Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old April 28th, 2013 #61
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy View Post
For starters what part of serious politics does instigating fights at wakes come under ?

After that you can explain just what role the thridway have in the attempt by the Bnp to recover their ground lost to UKIP
For starters you can explain:

a) what the f***k it has to do with you or indeed me in the first place
b) what a private wake organised by a bunch of friends has to do with a political activity
c) why you think I should know what the Third Way or the BNP are playing at - they're YOUR party, YOU find out
d) why the BNP lost ground to UKIP in the first f***ing place
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #62
Henry.
Senior Member
 
Henry.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,359
Henry.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bev View Post
Yes, the time and conditions are absolutely ripe for a nationalist or even civic party to make inroads and yet nothing. Build 'em up and knock 'em down has been used so many times that it's now expected so it comes as no surprise to see it happening to UKIP. What is a surprise is that UKIP has absolutely nothing in store to counteract it - the quickest and easiest response would be to say, as I did, that the Tories had their chance to offer up a referendum and they didn't. If they had - story destroyed. But they, like all our (not that UKIP are ours, exactly, but you get what I mean) other parties would just rather sit and moan about persecution and harassment and the Tories running scared and all the other platitudes they cough up.

The Tories ain't running scared at all - they know all they have to do is trot out another line like this and the target will sit scratching his head and not have a clue what to say. And it's not that the media would stifle a response - not with Twitter, FB, websites and everything else at the determined speaker's disposal. I don't suppose serious attempts at politics are half as much fun as bitching about - as you once put it - who stuck their tongues out at who in a pub this afternoon. The amount of replies on drama threads and on serious threads shows exactly what people are interested in most.
When Churchill (a hundred years ago) assisted the import of Jews into Britain, they poured into the working class areas of Britain taking control of certain industries which gave them access to the emerging trades union movement, and though they initially confined themselves to their own spheres of employment they were able - through amalgamations of small unions and the influence of the general congress - to take control of a body inittially created to represent the sole interests of the native working class: eventually they were able to turn the unions against those interests in favour of their own.

They were able to do this because they convinced the working man and woman that they (the Jews) are a 'bookish' people given to sobriety, diligence and a God driven commitment to universal justice. They convinced the people whom they sought to exploit that they could trust the children of God to do their bidding for them.

Griffin (though hardly teatotal) pulled a similar trick when he played the Pied Piper of Nationalism. But he (like those Russian Jews, before him) didn't lead the angry young men of Britain to the Promised Land - instead he helped deliver them en masse and on time to their own graveside.
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #63
andy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 12,833
andy
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bev View Post
For starters you can explain:

a) what the f***k it has to do with you or indeed me in the first place
b) what a private wake organised by a bunch of friends has to do with a political activity
c) why you think I should know what the Third Way or the BNP are playing at - they're YOUR party, YOU find out
d) why the BNP lost ground to UKIP in the first f***ing place
A. Your comrades were acting in their NF capacity
B. The sole reason for their attack was the politics of the victim
c. You are a great fan of theirs and have shamelessly endorsed the two recent articles I posted here from the official Bnp website.
D. That one is easy, because Griffin did not take my advice to relaunch the Bnp as a civic nationalist party after his Euro election win. I recall that you also opposed this strategy right here at vnnuk. Now we have a situation
__________________
The above post is as always my opinion

Chase them into the swamps
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #64
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy View Post
A. Your comrades were acting in their NF capacity
B. The sole reason for their attack was the politics of the victim
c. You are a great fan of theirs and have shamelessly endorsed the two recent articles I posted here from the official Bnp website.
D. That one is easy, because Griffin did not take my advice to relaunch the Bnp as a civic nationalist party after his Euro election win. I recall that you also opposed this strategy right here at vnnuk. Now we have a situation
a) Says who? What don't you understand about the words "privately arranged wake"?

b) Again, says who? There are two sides to the story.

c) Links to my being a fan or endorsing them? No? Thought not.

d) It became civic nationalist after the interference of Trevor Phillips. People didn't vote two MEPs in on the strength that they were UKIP with a prettier coloured rosette. They voted them in BECAUSE they were perceived and media-painted up as racist.

Quote:
Civic nationalism



1. Nationhood is defined by common citizenship



A. A civic nation consists of all those who subscribe to its

political creed.



