mainstream in the Jewish community- She has a column for the Jewish Chronicle!!! Likewise Richard Desmond arguably the number one purveyor of hate against Muslims in this country is chairman of Norwood!!! Its like making Abu Hamza chairman of Islamic Relief!

      Then there is the Republican Jewish committe which sent out the hate film Obsession before the election and AishTorah which showed the film as a way of atttracting jewish youth back to Judaism (by stirring up hatred of Muslims?)

      The Jewish Chronicle incidentally published an article by Jewish writer Baet Yor-on Eurabia -the modern day protocols the book which claims there is a secret conspiracy for Muslims to take over Europe!!!

    88. bananabrain — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:36 pm  

      Bananabrain @ 72: Personal experience, dinner/gathering situation. Shocking “terrorists” comment made, random discussions being overheard etc. I don’t really want to go into details, but suffice to say that my impressions are that it is just as bad in these circles as many say it is in muslim circles.

      oh, i see what you mean now. i thought you meant by “mainstream” that it was OK to say that sort of thing in public. it isn’t. i hope it never is. in fact, it is the dinner party/water cooler scenario that i do a lot of my grass-roots work at - where a remark is passed, i challenge it. oddly enough, i have found that the most effective technique is a thought experiment - muslims are having this exact same conversation at dinner, about you. how does it feel? wouldn’t it be better if they could say, from experience, no, hang on, is that how my jewish friend bananabrain thinks, maybe i’d better talk about it with him. it is amazing just how many of them get all quiet and thoughtful once they realise the implications for interfaith dialogue - it is not about clerics sitting down and making declarations; it is about the grass-roots, about the social networks we are part of.

      b’shalom

      bananabrain

    89. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:41 pm  

      In any case your propisition is impossible and counter intuitive: if a racist party were running on an anti-Jewish platform (and Jewish people are white Europeans) they would necessarily be anti brown and black people

      emory
      “I think you are forgetting that muslims can be white too. And that a white British muslim convert is less of a “problem” to the BNP than a white jew.”

      An irrelevant comment. Yes I am aware that Muslims can be white. But the fact is the vast majority of Muslims in the UK are non-white. Actually I dont think the BNP are too happy with white converts either - judging by comments on their site they consider them traitors to their culture and heritage (shh dont tell them King Offa minted an Islamic coin in the 7th century) as well as “race mixers” since they invariable have non white partners.

    90. Boyo — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:43 pm  

      “ISLAMOPHOBIA - Anti-Muslim Racism” according to Islamophobiawatch, the nation’s leading Muslim grievance-mongering site, although we all know by now (don’t we?) it is actually run by non-Muslim grievance-mongerers and is part of a GENUINE bone-fide conspiracy to create division and hatred, although not being Kosher I can understand why for some of you that might be hard to believe. But really, it’s there in the Protocols of the Juveniles of Lenin…

      http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/member/bob-pitt

    91. Boyo — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:46 pm  

      “if a racist party were running on an anti-Jewish platform (and Jewish people are white Europeans) they would necessarily be anti brown and black people”

      Well, the Nazis REALLY HATED Jews, yet they were quite fond of the Japanese.

    92. bananabrain — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:50 pm  

      I believe I provided the names

      if you mean the people in the searchlight article you linked to, most people outside the anti-racism world would not have heard of them. even i am only familiar with them because they are the white supremacists’ pet jews. mainstream they ain’t.

      No Mel Phillips isnt “a moderate”- but she is mainstream in the Jewish community- She has a column for the Jewish Chronicle!!!

      however, you said - and i quote: “mainstream amongst jewish moderates”, so let’s leave mel out of this. i think nobody here is in any doubt as to my opinion of her positions.

      Likewise Richard Desmond arguably the number one purveyor of hate against Muslims in this country is chairman of Norwood!!! Its like making Abu Hamza chairman of Islamic Relief!

      how is richard desmond the “number one purveyor of hate”? as far as i know he is a pornographer and i find it somewhat distasteful that someone like that should be an acceptable communal figure. perhaps there is something else about him i am not aware of, admittedly i don’t know a great deal about him. if he’s a hatemonger, that is certainly something i would be interested in addressing, i know many people who work with and raise money for norwood, which is an extremely praiseworthy organisation.

      Then there is the Republican Jewish committee

      i think you’ll find they’re american, i thought you were restricting this to the UK.

      AishTorah which showed the film as a way of atttracting jewish youth back to Judaism (by stirring up hatred of Muslims?)

      that’s not aish’s modus operandi, they tend to go for the “attract” rather than the “scare” approach but they’re not above dabbling in the latter from time to time when the speed dating and smoked salmon bagels run out. i personally detest most of the outreach organisations as illiberal, disingenuous, trojan-horse jewish equivalents to all that saudi-funded salafi infiltration that goes on in the muslim community - and i’m not alone in that, but that’s a slightly separate issue which i’m involved with by working with competitor organisations. certainly they don’t have the credibility to make political points, but they do pick up some of the peanut gallery that way i bet.

