• 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

    Questions for the BNP: part four


    by Jai on 16th June, 2009 at 8:26 am    

    [This continues Jai's 85 questions that the BNP need to answer, but refuse to do so- Rumbold's note]

    Social and legal impact of a BNP government (cont…)

    55. What percentage of a non-white British citizen’s legal testimony will be deemed equal to the testimony of one white/Caucasian British citizen?

    56. Will non-white British citizens have the legal right to prosecute white/Caucasian British citizens, and if so, under what specific conditions/restrictions?

    57. Will non-white British citizens have the legal right to defend themselves against prosecution by white/Caucasian British citizens, and if so, under what specific conditions/restrictions?

    58. Exactly how would a BNP government enforce first preference being given to white/Caucasian candidates over non-white candidates for job vacancies in the private sector?

    59. Exactly how would a BNP government enforce first preference being given to white/Caucasian employees over non-white employees when individuals are being assessed for promotion, team composition, or workload assignment in the private sector?

    60. Exactly how would a BNP government ensure the continued viability and competitiveness of British private companies nationally and (subject to global sanctions and trade embargoes) internationally if the primary criteria in relation to points 58 and 59 is race, rather than qualifications, background, skillset and performance?

    61. Exactly how would a BNP government enforce first preference being given to white/Caucasian clients/customers over non-white clients/customers when professional services are being provided by individuals and companies in the private sector?

    62. Exactly how would a BNP government ensure the continued viability and competitiveness of British private companies nationally and (subject to global sanctions and trade embargoes) internationally if the primary criteria in relation to point 61 is race, rather than business & financial benefit?

    63. Exactly how would a BNP government enforce first preference being given to white/Caucasian patients over non-white patients in relation to healthcare professionals (doctors, nurses, dentists and pharmacists) in both the public and private sectors ?

    64. What level of formal & informal monitoring and direct involvement by a BNP government would be required in order to facilitate and enforce the policies referenced in points 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 and 63?

    65. Upon the election of a BNP government, exactly what kind of formal, organised nationwide protocols does the BNP have planned in order to manage the severe impact on British popular culture as a result of the United States terminating and prohibiting the transmission or import of any American services or products pertaining to the American media or entertainment industries?

    66. Correspondingly, will a BNP government impose a pre-emptive or retaliatory ban on the viewing, import or acquisition of any literature, films, music, or other media from the United States and other countries hostile to the BNP’s policies and ideology?

    67. Will a BNP government ban members of the British public from reading, viewing or listening to any literature, films, music, or other media involving and/or produced by non-white people in Britain, the United States, or any other countries?

    68. If the answers to points 66 & 67 are “Yes”, exactly what level of government involvement in the private lives of British citizens does the BNP foresee in order to enforce these prohibitions?

    69. Upon the election of a BNP government, will any existing material in the private possession of British citizens which falls within the categories described in points 66 & 67 need to be compulsorily surrendered to the government and related authorities?

    70. Will a BNP government destroy any existing material currently in the public & private spheres and/or archived documents, artefacts and/or evidence if the aforementioned items are deemed to contradict or undermine the BNP’s policies and ideology?

    71. Will a BNP government re-write any historical, academic and/or scientific material deemed to contradict or undermine the BNP’s policies and ideology, specifically in relation to a) British, European and global history during the recent, medieval, classical and ancient periods, b) race, and c) genetics?

    72. Will a BNP government declare any literary, artistic, journalistic, academic, scientific, or corporate material produced by non-white people in Britain, the United States or other countries prior to the election of a BNP government as being intrinsically without merit in its respective fields, and if the answer is “Yes”, will this material subsequently be destroyed?

    73. Exactly how will a BNP government implement and enforce the huge levels of surveillance and intervention which will be required in order to prevent any kind of electronic communication domestically or (especially) with counterparties based in international locations involving British civilians which potentially involves discussions and/or the transmission of material contradictory to the BNP’s policies and ideology?

    Parts one, two and three here, here and here)



      |   Trackback link   |   Add to del.icio.us   |   Share on Facebook   |   Filed in: The BNP




    128 Comments below   |   Add your own

    1. Refresh — on 16th June, 2009 at 3:45 pm  

      Q73. The cheapest option is to turn every card-carrying BNP member into a snitch. A realistic option could be brainwashing kids to report on their parents.

      Add that to the recording and interception of every piece of data as per existing government plans.

    2. Isaac Brown — on 16th June, 2009 at 3:58 pm  

      You lot still at it…? Nobody is interested in answering your peurile “questions” so why don’t you bugger off to where you come from and boil your heads in the process! tally o!!

    3. Refresh — on 16th June, 2009 at 4:21 pm  

      Isaac, the value of these questions will become abundantly clear in due course. It may actually assist you too.

    4. chairwoman — on 16th June, 2009 at 4:37 pm  

      “You lot still at it…? Nobody is interested in answering your peurile “questions” so why don’t you bugger off to where you come from and boil your heads in the process! tally o!!”

      Or capable?

      When would you like me to move back to Camden? And may I please have my repatriation ‘incentive’ before I go?

    5. Colin Brown — on 16th June, 2009 at 5:14 pm  

      United in Hate.

      You self-loathing, lefty-liberals hate everything don’t you. You hate the society around you even though, you are part of that society.

      The Progressive-Left (that’s you guys - again) should watch the (two part video below) a thousand times each if necessary, until it dawns on you that YOU, are the REAL threat to BRITAIN. NOT THE BNP!

      Part 1). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO7IVl4-JFw

      Part 2). http://tinyurl.com/nhwu93

      Get some help - watch the video!

      Colin Brown.

    6. Ravi Naik — on 16th June, 2009 at 5:37 pm  

      United in Hate

      Colin pretty much demonstrates this new tactic from nationalists: project what they are accused of to others. For instance, the accuse us of “genocide” (remember Adolf?) - not of physical destruction of human beings, but of “race”. Yes, because we dare to defend that adult individuals are free to associate with whom they want, and have offspring with the same rights as others, without having the government taking the role of breeders, and reduce ourselves to dogs or horses.

      And then we are the ones who really hate. And we are the real racists because we seek the destruction of race through miscegenation. This is actually repeated over and over by nationalists.

      Paranoid, stupid people.

    7. Colin Brown — on 16th June, 2009 at 5:53 pm  

      Keep watching the film Ravik. Try to remember that it wouldn’t exist without you.

      Peace.

      ..even though that’s the last thing you wish for.

    8. Jai — on 16th June, 2009 at 5:55 pm  

      #5 is somewhat contradicted by the fact that several people involved in this initiative are neither Muslim nor left-wing.

      But it is good to have contributions such as #2, #5, and #7 from BNP supporters in writing, although of course they are in violation of the BNP’s official policy in relation to online internet-based communication involving its supporters, as follows:

      “…..particular care should be taken when making comments on chat forums and other sites such as Facebook. Do not make the mistake of thinking that comments posted on these sites are secret or hidden. Making inappropriate comments on these sites will be regarded as a very serious disciplinary offence. Please ensure that this message is passed quickly to all members in your area and that it is acted upon. We are entering a very critical time in our party’s history and cannot afford careless and stupid talk that can undermine the hard work of our activists.”

      Nevertheless, it is always constructive to hear views which are perhaps a more honest reflection of the stances and opinions of individuals supporting a particular organisation, its core ideology and its policies. Again, for the public record.

    9. chairwoman — on 16th June, 2009 at 6:11 pm  

      I am not Muslim
      I am not particularly left wing
      I am not liberal
      I am not racist

    10. Refresh — on 16th June, 2009 at 6:17 pm  

      I am Spartacus!

    11. Colin Brown — on 16th June, 2009 at 6:20 pm  

      chairwomen.

      You do hate. I have studied your postings. Your retort is essentially (denial-personified). Why distance yourself now? You’re not starting to feel ashamed of yourself already - are you?

    12. Don — on 16th June, 2009 at 6:23 pm  

      Diary for today;

      0615 Woke up. Loathed self.
      0620 Brushed teeth. Hated society.
      0625 Drank lefty-liberal free trade coffee. Hated
      society some more, but quite enjoyed coffee.
      0640 Shower and shave. Loathed self.
      0655 Dressed. Loathed trousers, hated socks, quite
      liked new lefty-liberal tee-shirt.
      0705 Walked dog. Hated society, but a lovely morning
      nevertheless.
      0730 Left for work. Loathed self for owning
      capitalist Clio. Played liberal-lefty cd (Carbon
      Silicon).
      0730 - Traffic unusually light, sun burning off the
      0800 mist in the valley. Forgot to hate society.

