Sunny Hundal website



  • Family

    • Liberal Conspiracy
    • Sunny Hundal
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr. Mitu Khurana
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feminism for non-lefties
    • Feministing
    • Gender Bytes
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Statesman blogs
    • Operation Black Vote
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • 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
    • Douglas Clark's saloon
    • Earwicga
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Rita Banerji
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • Southall Black Sisters
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head

  • BNP to appear on Question Time


    by Rumbold
    6th September, 2009 at 10:16 am    

    Thanks to their European electoral success, the BNP have been invited to appear on Question Time:

    “The BBC changed its position after the party won two seats at the European elections. Its share of the national vote at that poll was 6.2%. “They got across a threshold that has given them national representation and that fact will be reflected in the level of coverage they will be given,” said Ric Bailey, the BBC’s chief adviser on politics. “This is not a policy about the BNP. It’s a policy about impartiality.”

    The decision was approved by Mark Byford, the deputy director-general. David Dimbleby, the show’s host, backed the change.”

    I think that this a good idea. I have long been a supporter of debating with, and exposing, the BNP. The BNP do best when people don’t challenge their individual policies and instead just shout racist. Other panellists would do well to read eGov’s/Pickled Politics’ 85 Questions for the BNP, as well as the BNP’s responses (here and here). This is an opportunity to show the country while the BNP’s manifesto is both unworkable and extreme.


                  Post to del.icio.us


    Filed in: Media,The BNP






    67 Comments below   |  

    Reactions: Twitter, blogs
    1. Matt Borum

      Pickled Politics » BNP to appear on Question Time- I have long been a supporter of debating with, and e… http://bit.ly/ppP0s




    1. Lee John Barnes — on 6th September, 2009 at 11:06 am  

      “I have long been a supporter of debating with, and exposing, the BNP.”

      Would that be whilst you are ‘debating’ with those who post pro-BNP comments by deleting all their comments off of this forum and deleting all my comments left on here.

      What a hypocritical knob.

      http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/

      At least Harrys Place has the integrity and intelligence to allow free debate instead of acting like a pathetic liberal fascist and deleting anyone who is winning the ‘debate’.

    2. persephone — on 6th September, 2009 at 11:32 am  

      ^^ @ 1

      Actually PP gave you substantial space in the 85 questions to the BNP & included all your answers (even where the answer was a fudge) - these answers are still live on this site.

      By the way, I clicked on your link to your website - you have some spelling typos on your homepage - don’t worry as its not as if you are in an occupation where attention to detail is important, like a lawyer or something..

    3. damon — on 6th September, 2009 at 11:34 am  

      I think the BNP could benifit from it though.
      He’ll dodge the difficult questions but be able to say things like: ‘The British people were never asked if they wanted to be host to this multi-cultural experiment’ … which is the kind of thing that would resonate with some Daily Mail readers.

      And when they go on to other subjects he’ll be able to sound less controversial.

    4. Lee John Barnes — on 6th September, 2009 at 11:51 am  

      The day I submit my blog postings as case arguments to a court is the day I will worry about spelling mistakes.

      OK.

      Idiot.

    5. persephone — on 6th September, 2009 at 11:55 am  

      ^ once a professional always a professional. Theres a book called True Professionalism that David Maister wrote for lawyers suggest you read it.

    6. Cyburn — on 6th September, 2009 at 12:01 pm  

      The BNP have benefited from the “No-Platform” position in some debates saying that they know the BNP are right, which would lead to people thinking the BNP are persecuted.

      Hopefully being on question time, will eliminate their tactic on playing the victim.

    7. persephone — on 6th September, 2009 at 12:15 pm  

      @4

      I have worked with about 200 lawyers & no one ever made a distinction about the quality of their written language - in fact anything they wrote in the public domain had to be of a high quality. Plus they would never resort to abusive language even under more strenous situations than my post @2.

      But then I worked with professionals.

      If your standards drop, not to mention the weak answers to the 85 questions, why should you be taken seriously. I am finding it hard to.

      Are you a qualified - you don’t seem to be on the roll with the Law Soc?

    8. Shatterface — on 6th September, 2009 at 12:16 pm  

      ‘I think that this a good idea.’

      Damn straight. Treat them as just another - if repellant - mainstream party and they can no longer pose as the ‘persecuted’ voice of white Britain.

      Expose their arguments as the racist drivel they are.

    9. Tom — on 6th September, 2009 at 12:43 pm  

      I would like to agree but I’ve seen too many scientist vs pseudo-scientist debates.

      I’m not convinced debate is a good format for getting at the truth due to techniques like the Gish Gallop:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop#Debates

      http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/debating/globetrotters.html

      Not that I would silence the BNP even if I could, but I wish people were more aware of this kind of problem so they could give what they hear in debates appropriate weight.