      The Jewish Chronicle incidentally published an article by Jewish writer Bat Yeor-on Eurabia -the modern day protocols the book which claims there is a secret conspiracy for Muslims to take over Europe!!!

      well, bat-yeor is hardly mainstream, let alone moderate. the jc has to publish a wide variety of opinion, but it’s not like there’s a weekly column - mel’s stuff is far more problematic in my opinion, because it’s far less extreme so far more subversive.

      b’shalom

      bananabrain

    93. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:57 pm  

      Bobby

      “Stop slandering Sikhs and Sikhism munir, I am warning you now.
      Stop this slander of Sikhs immediately. Deal with the BNP. I am warning all of you to desist this slander of Sikhs in the UK.”

      My my threats Bobby? Why are you Sikhs so violent? Its your religion isn’t it? I mean carrying about swords all the time. And your Gurus were fighters too. BTW when will Sikhs condemn the killing of Indira Gandhi or the blowing up of Air India? And when are you going to drop those turbans and try and fit in. Mind you Im not against moderate Sikhs the ones who dont wear turbans or attend gurdwaras- theyre OK
      (PS I am joking)

      “Are you one of those who wishes to transfer prejudices onto a lie about Sikh support for the BNP in Britain? If not, then don’t laugh. I have had enough of this idiotic slander.”

      Wow one person makes a comment and you have had enough of this slander. You should be a British Muslim -we have to put up with this sh*t day in and day out

    94. munir — on 8th June, 2009 at 3:59 pm  

      Boyo
      “Well, the Nazis REALLY HATED Jews, yet they were quite fond of the Japanese.”

      And Gert Wilders really hates Muslims but is awfully fond of Jews. Whats your point? That bigots arent bigots cos they dont hate everyone

    95. Boyo — on 8th June, 2009 at 4:00 pm  

      “You should be a British Muslim -we have to put up with this sh*t day in and day out”

      Heh. You don’t have any problem slandering Sid day in day out, but he’s not a “proper” Muslim is he. With a skin as thin as yours its a wonder you dare even to go out in the sun.

    96. Shamit — on 8th June, 2009 at 4:03 pm  

      Jai,

      If you define political parties as legitimate public authorities (a stretch) you might get that done under the race relations act. But I am no legal expert

      But not a bad point to explore. While this might have some martyr impact I think it is a legitimate debate - can political parties be exclusive in terms of its membership?

    97. Boyo — on 8th June, 2009 at 4:04 pm  

      “if a racist party were running on an anti-Jewish platform (and Jewish people are white Europeans) they would necessarily be anti brown and black people”

      That was my point.

    98. emory — on 8th June, 2009 at 4:22 pm  

      But the fact is the vast majority of Muslims in the UK are non-white.

      Do you think white Muslims are going to be the subject of mass deportations? The BNP are not anti-religion party they are a racist party as various others have unsuccessfully tried to drum into you.

    99. Vikrant — on 8th June, 2009 at 4:34 pm  

      Jai,

      I think under Race relations act, BNP membership thing is illegal. But to sue them, you will have to try joining the BNP yourself and prove the you were racially discriminated against, I guess…

    100. Hantsboy — on 8th June, 2009 at 4:58 pm  

      Jai

      The change in the non-caucasian population of Europe has been hugely concentrated in a few post war decades. Not over generations and millenia as other migrations.

      The jumbo jet has a lot to answer for. Straggling tribes moving slowly on foot and fighting their way into other areas as at the end of the Roman Empire or the miniscule movements of people by early sailing craft are not the same thing as modern air travel.
      Anyone who remembers Europe in the first years after WW2 will also remember how remarkably homogenous it was.

      Still I do believe the arrival of Far Right politicians on the Euro scene heralds the end of the large scale migration above referred to.
      Can only be a good thing in my opinion.

    101. Vikrant — on 8th June, 2009 at 5:01 pm  

      Still I do believe the arrival of Far Right politicians on the Euro scene heralds the end of the large scale migration above referred to.

      What world do you live in boy? The days of mass immigration from the commonwealth have been over since the days of Thatcher!

    102. Jai — on 8th June, 2009 at 6:16 pm  

      What world do you live in boy? The days of mass immigration from the commonwealth have been over since the days of Thatcher!

      Exactly, Vikrant. And as far as the British Indian population in particular are concerned, most of the older generation arrived in the 1960s and early 1970s. Most Indians under the age of 40 (who now obviously considerably outnumber their parents) were born in Britain.