      0800 Ran into traffic. Remembered to hate society,
      loathed self for forgetting earlier.

      And so it goes.

      Hmm, maybe Colin has a point. Or just a collection of buzz-words. And why does he think peace is the last thing Ravi would wish for? I could hazard a guess…

    13. Ravi Naik — on 16th June, 2009 at 6:25 pm  

      Keep watching the film Ravik

      Nice contraction of my name. Can I do the same with your name and call you clown? :)

      Try to remember that it wouldn’t exist without you.

      We will have to agree to disagree on that one. I do think that Islamists and BNP supporters like yourself have a very similar mindset. You feed on each other.

    14. Don — on 16th June, 2009 at 6:29 pm  

      Refresh,

      Am I the only one who wishes that Kirk Douglas had replied ‘Err, yeah, that’s right. He’s Spartacus. I just got confused for a minute there.’

    15. Refresh — on 16th June, 2009 at 6:38 pm  

      ‘Am I the only one…’

      Don, I do hope so. What worlds could we aspire to if it wasn’t for solidarity?

      Now there is a left wing concept.

    16. Refresh — on 16th June, 2009 at 6:42 pm  

      deleted to avoid a derail.

    17. Refresh — on 16th June, 2009 at 6:46 pm  

      Mr Brown

      ‘You do hate.’

      Never in a million years!

      Just shows you can find anything you like if you look hard enough. And in this case it makes you appear a crackpot.

    18. Rumbold — on 16th June, 2009 at 6:56 pm  

      Ravi:

      “Nice contraction of my name. Can I do the same with your name and call you clown?”

      Wonderful.

      You see, all your names look alike. Unlike ‘Colin’ (pronounced ‘Co-lin’, like the famous black American) and ‘Brown’ (pronounced ‘efnic’).

      Heh Don.

    19. Amrit — on 16th June, 2009 at 6:59 pm  

      Oh, poor widdle Colin! He’s suddenly decided that the thought of asking US a question would involve too much thinking (and therefore pain). So, he does the next best thing - post weird, projecting rubbish.

      What do you mean, ‘appear a crackpot,’ Refresh? Ol’ Colin can’t even spell ‘Ravi’ or ‘chairwoman’; I don’t think we need to humour him too much…

      YOU, are the REAL threat to BRITAIN. NOT THE BNP!

      Yeah, because we are a political party who want to deport all whites and destroy the economy. Oh wait…

      Now Colin dear, you can get tomato-complexioned as much as you like. You can even stamp your feet if you like. Toss a few toys groundwards - but we are NOT going to stop the big, nasty man from taking you to task. We are not all Muslim or left-wing, but you and your fellow trolls are most certainly all hapless.

      You may also want to inform ‘Isaac’ that that’s ‘puerile’ and ‘Tally ho!’ while you’re waiting around.

      LMAO @ Don. Genius.

      I hated myself so hard I almost ahem, climaxed. ;-)

      Rumbold - I thought it was pronounced ‘Col-on’…

    20. Refresh — on 16th June, 2009 at 7:05 pm  

      Amrit,

      ‘What do you mean, ‘appear a crackpot,’ Refresh? Ol’ Colin can’t even spell ‘Ravi’ or ‘chairwoman,’ so I don’t think we need to humour him too much.’

      I wasn’t humoring him really. I believe in leaving people some space to connect with their sensibilities. Or at least with what the rest of mankind accepts as sensible.

    21. Don — on 16th June, 2009 at 7:35 pm  

      #5

      Colin, just a point of style rather than substance, but on the use of upper-case: it denotes emphasis and usually a raised volume. Try reading it through and see if it sounds comfortable or even sane.

      For example,

      …until it dawns on you that YOU…

      Yeah, that works, the sudden rise in volume, perhaps a finger jab for emphasis. Possibly getting to your feet, hopefully without spilling beer.

      …are the REAL threat to BRITAIN.

      Two in close succession would be difficult to carry off without appearing deranged. Seriously, try that out loud and see how it sounds. See what I mean? You could probably get away with REAL, but if you try for BRITAIN just two words later it’s not going to be melifluous. One or the other, not both.

      NOT THE BNP!

      That’s just shouting. And why would you need an exclamation mark if you are already in upper case? That’s shouting with your mouth full.

      This is well meant advice, if you really feel the need to emphasise a word, step back and ask yourself why. Then ask if italicizing sparingly might not be a better option than capitalizing profligately.

      It will make you seem less mad. Just a suggestion. I know that many of people like to use upper-case a lot, just as many people like to write letters in green ink. That’s fine, but it does influence how others view your comments.

      Best of luck in coming to terms with your issues with the real world.

    22. Shamit — on 16th June, 2009 at 8:23 pm  

      Isaac

      “Nobody is interested in answering your peurile “questions” so why don’t you bugger off to where you come from and boil your heads in the process! tally o!!”

      Nobody’s interested or just don’t have enough grey matter.

      And we are all from here and as I have said before much better representatives of our country ie BRITAIN than you are.

      And the impact of these questions — you are too thick to realise. But you would when you lose your pathetic vote share

    23. Colin Brown — on 16th June, 2009 at 9:34 pm  

      RE: Armpit:

      “Oh, poor widdle Colin! He’s suddenly decided that the thought of asking US a question would involve too much thinking (and therefore pain). So, he does the next best thing - post weird, projecting rubbish”.

      Somebody has to educate you liberal nuts on the errors of your ways. Although I must admit, [PP] is the most impressive, (non-think tank) I’ve visited.

    24. Colin Brown — on 16th June, 2009 at 9:48 pm  

      RE: Donk:

      “Colin, just a point of style rather than substance, but on the use of upper-case: it denotes emphasis and usually a raised volume. Try reading it through and see if it sounds comfortable or even sane”.

      I consider liberals (that’s you lot again) to be seriously unhinged individuals. I mixed lowercase wording with uppercase to make you feel more at home with the insane ideas that you mull over and over on this site.

    25. 5cc — on 16th June, 2009 at 10:29 pm  

      Didn’t take long before shifting from politely trying to ask innocent questions (while refusing to answer others) and getting a bit shouty and nasty did it?

      So against type for the BNP.

    26. Colin Brown — on 16th June, 2009 at 10:47 pm  

      Boy you lot are fragile. How are you going to cope when this happens to you shortly?

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zo7GOsXpDtQ

    27. Don — on 16th June, 2009 at 11:20 pm  

      Colin,
      … I mixed lowercase wording with uppercase to make you feel more at home …

      Yeah. That works. Because we do that all the time here.

      And here’s me thinking it’s because you are an angry, shouty man.

      I’ll pray for you.

    28. Amrit — on 16th June, 2009 at 11:32 pm  

      5cc: Amen, brother.

      I really love Colin’s attempt to ‘educate’ us that he’s positing above there. Newsflash, darling: you can’t ‘educate’ people who are smarter than you.

      Loving the brackets. Why don’t you make us a diagram out of brackets and capitals, to let us know exactly how you feel?

      Here’s a compilation of your own quotes for you, corrected. Consider it as me educating you.

      Somebody has to educate you fascist, racist nuts on the errors of your ways.

      I consider fascists (that’s you lot again) to be seriously unhinged individuals.

      .
      Now quit trolling and answer the goddamn Qs. I for one will now ignore any trolling that occurs unless it includes answers.

      Watch out, Don, you’ve just been referred to as a Northern music scene. See here for details: http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/musicblog/2008/jul/29/bouncytechnomeetsterribler

    29. Antisocialist — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:04 am  

      What a thoroughly distasteful site this is. I’m not a BNP member or even a supporter but I’ve read through some of your questions to them and they seem incredibly ill informed and frankly quite pathetic.

      Do you not have any sympathy for those English (that’s the one’s who it’s now legal to discriminate against on the grounds of their skin colour) who are having multiculturism forced on them against their wishes?

    30. Billy — on 17th June, 2009 at 7:00 am  

      So all English people are white?

    31. platinum786 — on 17th June, 2009 at 7:46 am  

      God how I love the BNP. You people make me squeal in glee. Go back to where we came from? ….LOL Why don’t you come down and make us…. LOL

      You all talk so big for people who cacked their pants when their names and addresses were revealed on the internet. Afraid to let the world know who you are.

      Jai, another excellent set of questions. Brown Clown and his “aryan” friends are obviously incapable of answering them, and are quite bothered by the fact that if these become widespread the population will be aware of what they truly are.