    10. falcao — on 6th September, 2009 at 12:44 pm  

      This is free publicity for the racists everybody knows the BNP are a bunch of nazi thugs. Nothing will be proved other than more publicity for their sick ideas.

    11. Boyo — on 6th September, 2009 at 1:28 pm  

      It will give them further legitimacy. People hear what they want to hear, so short of NG foaming at the mouth on balance the BNP will benefit. Everyone hates politicians and they are the anti-politicians, so long as NG can “play” it properly, as he will.

      However… just as on the Taliban thread i argued that the true problem lays elsewhere, the same applies to the BNP. There will always be a minority of extremists in any ideology or country. The reason these have come to prominence in the UK is the failure of the ruling elite (by which i mean not just labour, but the whole post-war consensus) to properly consider the implications of mass immigration and seek to stifle debate, not least with the racist smear (we discussed this in a previous Powellite thread where strong arguments were made to the contrary, but i was not convinced). It should surprise no one therefore that the “only man left standing” is a racist party, and that it achieves prominence.

    12. smack4head — on 6th September, 2009 at 1:53 pm  

      People arent prepared to take on Nick Griffin because theyre too caught up in the abhorrence of racism to actually maintain any degree of equanimity which would enable them to take on his arguments effectively, they just end up coming out with clichéd responses which hes well prepared for in advance.

    13. MICHAEL DONNELLY — on 6th September, 2009 at 2:07 pm  

      I cannot remeber the last time i watched Question Time.

      However, when there are members of the british National Party appearing in the Newsnight studio to provide an opinion on the news…that is when I would be concerned.

      The BBC should remember that impartiality is one thing, but publicising extremist views is en entirely different issue…one which I’m sure Ofcom will be prepared to address.

    14. Don — on 6th September, 2009 at 3:29 pm  

      @7

      Persephone,

      As Lee insists on telling us (to the point of tedium) that he has a bachelor’s degree in Law it’s probably safe to assume that he never progressed beyond that and is a lawyer only in his own head.

    15. MaidMarian — on 6th September, 2009 at 3:52 pm  

      ‘This is an opportunity to show the country while the BNP’s manifesto is both unworkable and extreme.’

      Well, the problem is that that just is not true. QT stopped being a serious debate show quite some time ago - it is now just a bit of a circus where people get to shout talk-baord friendly platitudes.

      The BNP will probably do very well out of a QT appearance becuse they thrive on heat, not light. I suspect that the 65 questions for the BNP won’t be of much use. And be in no doubt, the BNP will be working out now how to look good for the cameras and get the word, ‘victim,’ in as much as possible.

      The BBC have made the right decision for the right reasons. It (and, in all fairness - other broadcasters) are reaping what they have sown. By equating willy-waving shrill with debate they have dumbed down things to the level where the BNP are going on TV more-or-less on thier own terms.

      What we need urgently is a dumbing up - QT as it is now simply will not provide that, but it is not the BBC’s fault. That is politics as now. Sad.

      Lee John Barnes (POST 4) - There’s no need to sign your posts at the end of them.

    16. persephone — on 6th September, 2009 at 4:21 pm  

      Don @13 - thanks for clarifying, it explains alot. That LLB must be from the Unseen University a la Terry Pratchett

      Maid Marian @14 – excellent comment in the last sentence

    17. Lee John Barnes — on 6th September, 2009 at 6:00 pm  

      “Theres a book called True Professionalism that David Maister wrote for lawyers suggest you read it.”

      Would that be the one read by the lawyer scum who are growing rich exploiting the tax payers by riding on the race relations gravy train representing terrorists, liberals, marxists and assorted other traitors in order to destroy the British nation.

    18. MaidMarian — on 6th September, 2009 at 6:19 pm  

      Lee John Barnes - (16)

      You ride the race relations grvay train, do you not? Sure, you do it in a different way to the lawyers you talk about in such charming terms.

      But in terms of using race relations to build a profile and perpetuating identity politics, you and those lawyers are very much two cheeks of the same arse are you not?

    19. Don — on 6th September, 2009 at 6:30 pm  

      Lee (LLB),

      I doubt it. Sounds a bit management guru speak to me, but not exactly marxist.

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

      While you are here could you clear up a couple of points which speak to your credibility?

      Are you a lawyer?

      Are you gainfully employed?

      Thanks in anticipation.

    20. damon — on 6th September, 2009 at 6:34 pm  

      Lee John Barnes. My brother married a woman whose father was white English and whose mother is Moroccan Jewish.
      My brother’s mother-in-law is olive skinned and thought of herself as French when she was growing up there.
      She went to France at Moroccan independence with her family, then to England as a young woman while her sibligns went to Israel. She now has her immediate family in England and her wider family in Israel.
      Are her grandchildren (my niece and nephew) English and British or resident aliens or whatever?