    103. Jai — on 8th June, 2009 at 6:18 pm  

      The change in the non-caucasian population of Europe has been hugely concentrated in a few post war decades. Not over generations and millenia as other migrations.

      Oh dear, “Hantsboy”. Not quite up to speed on the impact of Roman expansion into North Africa and parts of the Middle East bordering the Mediterranean, I see.

      The jumbo jet has a lot to answer for. Straggling tribes moving slowly on foot and fighting their way into other areas as at the end of the Roman Empire or the miniscule movements of people by early sailing craft are not the same thing as modern air travel.

      See above.

      Incidentally, there seems to be quite a significant gap in your historical knowledge regarding the level of internal migration and intermarriage between Romans and other groups within the territories that fell within the expanding Roman Empire. These things did not occur merely at the “end of the empire” and involving “straggling tribes”.

      Would you like some figures about the regional composition of the Roman military, to give an indication of exactly how heterogenous their civilisation was ? During the reign of Augustus, Italians made up about 65% of the Roman army. A century later, they made up 1%. And that includes the soldiers stationed in what is now Britain.

      One more thing. I trust that you and your friends at “BNP Central” (to use your phrase) are aware of the fact that the Romans viewed the Britons of the time as barbaric, uncivilised savages that they were able to defeat (and whose territory they were able to annex) relatively quickly and easily. But they viewed the civilisation of the Indian subcontinent as very much their equals and were involved in a massive amount of bilateral trade with their Indian counterparts, along with being on excellent diplomatic terms with them.

      Your friend Nick Griffin’s understanding of the last “10,000 years of British history” (as he put it in one of his statements yesterday) is delusional to say the least, and there is considerable irony in the fact that a supposed descendent of people that the Romans viewed as incredibly backward and ended up beating into submission has ludicrous notions of “inherent racial superiority” over an ethnic group that the Romans themselves were on excellent terms with and had no racist attitudes towards at all. I expect the Romans themselves would have viewed the BNP’s presumptions as hilarious and an example of historical “Stockhold Syndrome”.

      But then, given Nick Griffin’s claims that the Holocaust was “lies, distortions and fabrications by the Allied powers” along with his convenient ignorance about the fact that 2.5 million Indians fought on the side of the British Empire in WW2 (the largest volunteer army in history), many of whom won awards for gallantry, I guess your mullah’s grasp on history as a whole is somewhat tenuous.

      Not that we would expect much more from the British Taliban Party, of course; but like your counterparts Al-Muhajiroun and those friendly music-banning fellows in Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan, I’m sure that ignorance and delusions of grandeur really are bliss.

    104. Jai — on 8th June, 2009 at 6:24 pm  

      The change in the non-caucasian population of Europe has been hugely concentrated in a few post war decades. Not over generations and millenia as other migrations.

      Oh dear, “Hantsboy”. Not quite up to speed on the impact of Roman expansion into North Africa and parts of the Middle East bordering the Mediterranean, I see.

      The jumbo jet has a lot to answer for. Straggling tribes moving slowly on foot and fighting their way into other areas as at the end of the Roman Empire or the miniscule movements of people by early sailing craft are not the same thing as modern air travel.

      See above.

      Incidentally, there seems to be quite a significant gap in your historical knowledge regarding the level of internal migration and intermarriage between Romans and other groups within the territories that fell within the expanding Roman Empire. These things did not occur merely at the “end of the empire” and involving “straggling tribes”.

      Would you like some figures about the regional composition of the Roman military, to give an indication of exactly how heterogenous their civilisation was ? During the reign of Augustus, Italians made up about 65% of the Roman army. A century later, they made up 1%. And that includes the soldiers stationed in what is now Britain.

      One more thing. I trust that you and your friends at “BNP Central” (to use your phrase) are aware of the fact that the Romans viewed the Britons of the time as barbaric, uncivilised savages that they were able to defeat (and whose territory they were able to annex) relatively quickly and easily. But they viewed the civilisation of the Indian subcontinent as very much their equals and were involved in a massive amount of bilateral trade with their Indian counterparts, along with being on excellent diplomatic terms with them.

      Your friend Nick Griffin’s understanding of the last “10,000 years of British history” (as he put it in one of his statements yesterday) is delusional to say the least, and there is considerable irony in the fact that a supposed descendent of people that the Romans viewed as incredibly backward and ended up beating into submission has ludicrous notions of “inherent racial superiority” over an ethnic group that the Romans themselves were on excellent terms with and had no racist attitudes towards at all. I expect the Romans themselves would have viewed the BNP’s presumptions, including those referring to “10,000 years of history and culture”, as hilarious and an example of historical “Stockhold Syndrome”.