--regardless of ethnicity

--or race, color, religion, gender, language



B. A civic nation is in principle a community



--of equal, rights-bearing citizens

--united in patriotic attachment

--to a shared set of political practices and values.

e.g. legitimacy of 1960s civil rights movement in USA



C. A civic nation is “democratic” in the sense that



--it vests sovereignty in all of the people (all citizens);

--a civic nation-state claims self-governing rights and rights for its citizens

vis a vis other nation-states



D. Civic nationalism is exemplified by creation of British

nation-state in the late 18th century



--out of the English,

the Welsh, the Scots, and the Irish



--united by a civic rather than an ethnic definition

of belonging



--& by attachment to civic institutions like Parliament

& the rule of law
https://www.msu.edu/user/hillrr/161l...tm?iframe=true

Is this what you want? Is my not fancying this what you're endlessly bitching at me for?
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #65
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
British conservative cabinet minister Ken Clarke has described some people intending to vote the UK Independence Party (UKIP) in the upcoming local elections as racists.


Speaking to Sky News Murnaghan programme on Sunday, the minister without portfolio accused the party of having no positive policies and being merely "against" immigrants and foreigners.

Clarke also described UKIP candidates for Thursday's English local elections as “clowns” and “indignant, angry people” and warned that they should not be allowed to control county councils in England.

"They (UKIP leaders) of course have not been able to vet their candidates. Fringe right parties do tend to collect a number of waifs and strays,” he said.

It comes as UKIP said the Tories conduct a "morally reprehensible" smear campaign against its would-be councilors in local elections.

Asked whether he agreed with British Prime Minister David Cameron's assessment in 2006 that the party was full of "fruitcakes and closet racists", Clarke replied, "I have met people who satisfy both those descriptions in UKIP.”

According to a recent YouGov poll for the Sunday Times, Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats with support levels of 31 and 11 percent respectively, were put behind the Labour's 40 percent support. It also found that the current vote share for the UKIP stands at 11 percent.
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/0...ed-as-racists/
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #66
Henry.
Senior Member
 
Henry.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,359
Henry.
Default

Quote:
"They (UKIP leaders) of course have not been able to vet their candidates. Fringe right parties do tend to collect a number of waifs and strays,” he said.
Two thousand years of British people and culture has, within one or two generations, been reduced to 'a number of waifs and strays' by a fat old drunk who calls himself 'conservative' yet people still think they have a chance of turning things around under this 'democratic' system!

They're living in Cloud cuckoo land and don't even know it....The old ways are spent and have been for quite some time.

Time to sober up and fight or go back down the pub and throw insults and glasses at each other?....That's the only choice for them to make now.
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #67
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry. View Post
Two thousand years of British people and culture has, within one or two generations, been reduced to 'a number of waifs and strays' by a fat old drunk who calls himself 'conservative' yet people still think they have a chance of turning things around under this 'democratic' system!

They're living in Cloud cuckoo land and don't even know it....The old ways are spent and have been for quite some time.

Time to sober up and fight or go back down the pub and throw insults and glasses at each other?....That's the only choice for them to make now.
.....and with 24 hour opening, the choice is an easy one.

How, I ask rhetorically, the f**k did we become reduced to this?

Still chasing after a few electoral crumbs when Phillips made it more than clear after the Euros that we weren't allowed near their cake.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #68
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry. View Post
When Churchill (a hundred years ago) assisted the import of Jews into Britain, they poured into the working class areas of Britain taking control of certain industries which gave them access to the emerging trades union movement, and though they initially confined themselves to their own spheres of employment they were able - through amalgamations of small unions and the influence of the general congress - to take control of a body inittially created to represent the sole interests of the native working class: eventually they were able to turn the unions against those interests in favour of their own.

They were able to do this because they convinced the working man and woman that they (the Jews) are a 'bookish' people given to sobriety, diligence and a God driven commitment to universal justice. They convinced the people whom they sought to exploit that they could trust the children of God to do their bidding for them.

Griffin (though hardly teatotal) pulled a similar trick when he played the Pied Piper of Nationalism. But he (like those Russian Jews, before him) didn't lead the angry young men of Britain to the Promised Land - instead he helped deliver them en masse and on time to their own graveside.
You'd think that after all he did for them, they'd have nominated him to grace at least a £20 instead of the humble fiver.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #69
Henry.
Senior Member
 
Henry.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,359
Henry.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bev View Post
.....and with 24 hour opening, the choice is an easy one.