    21. Don — on 6th September, 2009 at 6:44 pm  

      Damon,

      Short answer? They are niggers, yids and ragheads. Mongrels and cosmopolitan degenerates sapping the Nordic vitality. Dragging us down from the racial perfection which is Lee and Nick.

      Didn’t you know that?

    22. CarolineS — on 6th September, 2009 at 7:54 pm  

      The BBC’s invite has come about as a result purely as a result of the BNP agreeing to open up its membership to British citizens of ALL ethnicities, replacing its former “All-White” membership policy. Nick will have no trouble in winning over the People of Our Country to our Cause when they see him on a level playing field so long denied to us.NOW let them try to beat the party with the “Racist Stick” when Rajinder Singh stands for the BNP in a future election:

      http://tinyurl.com/mbwl3e

      The programme will be a first for the BNP, and, even if he is faced with a carefully selected hostile audience, Nick will wow the TV audience at home, I guarantee you!

    23. MaidMarian — on 6th September, 2009 at 7:57 pm  

      CarolineS (21) - Wow, playing victim and a date hasn’t even been set.

      Sod Nick, I’m impressed by you,

    24. Lee John Barnes — on 6th September, 2009 at 9:03 pm  

      Lee John Barnes. My brother married a woman whose father was white English and whose mother is Moroccan Jewish.
      My brother’s mother-in-law is olive skinned and thought of herself as French when she was growing up there.
      She went to France at Moroccan independence with her family, then to England as a young woman while her sibligns went to Israel. She now has her immediate family in England and her wider family in Israel.
      Are her grandchildren (my niece and nephew) English and British or resident aliens or whatever?

      That depends if they have British passports and are culturally British or not.

      If they are culturally British then they are Naturalised British Citizens (obviously) but if they have dual citizenship (but are not British culturally) then they are Naturalised British Citizens with dual nationality - in other words colonists.

      The BNP primarily represents the interests of the indigenous Ethnic British and the interests of all assimilated Naturalised British citizens who are British by culture regardless of their race - but we will never represent the interests of colonists.

      Those who have come here to impose their culture and way of life upon us are colonists - and not welcome regardless of their race.

      The Nazis were white and they were colonists intent on imposing a non-British political culture upon us - and they would have been resisted by the BNP as much as certain other colonists who are not white and who also seek to impose or establish political Islamism in our society.

      This is our country - assimilate or leave.

    25. Shatterface — on 6th September, 2009 at 9:14 pm  

      Put Lee Jon Barnes on. If they’re all as nakedly bigotted, their opposition need not even turn up.

    26. Lee John Barnes — on 6th September, 2009 at 9:29 pm  

      So ensuring Britain remains culturally British is ‘bigotted’ and that ensuring that Britain is not colonised by alien cultures and religions is also ‘biggoted’ is it ?

      I wonder if the people that run Israel, Iran, Saudi Arabia , Pakistan and India think that retaining their national cultures and religious identities is ‘biggotted’ ?

      I wonder how they would feel if a minority of white British evangelical christians entered their lands and tried to tell them how to live and tried to impose their minority culture on the majority - oh yeah, we did that didnt we it was called ‘Empire’ and that was ooohhh so evil and nasty wasnt it.

      But when we resist the same process we are ‘racists’.

      Fuck off you pathetic hypocritical liberal bastard.

      This is our country - assimilate or leave.

    27. damon — on 6th September, 2009 at 10:00 pm  

      Don @ 20.It looks like you’re wrong.

      My niece and nephew have only have ever had British passports and might just pass Lee’s British test.

      Although pale in complexion for most of the year, they do come back from holidays in the sun rather more evenly suntanned than the rest of my (west) Celtic-Norse folk community (ie Irish) family, who just tend to get more freckles and burn and peel … but that apart, it’s nice we don’t have too much to worry about.

      Lee, why don’t you leave? Get your mates together and buy an uninhabited Scottish island or something (with no internet access) and just live in peace together.

    28. Lee John Barnes — on 6th September, 2009 at 10:03 pm  

      Nah, we are gonna make all you snivelling liberal fascists leave.

      We wont surrender an inch of this nation to the colonists.

      Be packed and ready to leave all you Islamists and colonists.

      The BNP are coming.

    29. douglas clark — on 6th September, 2009 at 10:15 pm  

      Lee John Barnes @ 23,

      Do you have any idea how impractical your ideas are?

      I know quite a number of people who, when asked:

      “If you hate the fucking English, clap your hands”

      Would, indeed, clap their hands.

      (I wouldn’t, because almost without exception this has become an English web site and I actually like almost everyone that posts regularily here.)

      The aforesaid hand clapping mob would certainly tell you to get on your bike if you even claimed to speak for them. In fact, I think they would get a lot more annoyed than that.