      But then, given Nick Griffin’s claims that the Holocaust was “lies, distortions and fabrications by the Allied powers” along with his convenient ignorance about the fact that 2.5 million Indians fought on the side of the British Empire in WW2 (the largest volunteer army in history), many of whom won awards for gallantry, I guess your mullah’s grasp on history as a whole is somewhat tenuous.

      Not that we would expect much more from the British Taliban Party, of course; but like your counterparts Al-Muhajiroun and those friendly music-banning fellows in Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan, I’m sure that ignorance and delusions of grandeur really are bliss.

    105. Ravi Naik — on 8th June, 2009 at 6:38 pm  

      I think under Race relations act, BNP membership thing is illegal. But to sue them, you will have to try joining the BNP yourself and prove the you were racially discriminated against, I guess…

      I would be very surprised: they do have a manifesto where they explicitly reject non-whites. If it was illegal, I am sure they would be in court by now.

    106. gusty — on 8th June, 2009 at 6:52 pm  

      who do you ill informed mugs think you are calling people rascist scum go to birmingham leeds many areas of london bristol bradford etc you will see reverse rascist behaviour are these scum i have always believed lefties are anti british tell me why my children will never get social housing but the work shy both british and none british seem to get several choices its quite obvious that if you put to much air in a balloon it will burst thats how people like me feel this country is at present

    107. Vikrant — on 8th June, 2009 at 7:05 pm  

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scXWYPp4DC4

      Daniel Hannan sums it up for me…

    108. Amrit — on 8th June, 2009 at 7:15 pm  

      Jai, I know that as a intelligent and history-respecting fellow, you itch to correct the likes of ol’ Pantsboy there. However, given the recent influx of unwelcome mass-immigration to this site, I think we need to take action.

      That’s right - ignore the m-fers! As Shatterface put it in that delightfully witty comment, deny them the oxygen of publicity - AND your attention, which only feeds into their deluded victim-complexes.

      The sort of people who make the effort of going over to a blog full of the sort of people they hate, just to wind them up are… yes, that’s right, TROLLS! I move that in future, you should just give them a reading list, then dismiss them. I’d also be in favour of them having to learn basic grammar, spelling, etc. if they want to engage with us. That would unfortunately offer less occasion for your eloquence to shine, but it would sure save you time, and dissuade them from trying to claim this space as theirs.

    109. Boyo — on 8th June, 2009 at 7:33 pm  

      Romans? What did they ever do for us?!

    110. Rumbold — on 8th June, 2009 at 7:42 pm  

      Diarmid:

      “And given that they are eligible to receive public funds, surely this ought to be illegal.”

      Public funds from where (unless you mean at the European level)?

      Jai:

      Well, Shamit answered for me. I ddin’t know that answer, and had I guessed, I would have said the opposite, because of the protections afforfed by the first amendment.

      Leaving aside the free speech argument for the moment though, I would worry about the wisdom of restricting the right of racists to participate in the democratic process, which would probably have the effect of making them even more extreme.

      Thanks for highlighting the reality of the Roman Empire (although, do your figures for the numbers of Italians include Romans?). Your average North African in the Roman Republic/Empire was closer in tone to your average Italian, as urban North Africa had yet to experience the Arab and Berber blendings.

    111. Jai — on 8th June, 2009 at 10:40 pm  

      I noticed a small-but-significant type on my post #100:

      an example of historical “Stockhold Syndrome”.

      That should of course be “Stockholm Syndrome”. Unlike the BNP, including their Fuhrer Nick “10,000 years” Griffin, I’m not functionally illiterate where history is concerned.

      **************************

      Amrit,

      That would unfortunately offer less occasion for your eloquence to shine, but it would sure save you time, and dissuade them from trying to claim this space as theirs.

      I understand your points above (along with the rest of your comments in post #103), but I think that sometimes outbursts about historical matters should be corrected, especially on a public forum such as this. Remember that there is a much larger “silent audience” out there, and PP should not be allowed to be exploited by the BNP and their supporters as an outlet for their warped and highly inaccurate propaganda about European and global history.

      Romans? What did they ever do for us?!

      Very funny, Boyo ;)

      The Romans of course did a huge amount for the civilisational development of the inhabitants of Britain at the time — to the extent that it took about a thousand years for the situation to recover to approximately the same level after the Romans left, which shows how far more advanced they were compared to the locals (ironically, “Hantsboy’s” unwitting reference to “scrabbling tribes” was pretty accurate in this specific instance, but absolutely not in the case of very large areas to the east and south of Europe which also fell under Roman rule).