      I suggest you continue to spread these, facebook is a great medium of communication, perhaps pass them onto groups like hope not hate.

      The greatest irony of all, is that you and me and other “ethnics” are probably more ayran than these mongrols who form the BNP. I mean no offence to the average white person, but the english people generally have a very wide ethnic background, due to the large numbers of Invaders. The chances of any of them being Indo-Iranian is also pretty slim, they were mostly european. Also a lot of very english people have eastern european/gypsy ethnicity. A few interesting programs to watch if your interested in stuff like this is “Who do you think you are” which was on the BBC and a series which i think has just finished which i reccomend every watch, about the origins of mankind “The incredible human Journey”.

    32. inders — on 17th June, 2009 at 7:52 am  

      I didn’t see anything regarding Northern Ireland policy or policy regarding Scottish/Welsh devolution.

      There are natural fault lines within the BNP that they’re never going to resolve.

    33. Isaac Brown — on 17th June, 2009 at 7:56 am  

      Colin - surely you have better things to do than waste time talking to these aliens - still, you are allowing them to show us just what a potential menace they are to our society. They claim to be South Asian - ugggh!

    34. Golam Murtaza — on 17th June, 2009 at 8:14 am  

      Didn’t take long for ‘Colin’ and ‘Isaac’ to start showing their thuggish side. And all it took was a list of questions posted on a website. No doubt they’d begin operating gas chambers if we did something genuinely provocative.

    35. platinum786 — on 17th June, 2009 at 8:19 am  

      ^^^ They don’t have the testicular fortitude.

      They know they can’t touch us by themselves, they want to recruit the rest of the white population of Britain to their cause and they know they can’t do that whilst showing them their true faces. They have to wear a mask, and people like Jai are tearing those masks off using logic and reason, exposing their ugly hate filled faces.

    36. Colin Brown — on 17th June, 2009 at 8:27 am  

      This (BNP question-quest) is a bloodless inquisition against your own kind. You have to remember that (we) the normal people, view you (self-loathers) as societies biggest danger.

      You liberals are so indoctrinated to your ideals, that you refuse to question - let alone criticise the suffering that your left-wing bias brings the world.

      You guys did this: http://tinyurl.com/n48rz4

      But you are not in least bit sorry are you.

      Liberals are the threat. Here’s the memory jogger.

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

    37. hantsboy — on 17th June, 2009 at 9:24 am  

      Colin- bit like Rorke’s drift on here !

    38. Ravi Naik — on 17th June, 2009 at 9:36 am  

      They claim to be South Asian - ugggh!

      Uggh? I guess all we need is to recruit an army of 3-year olds to debate these people. I am being serious here.

    39. bananabrain — on 17th June, 2009 at 9:45 am  

      isaac: “tally ho” is actually french - “tailleau”. bloody immigrants, eh?

      neither a liberal nor a lefty i - although, i’m afraid i am jewish, so not likely to be letting your squalid little intellectual conceits pass unexamined, as of course we know your type of old.

      but i can’t let this pass:

      Colin pretty much demonstrates this new tactic from nationalists: project what they are accused of to others.

      so they’ve learned *something* at least, goodness knows that tactic is available to everyone from the bnp to the iranian government.

      b’shalom

      bananabrain

    40. munir — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:01 am  

      Colin pretty much demonstrates this new tactic from nationalists: project what they are accused of to others.

      “banana brain

      so they’ve learned *something* at least, goodness knows that tactic is available to everyone from the bnp to the iranian government.”

      Not sure what you mean by the Iranian government. If you mean accusing others of agression whilst being violent and agressive themselves the US and Israelis are far more appropriate candidates

    41. chairwoman — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:03 am  

      I bet ‘Isaac’ wishes his parents had called him something less (cough), dare I say it? Jew-ish.

    42. 5cc — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:03 am  

      “Colin- bit like Rorke’s drift on here !”

      Yes. Talking on an internet forum with a group of mainly British people, some of whom are not white, is exactly like being in a bloody battle against hundreds of Zulus armed mostly with spears and shields.

      That ‘wer’e not racist, honest guv’ stuff working well for you?

    43. Colin Brown — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:10 am  

      RE: hantsboy.

      Inevitably I, like thousands before me, will struggle to meet mortgage payments in the coming months ahead owing to the effects of cheap, immigrant labour.

      Globalism, which the self-loathing (useful idiots) on [PP] are so keen to embrace, is behind my pain.

      Whether the left realise it or not, they have picked a fight with the British. It’s too late for them to back out or throw in the towel now.

    44. Shamit — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:15 am  

      “They claim to be South Asian - ugggh!”

      First - we are BRITISH ASIANS.

      Second - BNP = Brain Not Present

      Third - Aliens = Sadly for you, those you call Aliens are better representatives of this country. And any third party reading these posts woud decipher that easily.

      Fourth - Evasion and Bullying may work in schools and in your utopian world ruled by BNP ideology - but thankfully the real world is far different.

      Fifth - this questioning your credibility as a legitimate political party would continue and the sources would simply multiply.

      Sixth - Both Pickled Politics and eGov monitor have given BNP the opportunity to respond to clarifications requested and refute the allegations. We have formally asked the Press office to send us their response and we offered to give them seven days to the first bunch of questions. So far no response.

      I understand your media team has a mountain to climb but some guts from apparently “truly and only Patriotic British folks” (which I think is a load of crap) would have been nice. But knowing how BNP’s biggest political asset are lies - I, for one, did not expect any responses from you lot.

      Finally Isaac, most people here have been very civil. But it won’t l;ast long — so I suggest unless you can contribute anything to the actual debate besides your childish rants I would advise you to go quickly.

    45. 5cc — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:19 am  

      “Whether the left realise it or not, they have picked a fight with the British. It’s too late for them to back out or throw in the towel now.”

      Heh. Defining the people opposed to you as not British and the people on yours as British. I see what you did there.

      It was rubbish.

    46. Refresh — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:19 am  

      bananabrain, remain focussed on the task in hand please. Avoid foolish temptations, otherwise expect a derailment.

    47. Ravi Naik — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:26 am  

      I bet ‘Isaac’ wishes his parents had called him something less (cough), dare I say it? Jew-ish.

      I already told our friend Yitzchak Brown here about the origin of his name - when he said that “Shamit” was a foreign name and not British.

      Inevitably I, like thousands before me, will struggle to meet mortgage payments in the coming months ahead owing to the effects of cheap, immigrant labour.

      One thing to notice is that we are in a recession, and that’s when the BNP has more support. I am sorry to hear about your financial difficulties Colin, but you do get a lot of benefits from cheaper labour: the cost of services are considerably lower. And you get a lot of benefits from highly skilled non-whites (both British and immigrants), because they contribute directly to the economy of Britain by making it more competitive with other economies, and they pay higher taxes that help those in society that need the most.

    48. chairwoman — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:28 am  

      We’re all struggling to meet mortgage payments.

      Along with not being Muslim, Left Wing, Liberal or racist, I am neither a Self Loather nor a Globalist.

      As for picking a fight with the British, we’re all British here whether you like it or not, and I, for one, am old enough to remember when I was still considered English despite my Jewishness.

    49. chairwoman — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:30 am  

      “I already told our friend Yitzchak Brown here about the origin of his name “

      Heh :)

    50. bananabrain — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:33 am  

      [refresh, i know: but the response from that particular poster illustrates my point as precisely as i could wish. in short - QED. end of derailment]

      Inevitably I, like thousands before me, will struggle to meet mortgage payments in the coming months ahead owing to the effects of cheap, immigrant labour.

      but the cheap, immigrant labour was equally available when you took the mortgage out, unless you took it out before about the mid-fifties. are you sure you were totally honest - including with yourself - about what you could actually afford? might i possibly ask how much larger than your yearly salary your mortgage is? because if it’s more than 3.5 times, you can’t afford it. so, if your salary is less than you think it ought to be, this is because of immigrant labour? how exactly is this to be proved? i mean, my salary is less than i think it ought to be, but i’m trying to solve that by getting a better-paid job; in the words of norman tebbit, no less, getting on my bike, not whinging about the world owing me a living.

      b’shalom

      bananabrain

    51. Refresh — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:34 am  

      Chairwoman

      ‘We’re all struggling to meet mortgage payments.’

      Question 44 refers.

      Help is at hand, you can be relieved of your mortgage and have it transferred to a more deserving BNP-endorsed family.

      A win-win, everybody happy.

    52. Colin Brown — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:39 am  

      I offer a correction. 5cc has a point. Let me rephrase.