      Just a few other words for yet another communitarian:

      So ensuring Britain remains culturally British is ‘bigotted’ and that ensuring that Britain is not colonised by alien cultures and religions is also ‘biggoted’ is it ?

      Err, yes it is. Well, it would be if it means electing arseholes like you and yours to define and determine what the fuck culturally British actually is?

      Is it a rejection of rap and a return to Morris dancing?

      Is it to reject Christianity and return to Wicca. (Well somebody imported Christianity, didn’t they?)

      Is it to confuse or pretend that our religious freedoms should only apply to religions ‘The Party’ approves of? A view you share with your intellectual equals, the Islamicists.

      And what does Lee John Barnes have to say about asylum seekers? What it his view on that?

      If I was an alien - a good old fashioned word for anyone not born here which has now been usurped by the likes of the brain dead Lee John Barnes - I would ask, with a puzzled look on my face, what exactly am I to assimilate too?

      Is it what a bunch of baldy thugs think British is? Perhaps they could assimilate to the Anti Fascist League? It is as British as the BNP.

      Or perhaps they could become Muslims. Or is a religion with a mosque established in 1889 not good enough?

      Or perhaps they could just clap their hands as some of my friends do. For they are just as British as you are Lee John Barnes. And they have never assimilated.

      It must be incredibly difficult to know just what you are supposed to assimilate too.

      But, and I shall say this only once, I wish you and your Islamicist chums would just find a fucking room somewhere…..

    30. douglas clark — on 6th September, 2009 at 10:23 pm  

      Lee John Barnes @ 27,

      The BNP are coming.

      I rather doubt that.

      You may be creaming yourself, right enough…

    31. Don — on 6th September, 2009 at 10:31 pm  

      Lee,

      Any chance of an answer to #18?

    32. douglas clark — on 6th September, 2009 at 10:42 pm  

      Doing a Sonia,

      Y’know what I really want?

      Does anyone care?

      It is simply that the centre has to hold against extremists of both persuasions.

      I find debating with the likes of Lee John Barnes a complete waste of time. He is frankly not a bright bulb in the chandelier, but then again Falcao equals him for idiocy.

      I’d like to hear whether anyone else sees our correspondence over the last few weeks as becoming increasingly divisive.

      I think that we have been invaded by folk that want to divide us, want to polarise discussion, and frankly tell lies to achieve their objective. That is not what I thought this place was about.

      Am I wrong?

    33. persephone — on 6th September, 2009 at 11:23 pm  

      @16

      You havent answered why you are not on the roll of the Law Society as all qualified solicitors have to be listed. If you are not I am fairly sure that it means

      a) you are not a qualified solicitor or
      b) you have been struck off by the Law Society

      Either answer begs the question as to why you are giving legal advice to the BNP?

    34. MaidMarian — on 6th September, 2009 at 11:28 pm  

      douglas clark (28) - ‘Do you have any idea how impractical your ideas are?’

      Don’t do it!!! Just walk away!!!

      Of course he knows he’s talking cobblers, that’s why he’s trying to draw people into discussing ideas on terms of talkboard pith.

      He will get to the, ‘yes, you kinda-sorta have a point,’ stage and that’s all that matters. Being practical or right is secondary from then on.

      Being a model of credibility doesn’t matter - he just wants to work the victimhood narrative in. At that point the line, ‘I don’t like the BNP but….,’ comes into play and that’s an identity politics win for these people.

      In your comment at 31 you are wrong to the extent that they do not want to polarise. They want to piggy-back onto the lazy, unquestioned talkboard belief that all must kick at mainstream political parties. Once they tag onto that belief, talkboard rants can easily be used to talk about how the BNP kinda-sorta have a point and mainstream politics is evil.

      A great dumbing up is needed.

    35. douglas clark — on 7th September, 2009 at 5:56 am  

      MaidMarian,

      Don’t do it!!! Just walk away!!!

      Of course he knows he’s talking cobblers, that’s why he’s trying to draw people into discussing ideas on terms of talkboard pith.

      Mybee aye, mybee naw. I understand better now how angry Sunny was when he started this site. And why I thought, and think, he talks a lot of sense.

      When you boil it all down, morons like Lee John Barnes claim a right, much like medieval kings, to speak on behalf of all of ‘us’. Claiming some sort of right that is completely and absolutely alien to me.

      Sunny started this site on the basic premise that no-one had the right to speak for him. A view I share.

      I am not going to surrender that principle to either Lee John Barnes nor his alter egos.

      My point @ 28 is this.

      Whilst I think there is no national identity as such, I think nearly everyone would fight to preserve our differences if we came under external attack. For we are not collaborators with the bullshit about blood and kith and kin that Lee John Barnes promulgates.

      I have a lot more in common with Sunny Hundal than I have with Lee John Barnes. And, whilst I disagree with our host quite a lot, on the points of general principle, I have a lot more in common with him than fucked up racists, whether they are white supremacists or brown supremacists.