      My point was basically about how misguided and arrogant it is for members of the BNP to attempt to misappropriate the contribution of the Romans to global human civilisation by claiming “European racial fellowship” when:

      a) the supposed ancestors of the members of the BNP were on the receiving end of an extremely hostile armed invasion and subsequent forcible colonial subjugation at the hands of the Romans (so they’re not exactly in a position to claim any credit for the Roman Empire by using the term “we”);

      and b) the Romans themselves were sufficiently enlightened to not even consider having such parochial and insular “racial” attitudes towards people, including those whose descendents the BNP and their fellow racists feel so “superior” and xenophobic towards. Even more so when you consider that, in terms of the level of societal/cultural development and being “peers” in the true sense of the term, the Romans knew full well that they were much closer to the civilisations of India, Persia and China than the wild, backward regions of northern Europe, including Britain.

      As a starting point for interested readers of PP, some very good initial primers are as follows:

      Roman trade and cultural exchanges with India:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_trade_with_India

      Diplomatic and trade relations between the Roman Empire and China:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Roman_relations

    112. Jai — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:03 pm  

      Rumbold,

      Leaving aside the free speech argument for the moment though, I would worry about the wisdom of restricting the right of racists to participate in the democratic process, which would probably have the effect of making them even more extreme.

      Well, there are obviously various arguments both for and against allowing them to participate.

      Common sense and the precedent of 1930s/1940s Germany should also be a guideline, especially in this instance.

      Thanks for highlighting the reality of the Roman Empire

      I think that, in some quarters, there’s a lack of awareness (possibly deliberate) about the fact that the borders of the Roman Empire at its height extended considerably to the east and south of Greece. Roman attitudes to race, people from other parts of the world in general, and indeed also what constitutes a “real Roman” were also very different to the views of the BNP and other contemporary white European racists.

      (although, do your figures for the numbers of Italians include Romans?).

      Yes.

      **************************

      It’s an interesting situation, isn’t it ? 65 years ago — an anniversary which was commemorated just a few days ago — the British at the time sent soldiers to Europe in order to stop Nazis from coming here, and now some modern-day British people have sent Nazis to Europe as politicians.

      Similarly, exactly 65 years ago, the general British policy in relation to Nazis was “Kill or capture”, whereas we now have Holocaust-denying British Nazis giving interviews on the news and throwing up faux-Churchillian victory “V signs”, and some of their followers even turning up here on PP and declaring their support on online news blogs owned by the Times, the Independent etc.

      Not exactly “a step forward” in terms of the progress & advancement of British society, is it ?

    113. persephone — on 8th June, 2009 at 11:36 pm  

      “Romans? What did they ever do for us?!”

      Nothing. Goddamn immigrants bringing their Romanisation of Britain over here

    114. Rumbold — on 9th June, 2009 at 9:06 am  

      Jai:

      “Common sense and the precedent of 1930s/1940s Germany should also be a guideline, especially in this instance.”

      What would be your standard for setting up a party then? What views would they have to subscribe to?

      “Roman attitudes to race, people from other parts of the world in general, and indeed also what constitutes a “real Roman” were also very different to the views of the BNP and other contemporary white European racists.”

      True enough. Although some Romans still looked down on other races, even if they had obtained Roman citizenship. It is bizarre to think that the Angles and the Saxons, two invading German tribes who displaced Britons, are now held up to be the par exemplar of what it means to be British.

      A bit like saying that we shouldn’t allow foreigners to play football in Britain because then players like Cristano Ronaldo won’t get a game.

      “Not exactly “a step forward” in terms of the progress & advancement of British society, is it?”

      No. Although at least they will find that the European Parliament is useless.

    115. Shamit — on 9th June, 2009 at 9:39 am  

      Amrit - I agree with your sentiments but I think Jai is correct too.

      Articulating logical conclusions of their ruinous policies and showing them up for the ignorant fools and thugs they are and that too without breaking a sweat is fun though — you have to admit. But its getting easier and easier and tiresome.

      **********************************

      Uninvited Thick BNP crew

      I would again reitrate- you need far more intellectual power to win any sympathy here let alone an argument.

      I am starting to think you guys have psychological problems otherwise why would anyone come back for more and more thrashing. But if you come here we would be happy to give you a verbal thrashing but its becoming pathetic as to how easy it is to destroy your arguments and demonstrate your so called “superior (my ass) intelligence” to the world.

    116. Jai — on 9th June, 2009 at 11:06 am  

      Rumbold,

      What would be your standard for setting up a party then? What views would they have to subscribe to?

      It’s more to do with what views they should not subscribe to. The American example which Shamit described earlier works as an excellent guideline.

      Britain should also take a tip from the modern German policy too, considering that this country actually went to war to destroy the BNP’s ideological predecessors.

      Given the admiration for Hitler’s junta and their Neo-Nazi ideology (and affiliation with similar groups internationally) on the part of various members of the BNP’s “High Command”, the BNP are effectively traitors and, as far as I’m concerned, so is everyone who voted for them. They are no different to the people who voted Hitler into power due to his various “promises” despite being perfectly aware about the more vicious aspects of his ideology and the plans he had in mind.