      The liberal mindset - British or otherwise, is fundamentally opposed to ‘ideas’ that reside in the realm of normality. Liberals live to invert normality.

      Everything that is bad in this world you liberals pass off as good. If you didn’t present such an immediate danger to society I might pity you a little.

      Alas we are out of time. You people have to be stopped otherwise the human race is unlikely to survive your folly.

      As I said before, the left is united in hate.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO7IVl4-JFw

    53. Ravi Naik — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:40 am  

      about what you could actually afford? might i possibly ask how much larger than your yearly salary your mortgage is? because if it’s more than 3.5 times, you can’t afford it.

      Oh, that’s beautiful: a Jewish commenter giving financial advice to a BNP supporter in a political blog run by Asians. :)

    54. Refresh — on 17th June, 2009 at 10:57 am  

      Colin Brown

      ‘Whether the left realise it or not, they have picked a fight with the British. It’s too late for them to back out or throw in the towel now.’

      I think you are all wind and bluster. Is this some kind of joke?

      Watch the real people of Britain kick the living daylights out of the BNP.

      Let me remind you, in conditions where the BNP expected to pick up lots of votes they did not see an increase over the last euro election. Pitiful really.

      A busted flush in electoral terms.

      Am I bovvered? Yes I am. A frustrated BNP is going to be a worrying sight, I mean as if we don’t already have a behavioural problem on our streets. I can just imagine supporters and members kicking over public bins, and parking our wheelie bins in the middle of the road and just generally being irritating.

    55. Colin Brown — on 17th June, 2009 at 11:13 am  

      Refresh. Get some help.

    56. hantsboy — on 17th June, 2009 at 11:21 am  

      Refresh
      Hmmm

      BNP got a 17% increase on their 2004 votes and at 943000 as against Nueliebor’s 2381000 is 40% of their vote.
      Tories at 4198000. BNP is 22% of their vote.
      So not looking bad for the ‘knuckledraggers’

    57. 5cc — on 17th June, 2009 at 11:28 am  

      Flipping hell.

      Blaming low paid immigrants for your problems
      Moaning about globalism
      Calling opponents self-loathing
      Calling opponents ‘useful idiots’
      Framing things in terms of a fight
      Labelling opponents as not British
      Likening (mostly) non-whites to spear carrying Zulus
      Using the term ‘Nuliebor’ (you missed the ‘e’ off the end, and hence part of the hilarious point behind the name, by the way)

      Do you get all these from ‘The Bumper Book of Far Right Cliches’?

    58. Leon — on 17th June, 2009 at 11:30 am  

      I didn’t see anything regarding Northern Ireland policy or policy regarding Scottish/Welsh devolution.

      There are natural fault lines within the BNP that they’re never going to resolve.

      Interesting point, I think you’re onto something there. Especially when you contrast the Welsh and Scottish nationalist parties with the far rights vulgar variant…

    59. Leon — on 17th June, 2009 at 11:31 am  

      Blaming low paid immigrants for your problems

      A long time ago I had a heated ‘discussion’ with a builder mate. He was rightwing and complaining bitterly about his wages going down due to immigrants working for less. I laughed at the irony of his opposition to unions and love of boss system was so royally fucking him over…blame the bosses not the workers!

    60. hantsboy — on 17th June, 2009 at 11:36 am  

      blame the bosses not the workers!
      Leon.
      Is that why the unions sent reps to Warsaw to sign up Poles ?
      Seemed an odd move to me.
      The established Trade Unions back globalisation (or did till very recently) so one has to ask

      WHOSE SIDE ARE THEY ON ?

    61. chairwoman — on 17th June, 2009 at 11:39 am  

      “I laughed at the irony of his opposition to unions and love of boss system was so royally fucking him over…blame the bosses not the workers!”

      Like the small businessmen who cheered for Maggie whilst her policies shut them down.

    62. MaidMarian — on 17th June, 2009 at 12:00 pm  

      Colin Brown (41) - ‘Inevitably I, like thousands before me, will struggle to meet mortgage payments in the coming months ahead owing to the effects of cheap, immigrant labour.’

      Really? I struggle to meet my mortgage payments because of massive house price inflation caused so a generation can cash in at my expense. That cheap immigrant labour has allowed a lot of companies to operate on the cheap and has been of benefit to a great many (like it or not) in the UK middle class.

      If you were to come to me and say that the UK economy is a puff-ball you may have more of a point. We have artificially sustained the show first by introducing women to the workforce, then by faux privatisation in a vain attempt to mask costs, then by pricing a generation out of housing, then by importing an immigrant workforce - all in the name of building an aspirant lifestyle on the cheap. We have, for 40 years not been producing our way to wealth.

      If you really think that there is this mindset out there where the public are willing to pay a genuine living wage (i.e one that allows home ownership) to cleaners, fruit-pickers, fast-food employees etc and go through the asset deflation that implies then I suspect you are living in a fantasy land.

    63. munir — on 17th June, 2009 at 12:08 pm  

      hants boy
      “Colin- bit like Rorke’s drift on here !”

      You mean you attacking a bunch of brown/black people for no good reason?

    64. hantsboy — on 17th June, 2009 at 12:21 pm  

      You mean you attacking a bunch of brown/black people for no good reason?

      Munir

      The Zulus had good reason to attack Rorke’s Drift from a tactical point of view and also because of the wider strategic interests of securing their homeland against the invader British.
      Their struggle was not rewarded until years later ……

    65. Ravi Naik — on 17th June, 2009 at 12:55 pm  

      If you really think that there is this mindset out there where the public are willing to pay a genuine living wage (i.e one that allows home ownership) to cleaners, fruit-pickers, fast-food employees etc and go through the asset deflation that implies then I suspect you are living in a fantasy land.

      I think the biggest failure of the political establishment is not bringing this point across: the effects of Britain pulling out of the global economy, which is what the BNP is supporting. People like Colin - and the BNP - think that if immigrants magically disappeared, that inflation would remain the same, when in fact, prices would necessarily hike: prices are low, because we have immigrants (here and in developing countries like China) working for lower wages.

      And #56 and #58 are spot-on.

    66. Colin Brown — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:07 pm  

      Brits were outnumbered 6-1 at Rorke’s drift. Yet we prevailed. What makes you ‘progressives’ think that our ability to fight our corner has wained? It’s stronger than ever and you have yourselves to thank for it. I can’t wait until we are formerly introduced.

      Can you?

    67. Ravi Naik — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:08 pm  

      It is clear that those that compete directly with cheap labour suffer the most. What can the government do to alleviate this problem? Can it introduce some sort of protectionist laws without violating global trade laws?

    68. 5cc — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:15 pm  

      “Brits were outnumbered 6-1 at Rorke’s drift. Yet we prevailed. What makes you ‘progressives’ think that our ability to fight our corner has wained?”

      Dude, just stop it. I’m British - and I would count as British even by the BNP’s standard, being that I’m white and that.

      The BNP don’t represent the British. For all your gloating over the tiny rise in the BNP’s overall vote in the Euro elections you represent less than a sixtieth of the total population of the UK. Most of us - including us white people - want nothing to do with you.

    69. hantsboy — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:17 pm  

      Can it introduce some sort of protectionist laws without violating global trade laws?
      Ravi

      Now you are talking.

      G Broon holds forth about the dangers of protectionism and the glories of globalisation.
      How would he like HIS job outsourced to Mumbai (nothing personal ) I wonder ?

      It’s significant that the most vitriolic anti-BNP propaganda came from that part of the Media firmly embedded in the globalist agenda ie the Murdoch press.

    70. Ravi Naik — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:19 pm  

      Brits were outnumbered 6-1 at Rorke’s drift. Yet we prevailed. What makes you ‘progressives’ think

      Er… I am not sure what is the analogy here. The Brits at Rorke’s drift were minority invaders of a foreign land, and yet they prevailed. According to the BNP, ethnic minorities are foreign invaders of this land… uhm…

    71. hantsboy — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:20 pm  

      According to the BNP, ethnic minorities are the foreign invaders in this land… uhm…

      Exactly Ravi.
      The Zulus were the BNP of their time and place.

    72. Ravi Naik — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:27 pm  

      The Zulus were the BNP of their time and place.

      So when Colin said “We prevailed”, did he mean the Brits or the Zulus?

    73. Colin Brown — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:27 pm  

      Didn’t I mention earlier, that you lot are self-loathers - 5cc?