      So, whilst I detest anyone that claims to speak for me, cf Lee John Barnes Esq, idiot of this parish, I also hate obvious charlatans that claim to speak for others.

      Which is what this site is supposed to be about.

      I think.

      Maybe Sunny would tell me if I am wrong.

    36. Lee John Barnes — on 7th September, 2009 at 9:04 am  

      This site is the equivalent of a goldfish bowl filled with little goldfish all agreeing with each other that the goldfish bowl represents the opinions of real people in the real world.

      Oh dear.

      The fact that you can state ” Or perhaps they could just clap their hands as some of my friends do. For they are just as British as you are Lee John Barnes. And they have never assimilated.

      It must be incredibly difficult to know just what you are supposed to assimilate too. ”

      The fact they have never assimilated means they are not British, and that is a view held by the majority.

      Only the minority of liberal traitors, crook and collaborators are prepared to clap their hands along with the Islamists and colonists.

      We know who claps their hands.

      And we deal with them the exact same way that they have been dealing with us. Thanks to our treatment at the hands of the hand clappers, we are more than prepared to give them back in kind what they have been giving us.

      Thats one thing we do have to thank the hand clappers for - they have prepared all the laws, all the bans, all the rules that we need to deal with the hand clappers like Douglas, the whining flaccid little pricks of a dying nation shrivelled into politically correct impotence by self loathing white liberal mugs, who believe we have no national identity.

      Pack your bags Douglas, because if you dont want to live in a Britain with a dominant British culture based on COMMONALITIES and not differences, then best you fuck off with the Islamists and colonists - as we intend to treat traitors like you just as we will treat them.

      You shall reap just what you have sown.

      What you have done to us - you will get back in return.

      Now wheres sunny - aint it about time he fed the fish.

    37. persephone — on 7th September, 2009 at 9:24 am  

      I take it from the lack of response to a simple question of being adequately qualified to do a job that the BNP were not able to recruit any half way decent qualified solicitor to be their legal adviser.

      It begs the question why not.

      It also negates any credibilty of the so called reportededly “legal adviser”

    38. persephone — on 7th September, 2009 at 10:12 am  

      Lee John Barnes, Legal Adviser to the BNP

      To add to the post @ 32 as to a few other reasons why a person may not be admitted as a solicitor by the Law Society:

      - no law firm has employed you successfully as a trainee solicitor AND you have not passed the Legal Practice Course (an academic qualification such as a BA in Law or LLB does not suffice though in some few cases you may have worked for a substantial time in a relevant role)

      - activity or background that conflicts with being a solicitor eg criminal activity

      - mental issues

      - conflict with professonal rules of conduct for eg Rule 6 is pertinent here see http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/code-of-conduct/216.article#r6-01

    39. Sunny — on 7th September, 2009 at 10:15 am  

      Maybe Sunny would tell me if I am wrong.

      Nope, you’re not wrong at all. We do.

    40. persephone — on 7th September, 2009 at 10:18 am  

      Use of the term Legal Adviser to the BNP:

      Reported references to Lee Jone Barnes as the legal adviser to the BNP is misleading but is used when the person is not a solicitor, barrister or lawyer. The majority of jo public commonly mistake the term legal adviser as meaning that a person is a fully qualified solicitor or lawyer or someone in the legal profession but that is not the case.

      The Law Society watchdog (Solicitors Regulatory Authority) give the following explanantion of which terms can be used:

      1. Lawyer

      Means a member of one of the following professions, entitled to practise as such:

      a) the profession of solicitor, barrister or advocate of the UK;

      b) a profession whose members are authorised to practise by an approved regulator other than the Solicitors Regulation Authority;

      © an Establishment Directive profession other than a UK profession;

      d) a legal profession which has been approved by the Solicitors Regulation Authority for the purpose of recognised bodies in England and Wales; or

      e) any other regulated legal profession which is recognised as such by the Solicitors Regulation Authority;

      2. Lawyer of England and Wales;

      Means a solicitor with a current practising certificate or an individual who is authorised to practise in England and Wales by an approved regulator other than the Solicitors Regulation Authority, but excludes a member of an Establishment Directive profession registered with the Bar Standards Board under the Establishment Directive;

      3. Legal profession - means a profession whose members are lawyers as defined in this rule

      From the above rules (of the country you espouse to be a true member of) you are not even in the legal profession but have to use the term legal adviser to get around that fact. I wonder if BNP members & wider public know that very important distinction?

    41. persephone — on 7th September, 2009 at 10:39 am  

      ” The day I submit my blog postings as case arguments to a court is the day I will worry about spelling mistakes.”

      Thats not the only thing you, the BNP & members need to worry about.