How, I ask rhetorically, the f**k did we become reduced to this?
From Arnold White's The Modern Jew (1899)

Quote:
INTRODUCTION xi

Amid the muttering of popular enmity on the
Continent England has pursued her even way. The
immigration into this country of the poor of other lands
is now almost entirely restricted to persons of the
Jewish race. The legislation contemplated by the
Marquis of Salisbury when in Opposition has not been
brought forward by his Government when in power.
Whatever may have been the reasons for the abstention
of Lord Salisbury's Government from dealing with the
Destitute Alien Question, there is no doubt that their
decision was a prudent one, unless they were prepared
to deal with the Jewish Question, and to be governed
by the facts of the situation. The present immigration
of debased and impoverished Jews from the slums of
the Russian Ghetto, however undesirable and hurtful
to the English people, has not yet attained dimensions
sufficient to lift the controversy out of the arena of
party strife. When, however, the manifest destiny of
the French people, the insurrection of the peasantry
and gentry of Central Europe against non-moral
capitalist domination, and the bursting of the bonds in
the Russian Pale have liberated a torrent of Jews who
must fly for safety, it should not be forgotten that
England is the one reservoir available for refugees. It
is because our rulers and statesmen generally do not
appear to have given serious thought to the conse-
quences of the coming invasion that I have attempted
to set forth in this book some of the facts of the case.

To make the people of England think is the object
of this book. If they refuse to think betimes, they will
wake up one morning only to discover that they have
parted with the realities of national life, and are domin-
ated by cosmopolitan and materialist influences fatal
to the existence of the English nation.

Dangers may be predicted from facts which may be
unwelcome but cannot be denied. Each immigrant
foreign Jew settling in this country joins, not the
English community as the Huguenots and Hollander
refugees from the Roman Catholic prosecutions of the
seventeenth century joined us, but a community
proudly separate, racially distinct, and existing prefer-
entially aloof. Members of this community for succes-
sive generations, except in rare instances, decline to
intermarry with non-Jews, maintain a different Sabbath,
consume a different food, and are tied to alien com-
munities of their own race and faith in other lands by
closer bonds than any that unite them to the country of
their adoption. This Jewish island in the sea of
English life is small to-day. Few trades, interests, or
classes are so directly affected by it as to create mis-
giving in the pubhc mind that a danger menacing to
national life has begun in our midst, is growing, and
must be abated if sinister consequences are to be
avoided. There are two methods, and only two, in
which the evil results of a Jewish imperium inside the
English Empire can be obviated. It can be destroyed
and its members expelled as was done in the thirteenth
century in most countries in Europe, including England,
and is likely to be done over again in France before
many years have passed, or the Jewish community,
frankly recognising the peril that besets them, must
review their conduct and heartily work for instead of
against the process of absorption which in two genera-
tions made French Protestants of the day of Louis XIV.



INTRODUCTION xiii

an integral part of the English people. So far the
enormous majority of them have resolutely declined
even to consider methods which they allege would
obliterate their racial entity as Jews. Except among
the Jewish aristocracy, they refuse to intermarry, and
while seeking no proselytes to their own faith, their
proudest consciousness lies in the conviction that Jeho-
vah has set them apart among the nations and destines
them to a future more glorious and responsible than
any that awaits the less gifted and favoured followers
of the Nazarene. They have, they say, a mission and
a message to the Gentiles.

England, therefore, is in this dilemma : She is either
compelled to abandon her secular practice of com-
placent acceptance of every human being choosing to
settle on these shores, or to face the certainty of the
Jews becoming stronger, richer, and vastly more
numerous ; with the corresponding certainty of the
press being captured as it has been captured on the
Continent, and the national life stifled by the substitu-
tion of material aims for those which, however faultily,
have formed the unselfish and imperial objects of the
Englishmen who have made the Empire. If it be
objected that the jews of the future are no less likely
than the Englishmen of the past to govern England
well, unselfishly, and with a high ideal for our national
life, the answer is simple. Jews are not likely to con-
sider or treat the English with greater tenderness than
they have considered and treated their own brethren
under dire persecution. When Russia girded up her
loins, like Pharaoh, to smite the Children of Israel, and
inflicted burdens grievous to be borne upon the



INTRODUCTION

wretched denizens of the poverty stricken Pale, the
rich Jews of Europe, with few important exceptions,
chose that opportunity to lend Russia the money that
enabled her, among other things, to rivet the chains of
ascendency on her Jewish subjects. Humanity does
not change its spirit in a day, a week, or a century, and
we English have no right, therefore, to anticipate that
when the Jews arrive at the position in Great Britain
which they occupy in France to-day, the conduct
of the bulk of them will be more humane, enlightened,
or unselfish towards us than it has been towards the
French or still more towards their six million co-
religionists in the Russian Ghetto.