      You hate society even though you belong to it. You hate the BNP. You hate Britishness and all it stands for. I think that’s a fair definition of a self-loathing progressive don’t you 5cc.

      I don’t care if you’re an Andorran or an Elf. You are against the cohesiveness that comes of having a largely mono-cultural society in a small country.

      You are the enemy at my gate. A denier of peace.

    74. Ravi Naik — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:33 pm  

      You are the enemy at my gate. A denier of peace.

      Colin, if you are not against people of different races living together - why does it matter whether people pray to different gods or praying to no god, wear different attire, or eat different foods? Why do you think that supporting individual freedoms denies peace?

    75. hantsboy — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:34 pm  

      Ravi. Well I’ve always rooted for the Zulus though Colin no doubt has his own view on the stirring battle.
      Cetawayo has a strong resemblance to N Griffin don’t you think ?

    76. chairwoman — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:35 pm  

      Colin Brown - What do you think “Britishness” means?

    77. 5cc — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:36 pm  

      “The Zulus were the BNP of their time and place.”

      Ha ha. Yeah, I’m sure that’s what you meant originally. So is Colin (see comment 63).

    78. Ravi Naik — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:42 pm  

      Cetawayo has a strong resemblance to N Griffin don’t you think ?

      Personally, I think Nick Griffin has a stronger resemblance to Mugabe, but that’s just me. :) Still, I don’t see Nick Griffin as a warrior, but a one-trick pony.

    79. Ravi Naik — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:45 pm  

      Cetawayo has a strong resemblance to N Griffin don’t you think ?

      Personally, I think Nick Griffin has a stronger resemblance to Mugabe, but that’s just me. :) Still, I don’t see Nick Griffin as a warrior, but a one-trick pony.

    80. Golam Murtaza — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:49 pm  

      Uh oh, looks like Colin and Hantsboy have accidentally elected to support opposite sides in a 19th century colonial conflict. Bizarre..

    81. chairwoman — on 17th June, 2009 at 1:56 pm  

      ” Uh oh, looks like Colin and Hantsboy have accidentally elected to support opposite sides in a 19th century colonial conflict. Bizarre..”

      Do you think they’ll dress up for it?

    82. platinum786 — on 17th June, 2009 at 2:01 pm  

      As long as they don’t blacken up for it. That would be un-pc.

    83. billaricaydikey — on 17th June, 2009 at 2:03 pm  

      I am still waiting for the non white racists out there to submit themselves to a DNA test to determine how much white is in them. Wolley and Jasper fall at the first fence and I would expect a lot of south Asians to do the same.

      After all, ther was a lot of interracial shagging going on over there wasn’t there? I have indulged in quite a bit of it myself and very nice it was too.

      And of course the final question. What did any of you lot do to stop the BNP getting to where they are now? Answers on a psotcard please.

    84. hantsboy — on 17th June, 2009 at 2:22 pm  

      I am still waiting for the non white racists out there to submit themselves to a DNA test to determine how much white is in them.
      billericay

      While you’re at it how about a DNA study of the different castes on the sub-continent.
      Could be interesting that one .

    85. Leon — on 17th June, 2009 at 2:29 pm  

      I think Nick Griffin has a stronger resemblance to Mugabe

      That’s not a bad idea, compare him to him.

      ‘Nick Griffin: the English Mugabe. If you want to see what Britain would be like under BNP rule, take a look at Zimbabwe…’

    86. Jai — on 17th June, 2009 at 2:49 pm  

      Platinum786,

      Re: #30

      Thank you again for your kind words and your suggestion.

      Regarding your last paragraph — When you have some spare time, you should definitely check out the following articles, in addition to the other excellent programmes you mentioned (go through the URL links within the articles too). I think you’ll find them interesting:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_people and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_Europe

    87. chairwoman — on 17th June, 2009 at 3:10 pm  

      “As long as they don’t blacken up for it.”/i>

      Heh :)

    88. 5cc — on 17th June, 2009 at 3:59 pm  

      Since the thread has been derailed and degenerated into mild insult slinging and the BNP people not being sure which side of a historical war analogy they’re fighting on (seriously, what is it with you guys and the fighting metaphors) - any chance of dragging it somewhere close to being on track?

      The BNP guys have said they can’t answer the question of what will happen to the non-whites/immigrants who don’t take up the offer to leave the country if the BNP aren’t satisfied with the number who do. Is there any chance of you telling us why you can’t answer that?

      Is it because you know and you’re not allowed/don’t want to say, or that you don’t know?

      If you don’t know, why would you join a party with the BNP’s past who leave that bit blank from what they tell you? Do you just trust the BNP won’t do anything nasty, or don’t you care?

    89. tomoe yamanaka — on 17th June, 2009 at 4:32 pm  

      we should unite with the Fatherland
      its the only ecomonic policy that will work with a BNP Government
      Hails the new dawn!

    90. MaidMarian — on 17th June, 2009 at 5:11 pm  

      Ravi Naik - ‘It is clear that those that compete directly with cheap labour suffer the most. What can the government do to alleviate this problem? Can it introduce some sort of protectionist laws without violating global trade laws?’ (and also your earlier reply to my first comment)

      Broadly, I agree with your analysis, but what government can do is more diffuse. The reality is that, however unpalatable they find it, voters quite seem to like having a cheap labour force available.

      It’s not really about protectionism as such - it is about people not being able to live (in any real sense of the word) on the wages that some jobs pay, hence the ‘need’ for importing labour to do the work on the cheap. It is not that British worker’s don’t want the jobs - it is that they can’t live on the wage.

      I just struggle to see the voters ever accepting the end-points of this. Indeed, it would be interesting to see what the BNP would have in in mind for house-prices.

      You mention China - a good example. China has effectively exported deflation to the West, and they are on the other side of the world. British labour has suffered from this, but it is this sort of complexity that is lost on the BNP.

      Global movements of goods and capital are what we need to reconcile with as much as movements of labour.

      And just as a sepatate rant. The UKIP fall into the same bind. They profess to care, but as good little neo-Thatcherites they love the wage deflation, diminution of organised labour and increased competition that immigration brings. They just dress it up better.

    91. MaidMarian — on 17th June, 2009 at 6:12 pm  

      BD (79) - ‘What did any of you lot do to stop the BNP getting to where they are now? Answers on a psotcard please.’

      I voted for someone else.

    92. Refresh — on 17th June, 2009 at 6:18 pm  

      Hantsboy, I believe the vote only went up by 1.6%.

      With the BNP hoping to pick up votes at the expense of the main three parties over the expenses fiasco, they achieved very little. I imagine those voters that were determined to note their disgust did one of two things, stayed at home or voted for someone else other than the BNP. They probably considered the possible outcome of handing out expense claim forms to the BNP and shrank away.

      As for the ‘knuckledraggers’ epithet, I object. There are good knuckledraggers and there are bad ‘knuckledraggers’. I am on the side of the good ‘knuckledraggers’. And in time expect to enlighten the bad ones.

    93. Don — on 17th June, 2009 at 6:32 pm  

      Billy,

      Are you going to be paying for these tests? If so, I’ll have one.

      Besides, I suspect that if someone who considered themselves black (because they were, y’know, black) discovered that they were 12% white they might well conclude - in the absence of a visible white grandparent - that it was because their maternal forebears had been repeatedly raped by white massa. Not sure how that would make them feel more positive about the situation.

      Until fairly recently, most ‘interracial shagging’ (thanks for sharing, by the way) was probably not very concensual in any meaningful way.

    94. Refresh — on 17th June, 2009 at 6:44 pm  

      MaidMarian

      ‘Global movements of goods and capital are what we need to reconcile with as much as movements of labour.

      And just as a sepatate rant. The UKIP fall into the same bind. They profess to care, but as good little neo-Thatcherites they love the wage deflation, diminution of organised labour and increased competition that immigration brings. They just dress it up better.’

      Very well put.

    95. persephone brown — on 17th June, 2009 at 8:36 pm  

      @ Brown - various comments

      Not all ‘immigrants’ are on low wages competing with the ‘indigenous’ for those jobs.

      Some ‘immigrants’ are here because they have professional skills that there is a lack of in the UK. And I don’t think those immigrants are the ones ousting you from a job (not going by the way you communicate here)

      If you are having problems with paying your mortgage, suggest you go back to school & improve your spelling. It may lead to a better paid job. But sadly that still won’t improve your other problems.

    96. Colin Brown — on 17th June, 2009 at 9:48 pm  

      persephone brown.