      Under what regulator/authority are you submitting case arguments in Court? Are you also conducting (unqualified) advocacy for the BNP? What about ‘legal’ advice given behind closed doors? The latter is a nebulous area & may depend on your word against Nick’s - am sure he can be trusted to do the right thing in such a predicament

      I hope the BNP have kept up to date with their Professional Indemnity insurance premiums … that is if the cover includes advice by a non legal professional … if not that may mean members fees may have to cover litigation costs

    42. douglas clark — on 7th September, 2009 at 11:48 am  

      Lee John Barnes @ 36,

      The fact they have never assimilated means they are not British, and that is a view held by the majority.

      So what ya gonna do about it? Their ancestors have lived here just as long as you have. And what is this shit about majoritarianism? You sir are the party of rootedness, if that is even a word. And my friends are as rooted here as you are. They, and I, hate you and your ilk, Lee John Barnes.

      We know who claps their hands.

      Jolly good Lee John Barnes. And we know, thanks to your membership list cock up exectly who you are too.

      Thats one thing we do have to thank the hand clappers for – they have prepared all the laws, all the bans, all the rules that we need to deal with the hand clappers like Douglas, the whining flaccid little pricks of a dying nation shrivelled into politically correct impotence by self loathing white liberal mugs, who believe we have no national identity.

      Hmm..

      I had a look. It is certainly flaccid, for discussing stuff with a moron like you is hardly likely to induce an erection. it is proabably little on the scale of things, so what, but it is neither impotent nor exactly shrivelled.

      Moving upwards from analogies about the relative merits of penile size, in my case we encounter a brain, a bear of very little brain perhaps, but not exactly none at all. Not too sure about what you have behind your completely odd head:

      http://lancasteruaf.blogspot.com/2009/07/strange-world-of-lee-john-barnes.html

      Were ypu attempting to look like Aleister Crowleys wee brother? I think you suceeded. Not safe for sensitive folk, what a freak!

      The article is a bit amusing too.

      Finally. finally, I think there is such a thing as national identity. I think it is about as illusive as the Higgs Boson, and of a lot less interest. Here’s a thought for you. I couldn’t care less who finds it or disproves it, but you haven’t a fucking clue, do you?

      There are larger concerns than your conceits.

    43. douglas clark — on 7th September, 2009 at 12:06 pm  

      Sunny Hundal @ 39,

      Thanks.

    44. fugstar — on 7th September, 2009 at 1:30 pm  

      i’m really interested in the audience more than the parties who are going to try and out self-righteousify eachother, whilst still subscribing the ideologies which coincide at certain points.

    45. Rumbold — on 7th September, 2009 at 1:58 pm  

      Lee John Barnes:

      Might you clarify what you mean by assimilate? Who decides what being British means? You?

    46. Ravi Naik — on 7th September, 2009 at 2:20 pm  

      In here, Lee John Barnes tries to explain their tactic:

      By the time we get on the show we will have amended the constitution - so when they throw the ‘racists’ and ‘nazis’ smear at us then Nick can legtimately say ‘we are a party that allows everyone to join the BNP, therefore we cannot be called Nazi or racist - except of course by fools, liars and scoundrels.

      Nick can say whatever he wants, but the fact is he was FORCED to open his membership to everyone. You can only claim that you are a non-racist party if you had opened your membership voluntarily, you got your chance, but now the EHRC has closed that door for you.

      Now, you, Nick and everyone at BNP central are racists. You dislike non-whites in Britain, and you dislike miscegenation. You claim that it is not a whites-only issue, but an indigenous one - yet, Andrew Brons is half-German, and the monarchy is comprised by European foreigners. I - and I suspect a lot of people - would at least respect you, if you had the guts and the courage to say:

      YES, we are RACISTS. We love our race so much, we want to preserve it. We do not believe that non-whites have a right to live here, unless they are here to serve us. Racism is not a bad thing, but a healthy feeling.

      But you don’t. Instead your party cowardly denies that it is racist - and reinforces that it is indeed a bad thing. And now, once again, by opening your membership to non-whites without a fight, you once again show that Nick Griffin is a politician which keeps on selling-out his ideology for the sake of power. This never ends well.

    47. Ravi NaiK — on 7th September, 2009 at 2:21 pm  

      In here, Lee John Barnes tries to explain their tactic:

      By the time we get on the show we will have amended the constitution - so when they throw the ‘racists’ and ‘nazis’ smear at us then Nick can legtimately say ‘we are a party that allows everyone to join the BNP, therefore we cannot be called Nazi or racist - except of course by fools, liars and scoundrels.

      Nick can say whatever he wants, but the fact is he was FORCED to open his membership to everyone. You can only claim that you are a non-racist party if you had opened your membership voluntarily, you got your chance, but now the EHRC has closed that door for you.