      Given their support of treasonous psychopaths, the British people who voted BNP may as well be supporting Al Qaeda.

    117. Jai — on 9th June, 2009 at 11:13 am  

      There was actually an offbeat but well-received American film starring Cameron Diaz from the 90s called “The Last Supper” which described this process very well, including “history repeating itself”. Those of you who have already seen it will know exactly what I’m talking about; if you’re unfamiliar with the movie, I strongly recommend you rent the DVD from Blockbusters and check it out.

      Nick Griffin is effectively Ron Perlman’s character. He’s duplicating the latter’s “grievances”, patterns of behaviour, ideology and ambitions exactly.

      People who have already seen the film will be aware of how the story ended.

    118. justpassingby — on 9th June, 2009 at 11:17 am  

      “Roman attitudes to race, people from other parts of the world in general, and indeed also what constitutes a “real Roman” were also very different to the views of the BNP and other contemporary white European racists.”

      I suppose severe persecution of the early Christian church by the Romans for three centuries and also the Jews don’t count for persecution in your books? Beheadings, crucifixions, and other forms of barbarism was pretty standard practice during the Roman Empire, as well as occasional ethnic cleansing during conquests. Yes, that was really very civilised wasn’t it? But the fact that they traded with India seems to make all the difference in your case.

    119. Jai — on 9th June, 2009 at 11:37 am  

      Justpassingby,

      I suppose severe persecution of the early Christian church by the Romans for three centuries and also the Jews don’t count for persecution in your books? Beheadings, crucifixions, and other forms of barbarism was pretty standard practice during the Roman Empire, as well as occasional ethnic cleansing during conquests. Yes, that was really very civilised wasn’t it? But the fact that they traded with India seems to make all the difference in your case.

      Nice try, but a mistake. I’m referring specifically to Roman attitudes towards race (as per notions of the concept in the modern era), not religion. And specifically in relation to various groups that the BNP and their fellow racists claim “inherent racial superiority” over (right down to the genetic level) purely by virtue of the colour of their skin and their targets’ origins outside Europe.

      If you were aware of wider discussions on PP regarding this topic (including another thread just yesterday), you’d know that I’ve stated the Romans were arrogant imperialists with an increasingly bloodthirsty popular culture; however, one thing they were generally not were racists. Certainly not compared to the BNP or, indeed, the Victorian imperialists who sought to emulate the Romans.

      But thanks for flagging up another list of reasons that the BNP and similar white racists are barking up the wrong tree to hijack the “glories of Roman civilisation” on the basis of a common European “racial identity” and, indeed, to proclaim any kind of “superiority” over people whose ancestral roots lie outside Europe.

      And oh, by the way, here is an analysis of the reasons for the persecution of Christians by the Romans, from the very same Wikipedia article you’ve kindly supplied. Thanks again for making my argument for me, especially considering the striking historical parallels with the BNP’s recent attempts to demonise Muslims in particular. I’m reprinting the relevant section in full:

      Reasons for persecution:

      The Roman Empire was generally quite tolerant in its treatment of other religions[citation needed]. The imperial policy was generally one of incorporation - the local gods of a newly conquered area were simply added to the Roman pantheon and often given Roman names. Even the Jews, with their one god, were generally tolerated.[citation needed]

      For the Romans, religion was first and foremost a social activity that promoted unity and loyalty to the state[citation needed] - a religious attitude the Romans called pietas, or piety. Cicero wrote that if piety in the Roman sense were to disappear, social unity and justice would perish along with it.[2]

      According to Simon Dixon - The early Roman writers viewed Christianity not as another kind of pietas, but as a superstitio, or superstition. Pliny the Younger, a Roman governor writing circa 110 AD, called Christianity a “superstition taken to extravagant lengths.” Similarly, the Roman historian Tacitus called it “a deadly superstition,” and the historian Suetonius called Christians “a class of persons given to a new and mischievous superstition.”[3] In this context, the word “superstition” has a slightly different connotation than it has today: for the Romans, it designated something foreign and different - in a negative sense. A religious belief was valid only insofar as it could be shown to be old and in line with ancient customs; new and innovative teachings were regarded with distrust.[citation needed]

      The Roman distaste for Christianity, then, arose in large part from its sense that it was bad for society. In the 3rd century, the Neoplatonist philosopher Porphyry wrote:

      How can people not be in every way impious and atheistic who have apostatized from the customs of our ancestors through which every nation and city is sustained? … What else are they than fighters against God? [4]

      As Porphyry’s argument indicates, hatred of Christians also arose from the belief that proper “piety” to the Roman gods helped to sustain the well-being of the cities and their people. Though much of the Roman religion was utilitarian, it was also heavily motivated by the pagan sense that bad things will happen if the gods are not respected and worshiped properly. “Many pagans held that the neglect of the old gods who had made Rome strong was responsible for the disasters which were overtaking the Mediterranean world.”[citation needed] This perspective would surface again in the 5th century, when the destruction of Rome caused many to worry that the gods were angry at the Empire’s new allegiance to Christianity. Saint Augustine’s opus The City of God argued against this view.