      How do I do that? Jacqui Smith passed the positive discrimination law in 2007. No matter how well qualified I am - PhD, DSc etc.. I will not be chosen for employment in a large company because I am both White and male. That makes me a ‘leper’ under present UK employment law. There is no way around it.

      Women and ethnics must be considered above that of white males in Britain to meet with strict equality targets regardless of said applicants lack of suitability or ability for the post.

      Do you know what that makes you guys?

      A bunch of patronising, scheming, hypocritical progressives.

    97. 5cc — on 17th June, 2009 at 11:51 pm  

      @ Colin

      “Jacqui Smith passed the positive discrimination law in 2007. No matter how well qualified I am - PhD, DSc etc.. I will not be chosen for employment in a large company because I am both White and male.”

      Can we have some references for that Act of Parliament please, since I know a number of white males who have got jobs since 2007?

      (Positive discrimination is illegal with a few exceptions set out in the Race Relations Act 1976 (sections 37 and 38, which cover encouraging people from specific groups to apply for jobs or offer them training under very specific circumstances).

      Only the Queen can pass Acts of Parliament.

    98. inders — on 17th June, 2009 at 11:57 pm  

      How unsuitable or unable can you be for cleaning a floor, or packing random crap in a factory?

      We’re not talking rocket scientists or the finders of the cure for cancer.

    99. Colin Brown — on 18th June, 2009 at 8:00 am  

      Nonetheless, positive discrimination breeds double standards in society. Is [PP] saying that’s a good thing?

    100. inders — on 18th June, 2009 at 8:16 am  

      Prove your assertion, if you want us to justify the consequent.

    101. Colin Brown — on 18th June, 2009 at 8:48 am  

      What is there to prove inders? Positive discrimination has been indoctrinated into UK law. I’d hardly call that an assertion.

    102. 5cc — on 18th June, 2009 at 9:03 am  

      @Colin

      “Positive discrimination has been indoctrinated into UK law. I’d hardly call that an assertion.”

      Yes it is. Without showing us the law that allows positive discrimination all we have is your assertion that it exists.

      I haven’t asked you to show us links to it so I can try to look clever. I’ve asked you because I’ve googled for it and looked through the list of Acts of Parliament I’ve included here and all I can turn up is the Race Relations Act 1976 that talks about two exceptions (that could just as easily cover white people if they fit the criteria) that only talk about providing training and encouraging people to apply for jobs.

      If positive discrimination is in law, show us the law or all we have is your assertion that it exists. I’m honestly curious to see what it says.

    103. platinum786 — on 18th June, 2009 at 9:15 am  

      I love how being “progressive” is a bad thing.

      God bless BNP supporters, they put a smile on my face everyday, when I should be working.

      Colin I’m sat in the office right now, and think it’s fair to say that 80% of the office is made of white males. The rest is women and non white people of mixed gender.

      I’ve been here a couple of years, and in my department, since I was hired, 10 more people hve been hired. 6 where white men, 2 white women, and two asians, who are of british origin.

      So 80% of the people hired have been white. What figures are you looking at? Those at your local Indian resturant?

      1 in 6 Pakistani men drives a Taxi. What stops white guys without a job driving taxis? You just have to pass a test, that’s it. If immigrants can manage it why can’t you?

      A similar figure of Pakistani men work in takeaways or resturants, setup and owned by other Pakistani men. What stops white men setting up chip shops and places selling bugers. If Pakistani’s can compete with Pizza Hut, KFC, McDonalds, Burger King, and still earn a living, why can’t white men?

      The BBC recently showed a documentary about immigrantion, as part of it’s white Britain season. In East Anglia Polish workers are willing to work for minimum wage, picking vegetables. Unemployed white men were offered the same job and refused to do it for the same pay. I call that lazyness.

      The reason people like yourself cannot get jobs is due to lazyness. Your not willing to work 16 hours a day as many taxi drivers do, your not willing to have no social life and work nights, as most takeaway workers do, your not willing to break a sweat as the vegetable pickers do, you want to be spoon fed. That’s not going to happen.

    104. Ravi Naik — on 18th June, 2009 at 9:30 am  

      If positive discrimination is in law, show us the law or all we have is your assertion that it exists. I’m honestly curious to see what it says.

      You see, Colin, the point of this exercise is to demonstrate that you are just parroting BNP’s dishonest rhetoric. The idea that non-whites or immigrants have it easier is just not true. In particular, the life of an immigrant is far from easy, and most of them have to work very hard to achieve a decent quality of live, away from their families - and I find it abhorrent that there is a party that is keen on demonising them, and us in the process.

      1 in 6 Pakistani men drives a Taxi. What stops white guys without a job driving taxis? You just have to pass a test, that’s it. If immigrants can manage it why can’t you?

      Of course, they can also try to have a decent education and not have to do those jobs. Most of the jobs you mention are not enough to buy a house or raise a family - and a lot of immigrants just earn enough to send the money back home.

    105. chairwoman — on 18th June, 2009 at 9:49 am  

      Platinum - Applause *claps hands*

      My Grandfather got up at 4am 5 days a week to go to Spittlefields Market to order fruit for his shop. On Saturdays he had a lie in till 6am as the market wasn’t open. He did this until he was in his eighties.

      He was an educated man, but his Polish/Jewish education couldn’t get him work here, so he did whatever he could to earn money to support his family and by the time he was in his forties he had saved enough money to pay cash for a house.

      And he wasn’t alone, like todays’s immigrants, his contemporaries worked every our God sent.

      But the indigenous population worked hard for long hours then too. They didn’t start their own businesses but they were grafters.

      I don’t know what’s happened to the Great Britain that I grew up in. It’s not the influx of immigrants that has caused this, but the attitude that says not ‘I will work hard’ but ‘I am owed’.

    106. Colin Brown — on 18th June, 2009 at 10:03 am  

      You guys at [PP] are unreal.

      Positive discrimination plans defended by Harman
      Thursday, June 26, 2008

      Quote:

      “Equality Minister Harriet Harman today defended controversial plans to encourage firms to discriminate in favour of female and ethnic minorities job candidates.

      The new Equalities Bill is also expected to force employers to disclose salary structures in a bid to make the pay gap between men and women more transparent.

      Responding to criticism that the plans could discriminate against white men, Ms Harman said “you don’t get progress if there isn’t a bit of a push forward”.

      The minister said: “Most women are going out to work and they are just as committed to their jobs - the money that they earn is important to the household budget so they should be paid fairly.

      “Yet listen to this figure - if you are a woman working part-time you get 40% less per hour on average than a man working full-time.

      “Now either this is because women are not up to the job or else there is discrimination against them. You can’t challenge discrimination when it’s kept swept under the carpet.

      “I think there’s a lot of resentment at the unfairness against women. They are not being given the facts.”

      She added: “There might be controversy but you don’t get progress if there isn’t a bit of a push forward.”

      The Bill, details of which were being outlined today, will also seek to stop pensioners being denied NHS treatment because of their age.

      Ministers want to stop elderly people being patronised by doctors following complaints of pensioners being fobbed off by GPs and denied health, travel and car insurance.

      Although age discrimination will be outlawed in the provision of goods and services, doctors will still be able to refuse older patients treatment if they believe there are sound clinical reasons to do so.

      It is thought that the Bill will underpin a culture change which will put ageism on a par with racism.

      The new legislation is aimed at tackling “harmful” age discrimination, and not banning systems which have benefits for the elderly, such as free bus travel.

      The law is not expected to affect companies like Club 18-30 which only sell goods to customers of a certain age.

      Ministers hope the Bill will promote a new era of openness on pay following pressure from trade unions for mandatory pay audits to make sure women are not receiving less money than men for doing the same job.

      The Bill will also introduce rights for breastfeeding mothers to feed their babies in public.

      Liberal Democrat youth and equality spokeswoman Lynne Featherstone said: “If the Government genuinely wants to tackle equality it must do more to end the growing discrepancy between the rules on pay for the public and private sector.

      “Without compulsory pay audits for the private sector these proposals will represent a very real victory for the hawks in the cabinet.

      “Public sector equality rights are fast becoming an ivory tower that private sector employees can only dream of.

      “A few tick-box questionnaires for Government suppliers on their equality policy are going to do little to change the day-to-day opportunities for the 20 million people who work in the private sector.”

      unquote.

      Assumption my ass.