Those who are only acquainted with the faultless
civic and social life of Anglicised Jewish subjects of the
Queen are scarcely in a position to judge of the dangers
which menace us as a nation, and which menace the
English Jews along with the rest of their fellow
subjects. In all countries and throughout the centuries,
recurrent phenomena attending the protection, equality,
popularity, strength, vices, and final ejection of the
Jewish community are constant ; and seem to form a
code of inexorable law which, to be understood, must
be examined. The mild spirit of Christian forbearance
has promoted the undue economic predominance of a
more powerful and intolerant race. When the spirit
of Christianity began to wane in France, the religious
indifference which followed the Revolution removed
the checks to Jewish prosperity, and there, whether by
Christian forbearance or religious indifference, no im-
pediment to the aloofness of Israel exists. The intoler-
ance of Christendom towards the Jews is reflected by



INTRODUCTION xv

an intolerance even deeper and more lasting of Judaism
towards non-Jews. They resemble the Roman Catholic
Church in this, that until they have obtained freedom
and equality they are humbler, more suppliant, and
meeker than other men ; but when once equality is
accorded, the spiritual despotism of Rome herself is not
more absolute than the iron intolerance of the prosper-
ous but non-spiritual Jew.

So long as one-half of Europe worships a Jew, and
the other half a Jewess ; while the engine of inter-
national finance is under Jewish control, and while
public opinion is medicated by Jewish influence over
the European press, the Jews will continue to be in
the future, as they have been in the past, the most
interesting people in the world. A race that baffled
the Pharaohs, foiled Nebuchadnezzar, thwarted Rome,
defeated feudalism, circumvented the Romanoffs,
baulked the Kaiser, and undermined the Third French
Republic presents ample material for legitimate curi-
osity. Secular exposure to the persecutions of ignorant
peoples and a sullen priesthood, Jewish tribulation,
and Jewish triumphs alternately compel the attention
of mankind. For many centuries the persecution of
the Jews assumed a religious form. Christian rulers,
at the instance of sacerdotal apprehensions, argued that
their own faith was so manifestly the right one, and the
creed of Israel so plainly wrong, that it was held to be
impossible that any Jew could be sincere in his religious
belief. For many generations the Jewish Question
assumed this form. Modern liberalism, which is often
but a synonym for the decay of faith, has dispelled the
fog that enveloped both Jews and Gentiles when Israel



xvi INTRODUCTION

was brought into collision with the Familiars of the
Spanish Inquisition. Later on, when the French Revo-
lution had crystallised in men's minds their dormant
longings for visible equality, the Jewish Question once
more changed. Hebrew prosperity attracted hostility,
hitherto directed against the lineal descendants of the
murderers of Christ because of the participation of
their ancestors in the greatest crime recorded in
history.

The virtue of prosperity is temperance ; the virtue of
adversity is fortitude. Prosperity is the blessing of the
Old Testament, as Bacon reminds us ; adversity is the
blessing of the New. But the Jew, who through all
ages has rivalled the Spartan in fortitude, has never
acquired the grace of bearing prosperity with temper-
ance. The virtues of Israel, discovered during long
stretches of calamity, bid fair to be forgotten by the
nations, in view of the vices exhibited by a few revellers
in the boundless prosperity of material success.

Notwithstanding, the Jews are increasing by leaps
and bounds, in numbers, in wealth, in sorrows, in
calamity, and poverty. If the antipathy of the Middle
Ages, inspired by their denial of the Founder of the
faith of Christendom, has passed away, it has been
succeeded by antagonism partly nourished from the
ranks of the Jews themselves. At the end of the
nineteenth century the nations are beginning to feel
the presence of a new and growing power in their
midst. Intellectual superiority. Oriental subtlety, and
the training of sorrow accredit the Jews with a complex
and mysterious power denied to any other living race.
They are found in all nations, but, like the Gulf Stream,



INTRODUCTION xvii

they remain apart from the mass of the ocean around
them. They are found in every range of social and
intellectual development. The Jew of the Russian
Pale differs from the Jew Anglicised for three genera-
tions as the Circassian differs from a Spaniard. Although
the only true cosmopolitan people in the world, with
the exception of the Gitanos, they reflect, like the
chameleon, the texture and the tint of the rock on
which they rest. They are divided into as many classes
as the Christians. Their education, employments,
habits, politics, and ideals vary as widely as among the
Gentiles. They are too often credited with a general
solidarity to which they can lay no claim. Unanimity
of view is like one form of crystallisation : it is some-
times the result of pressure. When the pressure of
persecution is removed, as in England or America,
Jewish unity may be sought for in vain on those subjects
upon which the English and American people differ
among themselves. Universal agreement on minor
matters among a race so quick witted and somewhat
quarrelsome is not to be expected. Still, in spite of
their differences of opinion, and although scattered
over the face of the earth, the Jews maintain a secret
and indissoluble bond of common interest. When
attacked from outside, Jewry presents a single front to
the enemy.