      Now, you, Nick and everyone at BNP central are racists. You dislike non-whites in Britain, and you dislike miscegenation. You claim that it is not a whites-only issue, but an indigenous one - yet, Andrew Brons is half-German, and the monarchy is comprised by European foreigners. I - and I suspect a lot of people - would at least respect you, if you had the guts and the courage to say:

      YES, we are RACISTS. We love our race so much, we want to preserve it. We do not believe that non-whites have a right to live here, unless they are here to serve us. Racism is not a bad thing, but a healthy feeling.

      But you don’t. Instead your party cowardly denies that it is racist - and reinforces that it is indeed a bad thing. And now, once again, by opening your membership to non-whites without a fight, you once again show that Nick Griffin is a politician which keeps on selling-out his ideology for the sake of power. This never ends well…

    48. Abdul Abulbul Emir — on 7th September, 2009 at 3:04 pm  

      Being British -what means it ?

      Would you like nasty BNP people to move into your neighbourhood Mr Rumbold. Of course not.
      You fear assimilation and cultural contamination from their knuckledragging ways.

      Being British means what you want.
      That’s all.

      Peace be upon me.

    49. douglas clark — on 7th September, 2009 at 3:37 pm  

      Rumbold @ 45,

      Exactly. It would be absurd for you and I to pretend that we agree on the political front.

      The fact that I think you are a jolly fine chap, and that we do agree about a lot of stuff suggests that whomsoever the alien happens to be would have a hard job assimilating.

      Would they side with me, or would they be obliged to side with you?

      Neither, perhaps.

      For I suspect they would be so shocked and horrified at the idiocy of Lee John Barnes Esq, that they would take an extremist position too.

      Oh! Joy!

      We are surrounded by nutcases.

      Please do not ban Lee John Barnes. Here is his photo:

      http://lancasteruaf.blogspot.com/2009/07/strange-world-of-lee-john-barnes.html

      What does that tell us?

    50. douglas clark — on 7th September, 2009 at 3:41 pm  

      Abdul Abulbul Emir,

      Yes, sort of…

      I tend to be a bit more lengthy.

    51. Shamit — on 8th September, 2009 at 12:43 am  

      Perse - This annihilation of Mr. LLB HONS was simply superb. You are a class act.

    52. Pounce — on 8th September, 2009 at 1:58 am  

      Message to Lee John Barnes.

      I have 5 medals serving this country, how many have you got? Thing is I have darkskin does that make me a traitor willing to sell this country out.

      If that is so could you explain why the BNP has a refuge in Croatia in case the balloon goes up?

      I mean at least I’m prepared to fight for my country.

    53. Jai — on 8th September, 2009 at 10:42 am  

      Brilliant investigative work, Persephone. Well done.

    54. Rumbold — on 8th September, 2009 at 11:33 am  

      Douglas:

      Lee John Barnes, is, in the nicest possible sense, rather odd. Harry’s Place is a particularly useful source of gossip on him.

      Well done Peresphone.

    55. douglas clark — on 8th September, 2009 at 11:51 am  

      Rumbold @ 53,

      True.

      But this is what he had to say about me:

      Thats one thing we do have to thank the hand clappers for – they have prepared all the laws, all the bans, all the rules that we need to deal with the hand clappers like Douglas, the whining flaccid little pricks of a dying nation shrivelled into politically correct impotence by self loathing white liberal mugs, who believe we have no national identity.

      Pack your bags Douglas, because if you dont want to live in a Britain with a dominant British culture based on COMMONALITIES and not differences, then best you fuck off with the Islamists and colonists – as we intend to treat traitors like you just as we will treat them.

      I am not complaining about this, I actually think it is quite amusing that a failing stage hypnotist - if his photo is anything to go by - thinks he has any validity whatsoever. Or that his threats are anything more than hoo hah. His interest in my cock seems a bit odd too, but there you go.

      You know I can call him out in Spades if I could be arsed. Oops, don’t want Lee John Barnes getting ideas now, do we?

      What a complete utter idiot.

      I expect I’ll have to go to South America or summat as I seem to have pissed off both the BNP and your new chum anobody.

      Ho, hum.

      I must be doing something right.

    56. Rumbold — on 8th September, 2009 at 12:01 pm  

      Douglas:

      Believe me, he is not my chum. In fact, He wants to deport me as well. But I don’t care.

    57. douglas clark — on 8th September, 2009 at 12:14 pm  

      Rumbold,

      I am talking about ‘anobody’ not Lee John Barnes. AFAIK ‘anobody’ hasn’t moved into the deportation racket just yet. All he does is accuse me of mental masturbation and the like. See a pattern here? Accuse people you don’t agree with of being perverted because neither Lee John Barnes nor ‘anobody’ could argue their way out of a wet paper bag.

      See here:

      douglas clark,

      you sir, are here purely to score cheap points, and self serve your ego, and to engage in mental masturbation.