    107. 5cc — on 18th June, 2009 at 10:16 am  

      @chairwoman

      My dad did exactly the same as yours up until his death to stock the greengrocers he owned with his brother. He wasn’t an educated man (he left school at 14) Nor was he an immigrant.*

      It’s important to make clear that we’re not talking about ‘the indigenous population’ as a whole, or even all those out of work. I think (or at least hope) what we’re talking about here is a small number of people who are out of work and blame immigrants for their plight when the truth of who’s to blame lies a little closer to home.

      We don’t want to give Colin and Hantsboy ammunition.

      *Although I’m not sure if he meets the BNP’s strict criteria, since his great-grandparents did migrate here (alien religion as well), but from a country that the BNP want to invite to become part of Britain, is part of the British Isles and was ruled by the British at the time.

    108. 5cc — on 18th June, 2009 at 10:41 am  

      @Colin

      You’ve just proved that all you had was an assertion.

      You have a reference to a Bill, which is in Parliament at the moment facing debate on whether or not it will become law. It isn’t actually law, and won’t be unless it passes through Parliament and is voted successfully on and then passed into law by the Queen. The Bill may be amended a number of times before it becomes law. It might not even get Royal Assent before the election and the next government might drop it.

      I’ll have a look through the Bill to see exactly what it says about positive discrimination (the article you’ve cut and pasted doesn’t say) because it may just be a reassertion of what’s already in the 1976 Act.

      For now though, positive discrimination is still actually illegal. If anyone employs someone over you because of their sex/race, they’re breaking the law.

    109. Jai — on 18th June, 2009 at 10:51 am  

      Assumption my ass.

      The correct British spelling (and prenunciation) is “arse”, Colin. The BNP is quite aggressively hostile to what they term “American cultural imperialism”, remember, as detailed in Page 50 of their 2005 manifesto.

      Actually, they’d probably frown on the very American word “guys” too. I guess that leaves us with “chaps”, “fellows”, or simply “gentlemen”.

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

      5cc,

      Brilliant points by you throughout this thread. Keep going.

    110. Colin Brown — on 18th June, 2009 at 11:36 am  

      Progressives. Professional hair-splitters. But why? Could it be do deflect attention away from the insidiousness of the left-wing claptrap they choke down the throats of the uninitiated?

      Yes, that’ll be the reason. After all, it’s not like Jai is here to offer brush up courses on English usage is it.

    111. Ravi Naik — on 18th June, 2009 at 11:46 am  

      For now though, positive discrimination is still actually illegal. If anyone employs someone over you because of their sex/race, they’re breaking the law.

      Colin, can you respond to this or not?

    112. Colin Brown — on 18th June, 2009 at 12:01 pm  

      Yes Ravi. I fail to see what is ‘positive’ about discriminating against a potential employee. Said job applicant should be chosen on ability and aptitude, not his or hers sex or skin colour.

      However, I’m quite sure that your question has far more to do with manufacturing a parallel between the BNP’s choice to ‘discriminate’ on it’s membership entry requirements than it does with the question you raised.

      Am I right, or am I right Ravi?

    113. 5cc — on 18th June, 2009 at 12:12 pm  

      @Colin

      Pointing out that something you’ve said is law isn’t actually law isn’t hair splitting. There’s a rather big difference between ‘is’ and ‘isn’t’. Ravi has asked you to respond to the point that positive discrimination in employment recruitment is actually currently illegal. Your reply completely ignores this fact and carries on as if it wasn’t the case. It is.

      And looking through the Bill (which may or may not become law), shows the bit about positive action (that may or may not be dropped or amended if the Bill becomes law - you’re looking for section 153) casts more doubt on what you claimed, from the first look.

      You said:

      “Jacqui Smith passed the positive discrimination law in 2007. [No she didn't. A Bill was introduced this year that isn't actually law and might never become law] No matter how well qualified I am - PhD, DSc etc.. I will not be chosen for employment in a large company because I am both White and male. [The Bill doesn't say that, see below]. That makes me a ‘leper’ under present UK employment law. [It's not present UK law] There is no way around it. [There are several. the main one being that it's not law].”

      The actual Bill makes provisions for employers who decide a particular group (including white males, funnily enough) is underrepresented in their company or faces disadvantages. These employers are allowed to then recruit people from that disadvantaged group but only if they are equally or better qualified than people from outside the group.

      Here’s the exact example of something that wouldn’t be allowed taken from the Bill’s Explanatory notes:

      “An employer offers a job to a woman on the basis that women are under-represented in the company’s workforce when there was a male candidate who was more qualified. This would be unlawful direct discrimination.”

      So that bit you said about ‘no matter how well qualified I am..’? Yes it does. If this Bill in its present form becomes law, and if you apply for a job in a company that has decided that another group is underrepresented, and if you’re up against another candidate from that group, and if you’re better qualified than that person, then the company must, by law, employ you.

      That’s less harsh that what you’ve said is already law, and it isn’t even the law yet. It might not even become law.

      You need to be careful of anything you read about equality law from the BNP.

    114. Colin Brown — on 18th June, 2009 at 1:00 pm  

      In effect, the equality bill is already law. Globalism, which Labour have embraced, has seen to that. The fallout of this anti-indigenous policy is that Western populations the world over are being displaced from their homelands by endless hordes of cheap foreign labour.

      And no. There isn’t a skills shortage. That is yet another globalist lie to justify the insidious agenda which [PP] will now rush to deflate as being another silly urban legend.

      http://tinyurl.com/mhsh4a

    115. Shamit — on 18th June, 2009 at 1:01 pm  

      I am against affirmative action especially that is based on race or gender.

      However, I am open to some sort of affirmative action when it comes to providing opportunities to economically deprived citizens (irrespective of their class, colour, creed and/or religion). However, I am not keen on creating quotas in employment or politics but may be in education and training so that those coming from less fortunate positions (economically) have the option to develop into well rounded individuals and have the opportunity to compete with others.

      I think the Harman Equality Bill is an abomination and as a person who runs a business — I can vouch that most people who are responsible for the bottomline tend to hire people based on the value they can add rather than the nature of skin colour or their reproductive organs.

      However, as a society, I believe we need to protect equal rights and women should be protected against employers such as ALAN (the idiot) Sugar who thinks it is appropriate to ask when they are going to have babies.
      *************************************
      Colin - unchecked immigration is a problem and anyone who denies that is completely off their rockers. Many British Asians would agree with that statement.

      However, as I have said before, immigration should be based upon one’s ability to add value to our country economically (directly or indirectly) and definitely not based on race.

      I am also against granting amnesty to those who are illegal immigrants because there are lot of people who work hard and follow the rules and gain residency and citizenship in this country. Granting illegals amnesty is a loony left concept which I completely disagree.

      I am also against granting anyone permanent residency just because they have happened to stay in this country over 5 years or whatever the case may be. It should be decided on a case by case basis and I would like to adopt the permanent residency laws like Singapore where every five years they review if the person still deserves to be a PR.

    116. Shamit — on 18th June, 2009 at 1:13 pm  

      Does that convince you that not everyone in this blog is loony left?

      And also being progressive means marrying pragmatism to idealism - not a very hard concept actually. And the term is bandied around like that all lefties are progressives — I disagree.

      Ever read Bill Clinton’s speech on affirmative action: the motto of the speech was mend it not end it. Have a read. That’s the guy who defined progressive politics even though many on liberal conspiracy would disagree.

      By the way could you please define what you mean by progressives?

    117. 5cc — on 18th June, 2009 at 1:27 pm  

      @Colin

      “In effect, the equality bill is already law.”

      No it isn’t. That’s just a lame dodge, and the rest is an attempt to try to derail the conversation and distract from what you’ve been asked. Even if the Equality Bill was law (which it isn’t) it doesn’t say what you claim it does.

      Talking about ‘globalist lies’ is a just smoke and mirrors distraction. The Equality Bill isn’t about skills shortages.

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

      @Shamit

      Not a massive fan of positive discrimination myself, chiefly because it gives people like Colin and Hantsboy reason to act all victimised, however much they mistinterpret it.

      But - from what I’ve seen of the Equalities Bill, it doesn’t create quotas. It just allows employers to recruit from groups they feel are underrepresented or disadvantaged (but I may get a surprise the more closely I read it). And it doesn’t allow you to hire people based on something other than the value they can add, since you always have to pick the best qualified candidate. The only exemption is if you have two candidates who can offer equal value but you think one is from a disadvantaged group.

    118. Shamit — on 18th June, 2009 at 1:37 pm  

      @5cc

      The problem is the Equalities Bill is that it is not required.

      Every one has equal protection from the law and those who are discriminated against have paths to challenge that discrimination. Why add a new bureaucratic layer to oversee the process? I think we have enough waste of taxpayer’s money?