      On a more social, practical level, Christians were distrusted in part because of the secret and misunderstood nature of their worship. Words like “love feast” and talk of “eating Christ’s flesh” sounded understandably suspicious to the pagans, and Christians were suspected of cannibalism, incest, orgies, and all sorts of immorality.[5]

      According to H. B. Workman, the average Christian was not much affected by the persecutions; rather, Christian “extremists” would have been singled out as disruptive. Persecution of Christians acquired increasing significance in the writings of the Church Fathers during the 3rd and 4th centuries, on the eve of Christian hegemony.[6]

      The Roman persecutions were generally sporadic, localized, and dependent on the political climate and disposition of each emperor. Imperial decrees against Christians were often directed against church property, the Scriptures, or clergy only. Everett Ferguson estimated that more Christians have been killed for religious reasons in the last 50 years than in the church’s first 300 years.[7]

    120. Jai — on 9th June, 2009 at 11:57 am  

      Apparently Nick Griffin’s trying to build a pan-European alliance with similar Neo-Nazis. It would also give the BNP access to a shared pool of the £22.8 million allowance that is allocated to European parliamentary groups.

      http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/griffin-tries-to-build-extremist-bloc-in-europe-1700174.html

      Interesting discussion thread afterwards. Looks like someone out there’s picked up on my “British Taliban Party” moniker for the BNP too…..

    121. Ravi Naik — on 9th June, 2009 at 12:31 pm  

      Apparently Nick Griffin’s trying to build a pan-European alliance with similar Neo-Nazis.

      That’s the part I am most interested. The extremist parties from the new EU members are openly racist and anti-Semitic, the kind of rhetoric that the BNP desperately tries to avoid in public (read the latest BNP disciple and language manual). On the other hand, will the new moderate nationalist parties - like the party of Geert Wilders accept them? UKIP seems to be their most likely ally, and there is no way UKIP will join the likes of the BNP. Expect a lot of scrutiny.

    122. justpassingby — on 9th June, 2009 at 1:17 pm  

      you’d know that I’ve stated the Romans were arrogant imperialists with an increasingly bloodthirsty popular culture; however, one thing they were generally not were racists. Certainly not compared to the BNP or, indeed, the Victorian imperialists who sought to emulate the Romans.

      So what? They still persecuted people based upon their own arbitrary criteria. How much less of a crime is that?

      Comparing in relative terms different empires on how tolerant they were really is quite silly, because almost every empire in history has persecuted people to some degree.

      By the way, I’m not white but I am Christian. You seem to have jumped to the classic mistake of thinking I am white based upon my religion.

      The BNP are first and foremost a racist party, not a religious party. Their attempts to play the religious card are futile because the majority of (practicing) Christians still do not heed their call. Of course, a few gullible white Christians may be attracted to them. But being racist is inimical to what Jesus taught.

    123. Jai — on 9th June, 2009 at 3:47 pm  

      Justpassingby,

      So what? They still persecuted people based upon their own arbitrary criteria. How much less of a crime is that?

      Comparing in relative terms different empires on how tolerant they were really is quite silly, because almost every empire in history has persecuted people to some degree.

      You seem to have misunderstood my motivations (which should have been obvious, because I clearly spelt them out earlier in response to Hantsboy’s mutterings about the Romans).

      However, since it needs re-iterating: I am not holding up the Romans as a paragon of imperial tolerance. They were a group of self-glorifying, expansionist thugs who, for all their advanced ideas about politics, philosophy and technology, did not view the Indians, Persians or the Chinese as viable targets for conquest because all of the latter were at the very least their own equals in terms of their military capability to defend themselves, along with their own levels of wealth, political/philosophical development, the extent of territory under their control, and so on. Under different circumstances, I have no doubt that Roman attitudes would have been considerably more hostile (but again, note that presumptions of race would not be a factor here).

      I am simply drawing attention to the fact that — for all their brutality — the Romans were generally not racists, especially towards some groups that the BNP and their supporters believe themselves (and all other Europeans) to be intrinsically racially superior to, specifically for the benefit of members of the latter who glorify the Romans as “fellow members of the European race” and, along with the Greeks, as people amongst the major founders of European civilisation as per their understanding of it.