Notwithstanding the solidarity and aloofness of the
Jewish race, many of the leading exponents of Israelite
opinion constantly deny the existence of a Jewish
Question. It is my object in the following pages to
describe it.
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #70
andy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 12,833
andy
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bev View Post
a) Says who? What don't you understand about the words "privately arranged wake"?

b) Again, says who? There are two sides to the story.

c) Links to my being a fan or endorsing them? No? Thought not.

d) It became civic nationalist after the interference of Trevor Phillips. People didn't vote two MEPs in on the strength that they were UKIP with a prettier coloured rosette. They voted them in BECAUSE they were perceived and media-painted up as racist.



https://www.msu.edu/user/hillrr/161l...tm?iframe=true

Is this what you want? Is my not fancying this what you're endlessly bitching at me for?
Ignatieff doesn't know his arse from his elbow, he prove it in spades when he turned up at the old ancestoral home in the Ukraine and found the locals had not forgotten nor forgiven the russian settlers (The Ignatieff's ) and told him so to his face.
That aside facts are facts and being borne out this minute. The racial nationalist legally registered party does not get any power (NF) . The non racial legally registered political party (UKIP) does. It follows that in the era of the legally registered political party that if you want any political power then you had better change your tactics and your policies to suit. Changing them to the pro hamas thridway does not look like a good strategy to me as Griffin is finding out ( If he even gives a fuck that is )
__________________
The above post is as always my opinion

Chase them into the swamps
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #71
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy View Post
The racial nationalist legally registered party does not get any power (NF) . The non racial legally registered political party (UKIP) does.
What is the point in two UKIPS? If YOU think the sun shines out of Farage's arse and that we're all British together as long was we squeeze out a tear at God Save The Queen and can name the PM who was in during WWII, then you join UKIP and let everyone else be.

Quote:
It follows that in the era of the legally registered political party that if you want any political power then you had better change your tactics and your policies to suit.
Seeing as Labour is ahead in most polls, why don't we just change our policies to match theirs and then we can claim they stole our march? There's no f***ing point in formulating policies around something you don't believe and that the voters don't want. If they wanted UKIP, there'd be a few UKIP MPs. There aren't.

Like I said and like you ignored - the BNP got two MEPs when the media had been telling the world for months that Griffin was a waycist fashist narzee.

As soon as they change to the Phillips-instigated "as long as he wants to be British then he's British" the votes plummeted. Sure, other factors played a part but these were largely internet based and not something the average voter was aware of.

It follows, therefore, that the BNP the voters wanted was the BNP as they thought it was pre-Phillips.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #72
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry. View Post
From Arnold White's The Modern Jew (1899)
Quote:
To make the people of England think is the object
of this book. If they refuse to think betimes, they will
wake up one morning only to discover that they have
parted with the realities of national life, and are domin-
ated by cosmopolitan and materialist influences fatal
to the existence of the English nation.

....and that's exactly what has happened. Exactly.

That there was a cleverly orchestrated plan to destroy our identity and hand our destiny over to foreign powers cannot be denied.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #73
Henry.
Senior Member
 
Henry.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,359
Henry.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bev View Post
....and that's exactly what has happened. Exactly.

That there was a cleverly orchestrated plan to destroy our identity and hand our destiny over to foreign powers cannot be denied.
White had not been an anti-semite but that changed when one of the richest Jews in the world, Baron de Hirsch, commisioned him to visit the Russian Pale to assess the condition and suitability of the Jews there in regard to his well-meaning project of removing them to Argentina.

What Arnold White discovered changed him as a man while the Jews who took up Hirsch's kind offer sucked every last penny from the Baron's great fortune.
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #74
andy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 12,833
andy
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bev View Post
What is the point in two UKIPS? If YOU think the sun shines out of Farage's arse and that we're all British together as long was we squeeze out a tear at God Save The Queen and can name the PM who was in during WWII, then you join UKIP and let everyone else be.



Seeing as Labour is ahead in most polls, why don't we just change our policies to match theirs and then we can claim they stole our march? There's no f***ing point in formulating policies around something you don't believe and that the voters don't want. If they wanted UKIP, there'd be a few UKIP MPs. There aren't.