      I am not here for these reasons at all. I suspect that anobody is the front end of an attempt to change the tone of the comments around here by polarising discussion and alienating anyone that doesn’t see life through his somewhat narrow prism. I think he is rather more narrow minded than he’d like to admit, but there you go. I may be wrong.

    58. sonia — on 8th September, 2009 at 1:00 pm  

      “But, and I shall say this only once, I wish you and your Islamicist chums would just find a fucking room somewhere….”

      Heh very well said Douglas - this is the core of the issue really. Islamists and the BNP have a lot in common: they both idealise their own particular ‘civilisation’. (and see nothing in common with each other, rather a fight to be the ‘alpha-male’)

      this kind of thinking is outmoded and unfortunately for the rest of us cosmpolitan individualists, the UK has for some reason, become their battleground.

      I suggest we get both lots up on QT/any other forum (and they feed off each other so it makes sense) to display their common hatred and prejudices, illiberal, static, fixed ‘groupthink’ and desire to be the top dogs and resistance to collaborate with the ‘Other’.

    59. sonia — on 8th September, 2009 at 1:09 pm  

      The fact of the matter is what is so worrying about the BNP and the Islamist types is that they favour a form of social authoritarianism which is very much predicated on ‘group belonging’ and ‘regulating’ what the individual members of that group should be doing.

      Which is what societies traditionally have been all about - and what the libertarian movements have all been working so hard to get away from! This affects All of us - anyone who is interested in individual freedom of identity. - it is not just a question of ‘race’ as that is one particular social construct around which a group can be built, but it can also apply to religion, and nationalism as well. (like Samuel Huntingdon is about “American” civilisation). (and any attempt to define ‘Britishness’ apart from the holding of citizenship runs the risk of falling into these traps!)

      “Assimilating” effectively means conforming to the Group’s idea of what its members ought to be doing, thinking, wearing, who they’re dating, etc.

      Now all groups do this to a certain extent, and again, the whole point of free societies is that we, as individuals, (which is how we experience reality!) have the ability, freedom, and choice, to live our lives as part of many groups, networks, identities and beliefs. it’s an ongoing battle..

      to the BNP and similar types of social authoritarians, we must say NO, we are individuals first and foremost, and we will say NO to controlling Groupthink.

    60. halima — on 8th September, 2009 at 4:11 pm  

      “Be packed and ready to leave all you Islamists and colonists.”

      Sunny, didn’t you write an article a while back saying the BNP’s campaign recently has intensified and is focusing on Muslims? Then everyone slammed you because aparently that wasn’t the case.

      http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/5160

    61. Rumbold — on 8th September, 2009 at 9:37 pm  

      Douglas:

      Oops. Crossed wires there. You are an excellent debator. People who insult you are just frustrated.

    62. douglas clark — on 8th September, 2009 at 9:55 pm  

      Sonia @ 57,

      Yes, an alpha male fight seems to me to be exactly what it is about.

      I agree with you about everyone being first and foremost an individual, but a heck of a lot of people seem to revel in being a big fish in a small pond, which would be some sort of pecking order if fish had beaks!

    63. persephone — on 8th September, 2009 at 10:57 pm  

      Shamit, Jai & Rumbold

      Thanks y’all

      But fairs fair, credit is due to Lee John Barnes (note*) as he provided so much material to work with.

      As with a lot of the BNP there is a deep well of silence when faced with facts. They only rear their heads on aspects revolving around ‘culture’, ‘assimilation’ where they seek to muddy the waters with their own brand of racism.

      Note * Why do people use their middles names? There can’t be more than one LJB who also dresses like a cross between Prince John and a cheap magician from Bognor Regis

    64. persephone — on 8th September, 2009 at 11:31 pm  

      @ 54 You may need to worry about his interests if you look anything like the photo of the fantasy man on his homepage.

      Its a photo of a diva-esque male naked apart from being clad in a diaphanous veil over the nether regions. I have learnt it is a Nordic God worshipped by Lee John Barnes.

    65. persephone — on 8th September, 2009 at 11:35 pm  

      If anyone has any heavyduty legal problems they need specialist advice on, LJB is offering free ‘legal’ advice & lawyers (ahem) who are ready to help on the most sophisticated and complicated legal issues as follows:

      http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/2008/11/legal-advice.html

    66. wannabe — on 29th January, 2010 at 1:48 am  

      Does anyone from the legal fraternity know who the solicitors for the BNP were at the county court hearing on 29 January 2010?

      I am looking for a training contract and would like to apply to firms who have absolutely no morals and are prepared to represent scumbags, hence i regard the prospect of training with the BNP’s solicitors to be ideal. Moreover, to be part of a team which is bleeding these fools seems very rewarding.

      Having read the preceding discussion, I have concluded that Lee Barnes is not a lawyer, and in all probability, he only managed a 2:2 at university, just like Der Fuhrer himself.

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.