      By the way, I’m not white but I am Christian. You seem to have jumped to the classic mistake of thinking I am white based upon my religion.

      I made no references whatsoever to your presumed ethnicity or your presumed religious affiliation.

      However, given the way that so many early Christians were treated by the Romans and indeed the fate of Jesus himself, I can appreciate why your views of the Romans would not be particularly favourable. You would be completely justified in this stance.

      And while we’re on this topic, I’ve frequently been struck by the paradox of many racist British imperialists from the Victorian era conspiciously trying to emulate the Roman precedent (in fact, there are historical records of some of British colonialism’s staunchest advocates pompously declaring “We are Romans”) whilst simultaneously promoting Christian evangelism and indeed claiming to be pious Christians themselves; perhaps the inherent contradiction was somewhat less than obvious to them, despite the glaring irony from the perspective of more objective eyes.

      The BNP are first and foremost a racist party, not a religious party. Their attempts to play the religious card are futile because the majority of (practicing) Christians still do not heed their call. Of course, a few gullible white Christians may be attracted to them. But being racist is inimical to what Jesus taught.

      Exactly, which is why all this needs to be flagged up as many times as possible and as loudly as possible. And also why you and I are actually very much on the same side ;)

    124. Rumbold — on 10th June, 2009 at 9:56 am  

      Jai:

      “Given the admiration for Hitler’s junta and their Neo-Nazi ideology (and affiliation with similar groups internationally) on the part of various members of the BNP’s “High Command”, the BNP are effectively traitors and, as far as I’m concerned, so is everyone who voted for them.”

      While I abhore their views too, is this enough reason to ban them? After all, no one to my knowledge has called for Diane Abbot to be banned from public office, even though she simpers over mass murderers:

      http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2008/05/why-does-bbc-give-diane-abbott-airtime.html

      Or anyone else who has expressed unpleasant views and/or support for Britain’s historical enemies (see Tony Benn et al.)?

    125. Jai — on 10th June, 2009 at 11:01 am  

      Rumbold,

      While I abhore their views too, is this enough reason to ban them?

      Possibly, considering their end-game and Nick Griffin’s network of fellow ideologues both in the US and in Europe, which whom he is now attempting to form an international coalition.

      (There also some similarities to a certain banned Islamist organisation in the UK too, outlawed for similar reasons and with similar aspirations. Nick Griffin is basically the English version of Anjem Choudary).

      Or prosecute them for treason. Or any of the other measures that their UK-based Islamist counterparts have been threatened with or which have actually been implemented.

      Or anyone else who has expressed unpleasant views and/or support for Britain’s historical enemies

      Al-Muhajiroun.

    126. Shamit — on 10th June, 2009 at 11:07 am  

      “..Or prosecute them for treason. Or any of the other measures that their UK-based Islamist counterparts have been threatened with or which have actually been implemented.”

      Jai -Thats a good idea mate

    127. Jai — on 10th June, 2009 at 11:41 am  

      Thanks Shamit. I’ve just gone into further detail about it on the “Wings of the BNP” thread.

      ***********************

      I’m going to repeat what I said in #112 above, as I think it’s an other critical point that needs to be circulated and emphasised as widely as possible:

      65 years ago — an anniversary which was commemorated just a few days ago — the British at the time sent soldiers to Europe in order to stop Nazis from coming here, and now some modern-day British people have sent Nazis to Europe as politicians.

      Similarly, exactly 65 years ago, the general British policy in relation to Nazis was “Kill or capture”, whereas we now have Holocaust-denying British Nazis giving interviews on the news and throwing up faux-Churchillian victory “V signs”, and some of their followers even turning up here on PP and declaring their support on online news blogs owned by the Times, the Independent etc.

      The British population as a whole — both those who voted for/support the BNP and everyone else in this country — needs to grasp the fact that these are 21st century Nazis trying to seize power in Britain. They are the real thing.

      If you support them, then that makes you identical to someone who supported Hitler’s efforts during WW2, and it spits on the memory of everyone on the side of the Allies who fought and died in that conflict, it stabs in the back all those British people in the present day whose relatives fought and/or died in WW2, it makes a mockery of this country’s annual D-Day anniversary celebrations, and it’s a betrayal of the worst kind towards those brave, elderly military veterans who are still alive.

      Anyone else reading this is more than welcome to duplicate everything I’ve just said above on any other internet discussion forums or blogs. Go for it.

    128. gusty — on 10th June, 2009 at 6:38 pm  

      with regards to the chaps who launched eggs and used placards at westminster i feel envious that they can take time off work at such short notice this isnt so easy for many people or is it as i suspect another case of leftie scroungers and mature students how typical they hate everything british except the giro each fortnight



    • Post a comment using the form below

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2009. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.