Like I said and like you ignored - the BNP got two MEPs when the media had been telling the world for months that Griffin was a waycist fashist narzee.

As soon as they change to the Phillips-instigated "as long as he wants to be British then he's British" the votes plummeted. Sure, other factors played a part but these were largely internet based and not something the average voter was aware of.

It follows, therefore, that the BNP the voters wanted was the BNP as they thought it was pre-Phillips.
You can claim until your b lue in the face that the electorate voted for the Bnp to reopen aushwitz but it is not true. The electorate voted for the Bnp despite the system media portrayal not to endorse reopening aushwitz but because they took Griffin at his word that they (The Bnp ) were a non racist post fascist political party for British patriots.
It is self evident and subsequent events prove it that there is not large swathe of the electorate in that locale that are neo nutzi skinhead yobbos, your failure to accept this simple fact is laughable.
Re launching political parties is quite normal in the domain of legally registered political parties, the Bnp could have, should have and did not because Griffin did not want to for unknown reasons and Brons didn't have a clue in the first place. Brons probably thought he was attending a cheese and wine soiree when he attended the count. Certainly his after election speech must rank as the most underwhelming reaction to a siesmic shift in the UK'spolitical spectrum ever shopwn by a politician.
UKIP was/ is promoted solely to stop respectable British patriots from voting for the Bnp. That you do not realise this anymore than Griffin does is not surprising. What with his espousal of thridway crap and your own attachment to milnerism one cannot expect you (or he ) to have a danny about politics in the first place
__________________
The above post is as always my opinion

Chase them into the swamps
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #75
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy View Post
You can claim until your b lue in the face that the electorate voted for the Bnp to reopen aushwitz but it is not true.
Except I didn't claim that, did I?

Quote:
The electorate voted for the Bnp despite the system media portrayal not to endorse reopening aushwitz but because they took Griffin at his word that they (The Bnp ) were a non racist post fascist political party for British patriots.
You've asked every single voter, have you? You've asked every single one WHY they voted BNP? No? Didn't think so.

Quote:
It is self evident and subsequent events prove it that there is not large swathe of the electorate in that locale that are neo nutzi skinhead yobbos, your failure to accept this simple fact is laughable.
Where have I intimated that? I haven't.

However, it's noted that those locales have high levels of immigration AND had pro-immigrant or indeed immigrant councillors. Any rational person would therefore deduce that the BNP vote was an anti=immigrant vote from people sick of the pre-election conditions.

Quote:
Re launching political parties is quite normal in the domain of legally registered political parties, the Bnp could have, should have and did not because Griffin did not want to for unknown reasons and Brons didn't have a clue in the first place. Brons probably thought he was attending a cheese and wine soiree when he attended the count. Certainly his after election speech must rank as the most underwhelming reaction to a siesmic shift in the UK'spolitical spectrum ever shopwn by a politician.
Remember the Phillips caper, do you? It was forcibly relaunched post court result with a changed consitution. ie: it did what you wanted. How's the vote been since?


Quote:
UKIP was/ is promoted solely to stop respectable British patriots from voting for the Bnp. That you do not realise this anymore than Griffin does is not surprising. What with his espousal of thridway crap and your own attachment to milnerism one cannot expect you (or he ) to have a danny about politics in the first place
Those who can be arsed can search back and find that I was one of if not the first to say that UKIP was a state valve designed to take the BNP vote.

I don't have a danny about pollitics? Maybe not, but a) at least I know that Randolph Hearst stood for election and more importantly b) I know what I want from a party and dancing round the maypole on St George's Day with all the New Britons ain't it so you can take your civic nationalism and shove it where you keep your political science degree.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #76
andy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 12,833
andy
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bev View Post
Except I didn't claim that, did I?



You've asked every single voter, have you? You've asked every single one WHY they voted BNP? No? Didn't think so.



Where have I intimated that? I haven't.

However, it's noted that those locales have high levels of immigration AND had pro-immigrant or indeed immigrant councillors. Any rational person would therefore deduce that the BNP vote was an anti=immigrant vote from people sick of the pre-election conditions.



Remember the Phillips caper, do you? It was forcibly relaunched post court result with a changed consitution. ie: it did what you wanted. How's the vote been since?




Those who can be arsed can search back and find that I was one of if not the first to say that UKIP was a state valve designed to take the BNP vote.