      And, fining employers who apparently pay women less (now Harman used dodgy statistics to support her case) — but the bill also does not take into account legislation already in the statutes which grant special provisions for mothers with young children etc etc. Flexible working is now a norm and people work when they choose to work. I realise that this is the case where professionals are mostly involved — but that is exactly the group Harman is targeting.

      I think this equalities bill is hogwash and is an unnecessary legislation. Also, can Harman practice what she preaches — how many Cabinet ministers are women?

      So this is like many other anouncements and legislations that the Government brings in — it does nothing to alleviate problems that the country is facing but simply makes them feel good and the Fabian brethren.

    119. 5cc — on 18th June, 2009 at 2:01 pm  

      @Shamit

      Fair enough. I’m not defending the Bill per se here (not a Labour supporter either), I’m just pointing out that it won’t create the environment Colin claims already exists.

    120. Colin Brown — on 18th June, 2009 at 2:32 pm  

      A lame dodge? OK 5cc get your teeth into this.

      This costly Equality Bill passed its Second Reading in the House of Commons on 11th May 2009. The Bill aims to sweep all of the existing law on equality into one Act of Parliament and to eliminate more forms of discrimination than are currently covered. Additional concepts, such as “discrimination by association” and “positive action” are also introduced. The Bill is now due to be considered by a Committee of MPs.

      During the debate, Harriet Harman, Minister for both Women and Equality, barely mentioned “religion or belief” in the list of grounds on which people are not allowed to discriminate in the Equality Bill, but instead concentrated upon the gender pay gap and women-only shortlists for MPs. Mrs Theresa May, on behalf of the Conservative Party, asked for the Bill not to be read a second time, one reason being that it allows “…discrimination in recruitment and promotion decisions”. If MPs had succeeded in voting against the Bill being read a second time, it would cease to go through Parliament — at least for this parliamentary session. She also mentioned that businesses are “struggling to stay afloat”, that imposing a compulsory pay audit would be seen as a “bureaucratic nightmare” and that the Bill had been “…muddled by ill-thought-out, unworkable proposals…”.

      Conservative MP Philip Davies protested that this is the “…most incredibly misleadingly titled Bill, as one of its central planks is not to enshrine equality in law, but to reintroduce discrimination in the workplace”. He later added that: “…the Government claim in the explanatory notes that the Bill will cost the private sector a one-off sum of £211 million — just what it needs in a recession — and recurring costs of between £11 million and £17 million a year, consisting mainly of additional court and tribunal cases and compensation awards.”

      Another Conservative MP, Graham Brady, pointed out that as a result of the “positive action”, “recruitment and promotion” clauses, an employer could choose to employ a white woman in preference to an equally-qualified black man, so that the Bill is actually setting out “…a hierarchy of different, competing equalities”. He added: “This is becoming so complicated that, in seeking to protect some groups quite properly from discrimination, there is a risk of inflicting discrimination on others”.

      Liberal Democrat MP Lynne Featherstone called for the partial removal of “religion” as a protected ground, because of the “varied” religious views held by different people in schools on matters such as “abortion, alcohol, homosexuality and sex education”, as well as calling for a narrowing of exemptions for religious employers.

      Additionally, Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris argued that extending the public sector duty to avoid discrimination on grounds of religion is “highly controversial” and runs the risk of “entrenching resentment”. He also argued for the narrowing of exemptions for religion for religious employers. He criticised provisions that allow schools to appoint a teacher who has “Jesus in [his/her] heart” in preference to one who does not and also maligned restrictions on access to faith schools. He admitted that he has interests: his membership of the Joint Committee on Human Rights and his “honorary positions with the British Humanist Association, the Liberal Democrat lesbian, bisexual and transgender campaign, and the National Secular Society.”

      Who needs or wants this bill 5cc? And what makes you so sure that globalism (cheap labour) won’t be part of it?

      http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2008-09/equality.html.

      http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090511/debtext/90511-0004.htm#0905118000001.

    121. platinum786 — on 18th June, 2009 at 2:39 pm  

      #104 - Ravi, it’s true the jobs aren’t well paid, but’s it’s more than the dole isn’t it? Even on minimum wage, after a 40 hour week your earning 3 times more than the dole.

      Also in some cities, cabbies can rake in quite a lot of money, depends if your willing to work a 72 hour week or not.

      Some people just like to whine rather than go out there and do something. If I want the best I have to go out there and work to get the best. If I want to be the best in IT i need to spend my spare time in books and learning code and stuff like that.

      If you don’t have acedemic qualifications, you can make a lot of money doing non acedemic stuff. We have polish plumbers and builders, why can’t young men on the dole go out and learn how to do these things? Get the skills. People are wasting lifetimes whining, why not waste 2-3 years earning a pittance and being an understudy to a crafstman?

      The average income in the UK is £20,000 a year i think, it can’t be that hard to gain the skills to at least hit that barrier over a lifetime.

    122. 5cc — on 18th June, 2009 at 4:19 pm  

      @Colin

      Of course it’s a lame dodge. You haven’t shown how the Bill effectively already is law (which it isn’t - it’s worth saying again that a Parliamentary Bill is not law), and you haven’t shown that it says the things you say it does. You’ve also glossed over the fact that you said it was passed as law in 2007 and it’s only just received its second reading.

      What you’ve actually done is copy and paste an article from an evangelical Christian organisation that consistently lobbies against gay rights - Christian Concern For Our Nation - that (surprise surprise) criticises the Bill. You’ve also linked to the debate around the second reading of the Bill, which includes some people criticising it. All you’ve done is show that some people don’t like the Bill and have criticised it, which happens all the time with every Bill ever.

      The Bill still isn’t law, still has to pass through the House of Lords and all the other stages it needs to pass through before it becomes law (here’s the list of stages a Bill has to go through before becoming law).

      In the debate, Teresa May does call for clarity in the positive action elements of the Bill to make it clear whether they can be used only in individual cases or as a widespread recruitment policy. She proposes that this is addressed in the Committee stages. Nowhere does anyone say what you did, which is:

      “Women and ethnics must be considered above that of white males in Britain to meet with strict equality targets regardless of said applicants lack of suitability or ability for the post.”

      Unless you can point to anywhere in the actual Bill that actually says what you say it does, rather than link to places where other people have complained about something else they don’t like about it, I think it’s time for you to admit that a) it is not actually law that ‘ethnics’ and women must be considered over white men, and b) that the Equality Bill doesn’t propose that.

      Then you can go on to criticise what you don’t like about what the Bill does say if you want.

    123. Don — on 18th June, 2009 at 4:45 pm  

      5cc

      But if there is no extant law that ‘ethnics’ and women must be considered over white men, then how do you explain Colin’s inabilty to find a decent job?

      Clearly Colin is at a loss to think of any other reason, so I imagine he will continue to look for ways in which his faiure in life is all the fault of uppity ethnics and women.

    124. Leon — on 18th June, 2009 at 4:50 pm  

      I think the Harman Equality Bill is an abomination and as a person who runs a business

      Ironically it may actually be a useful weapon against the BNP… :D

    125. Ravi Naik — on 18th June, 2009 at 5:20 pm  

      My wife and I were talking the other day about this. She said that she would never put our son in a nursery where our baby would be taken care of by men. I find that sexist, but I wonder if she has a point. Would gender diversity be enforced in this case?

    126. 5cc — on 18th June, 2009 at 5:57 pm  

      @Ravi

      Can’t say I’m an expert on the Bill since I’ve only read it today - but from what I’ve read of the Positive Action section, employers won’t be forced to do anything. (I could have missed something or read this wrong - I’d be happy if anyone can point out if I am). I’m not sure how it applies to public sector staff.

      If an individual nursery or some sort of governing body for nurseries decided that men were underepresented as nursery nurses/teachers, in the current law they can try to offer incentives for men to apply for positions or offer training to men before women. Men are already encouraged to become primary school teachers like this.

      The new Bill proposes that the nursery could then deliberately choose a man provided only that no better qualified or better suited women applied for the job.

      I think I’ve got that right.

    127. Charlie — on 19th June, 2009 at 11:44 am  

      @Don

      I think it’s the shouting in random places that’s putting off potential employers. He should ask the BNP for some work it sounds a hoot no tax and you can download all manner of strange things to the laptop.

    128. Clairwil — on 19th June, 2009 at 12:44 pm  

      Then again, they may ask him questions at the interview and he doesn’t seem to like questions much. Reminds me rather of a terrier I once had.



    • 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.