I don't have a danny about pollitics? Maybe not, but a) at least I know that Randolph Hearst stood for election and more importantly b) I know what I want from a party and dancing round the maypole on St George's Day with all the New Britons ain't it so you can take your civic nationalism and shove it where you keep your political science degree.
Pathetic response unworthy of further comment
__________________
The above post is as always my opinion

Chase them into the swamps
 
Old April 28th, 2013 #77
andy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 12,833
andy
Default

One interesting thing from the UKIP email revelations was that they are considering purchasing policies from right wing think tanks. Is there any evidence in the big three accounts that they are purchasing policies from think tanks ? Certainly call me dave wants to see about getting his money back on the olympics,doreen lawrence and the hug a hoody strategies.
__________________
The above post is as always my opinion

Chase them into the swamps
 
Old April 29th, 2013 #78
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
Boris Johnson today warned the Tories not to ‘freak out’ at the rise of the UK Independence Party, days before crucial local elections.

The London Mayor said UKIP’s leader Nigel Farage was a ‘rather engaging geezer’ whose ‘pint and cigar and sense of humour’ appeal and anti-EU policies should not mean bad news for the Conservatives.

But Mr Farage sought to escalate the row between the two parties, hitting back at claims that his party is supported by ‘racists’ and dismissing revelations about online rants by candidates as 'silly things' posted after they have 'been to the pub'.


UKIP policies and personnel have come under intense scrutiny in recent days, ahead of council elections on Thursday.

Mr Farage’s party is fielding a record 1,700 candidates but has been dogged by allegations of anti-semitism and membership of the British National Party among those standing for election.


Two UKIP candidates have been suspended amid claims of alleged racism. Anna-Maria Crampton from East Sussex allegedly made comments blaming Jewish people for the Holocaust, and Sue Bowen is a former BNP member.

FAMILY OF EX-LABOUR CABINET MINISTER DEFECT TO UKIP
Liz Shore, son-in-law Bob Smith and daughter Tacy Smith have switched from Labour to UKIP

The family of a former Labour Cabinet minister has defected to the UK Indepdence Party.

Liz Shore, the widow of Peter who served as Trade Secretary under Harold Wilson and Environment Secretary in Jim Callaghan's government, has switched to the anti-EU party.

She will stand for UKIP in elections to Cornwall's unitary council.

Mrs Shore, 85, said: 'I have been against the Common Market since day one and voted against it in the referendum in 1975 – but this is for county not for country.'

Her daughter Tacy and and her husband Bob have also moved from Labour to UKIP to stand in Thursday's poll.

Richard Wilkins, a candidate on the Isle of Wight, said Mick Philpott, who killed his six children in a fire, should have faced ‘chemical castration’ so he could not have claimed so much in benefits.

Chris Scotton, a candidate in Leicester, has a Facebook page endorsing the far-right English Defence League.

Mr Farage insisted he did not have the resources to 'vet' all of the party's candidates.

'This is a problem of social media – people get on Facebook, they got on Twitter and very often at night, possibly after they’ve been at the pub or whatever, people say very silly injudicious things.

'And what has happened here is a lot of money is being spent by Tory central office going through thousands of comments made.'

A new analysis of UKIP tax policies and spending promises also suggested a £120billion ‘black hole’.

It also emerged that both Labour and the Conservatives want to block the UKIP leader from the TV debates expected to be held ahead of the 2015 general election.

The Tories appear split on how to respond to the rise of UKIP, which believes it can reach more than 14 per cent in this week’s elections.

Cabinet minister Ken Clarke said UKIP was a bunch of ‘clowns’ and he had met supporters who ‘satisfy’ David Cameron’s 2006 assessment that UKIP is packed with ‘fruitcakes and closet racists’.

The party is also ‘against foreigners, it’s against immigrants’, he added.



Almost 10,000 people are contesting almost 2,500 seats on in local elections in England and Wales on May 2
Mr Farage, pictured in London today, insisted other parties have members who used to have links with the BNP

LABOUR JOIN TORIES IN BLOCKING UKIP FROM TV LEADER'S DEBATES
The 2010 TV leader's debates

Labour leader Ed Miliband wants to block the UK Independence Party from having a role in the TV leader's debates, it emerged today.

The Tories were already opposed to the idea of giving UKIP leader Nigel Farage equal status ahead of the 2015 general election.

Labour had thought UKIP would only damage the Tories' election hopes.

But strategists now fear UKIP's 'brand of anti-politics could damage all three main parties i unpredictable ways,' The Guardian reported.

Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg enjoyed a surge in the polls in the 2010 polls as a relatively unknown figure alongside David Cameron and Gordon Brown.

But today Mr Johnson struck a more conciliatory tone, warning the party not to ‘freak out’ in the style of Hollywood actor Nicholas Cage in a many of his films.

Writing in his newspaper column, the London Mayor said: ‘Take Nigel Farage, whom I met years ago and who has always struck me as a rather engaging geezer.

‘He’s anti-pomposity, he’s anti-political correctness, he’s anti-loony Brussels regulation. He’s in favour of low tax, and sticking up for small business, and sticking up for Britain.

‘We Tories look at him – with his pint and cigar and sense of humour – and we instinctively recognise someone who is fundamentally indistinguishable from us,’ he wrote in the Daily Telegraph.

‘Omigaaaad, we say to ourselves: they’re stealing our schtick! And we are tempted to do a Nicolas Cage – to overreact, to freak out, to denounce them all as frauds or worse.

‘I think there may have been a few ill-advised insults flying around in the past couple of days.’

Almost 10,000 people in total are contesting almost 2,500 seats in local elections in England and Wales.

Election experts predict UKIP could can up to 40 council seats on May 2, with the Tories and Lib Dems braced for heavy losses.

Mr Farage suggested the attacks on his party were proof that the Tories have ‘lost the argument’.


The Tories swept the board in 2009, turning the electoral map almost entirely blue. Four years on they are under pressure from Labour, the Lib Dems and UK Independence Party

‘Ken Clarke and others have decided that, rather than going for the ball, they are going to attack the player and that is exactly what this is about,’ he told ITV’s Daybreak.

‘They know that the British public are genuinely concerned about opening up the door to Bulgaria and Romania next year.

‘They are concerned because we have a million youngsters unemployed, we have wages being driven down and I am afraid a crime wave in London being caused by Romanians already.
UKIP TAX AND SPENDING PLAN HAS '£120BILLION BUDGET BLACKHOLE'

There is a £120billion black hole in UKIP’s election manifesto, it emerged today.

It includes a combination of tax cuts worth £90billion and an extra £30billion in spending, The Times said.

The manifesto promises to lead the European Union, saving £6.4billion-a-year.

But it contains a raft of big spending promises, including boot camps for young offenders, doubling prison places and detention centres for asylum seekers.

It also promises a 25 per cent flat rate of tax, axing national insurance contributions for employers costing £50billion, abolishing inheritance costing £.3billion, cutting carbon taxes £3.8billion, allowing councils to keep VAT receipts worth £10billion.

There is also a pledge to increase defence spending by 40 per cent, costing £16billion-a-year. There would also be an extra £4billiuon in extra spending on military equipment.

Tory MP Charlie Elphicke told The Times: ‘It is clear that there is a £120 billion financial black hole in UKIP's economic plans.

‘If implemented we would end up going the way of Cyprus and Greece much faster even than if we had a Labour government.

'UKIP's wacky policies can only be paid for by a massive increase in borrowing or wholescale sacking of teachers, doctors and nurses.’

The UKIP manifesto also includes county referendums on the hunting ban and a return to smoking in pubs.

UKIP leader Nigel Farage recently admitted his tax policy is ‘incomplete… it need more work’ as he claimed the party’s manifesto sets out ‘aspirations’ rather than concrete promises.

‘These are tough subjects to talk about. All we are doing is talking the truth. There is nothing in UKIP that is racist in any way at all and Ken Clarke knows it. If he throws this abuse out, we will start having a proper debate.’

UKIP is investigating a handful of its record 1,700 candidates over links to groups such as the BNP and alleged racist and homophobic comments.

Mr Farage, whose party has said it does not condone ‘unpalatable views’, told the programme UKIP is ‘the only party in British politics who does not allow former members of the BNP to even join us as a member, let alone be a candidate.

‘Labour has sitting councillors who are former BNP members, the Tories have BNP members in their party, we forbid it.’

In a high-risk manoeuvre yesterday, Mr Clarke took aim not just at UKIP leaders and their candidates, but also at voters who are considering backing the party, many of whom are disillusioned Tory supporters angry about David Cameron’s stance on immigration and gay marriage.

UKIP called the Conservative onslaught a ‘morally reprehensible smear campaign’ last night – but the party has also faced a series of damaging claims about the background of some of its candidates.

Asked whether he agreed with David Cameron’s 2006 assessment that UKIP is packed with ‘fruitcakes and closet racists’, Mr Clarke replied: ‘I have met people who satisfy both those descriptions in UKIP.

'Indeed, some of the people who have assured me they are going to vote UKIP I would put in that category. I rather suspect they have never voted for me.'

He said he was sure that ‘most of the Ukip people are perfectly nice when they are having a drink’ but added: ‘It is very tempting to vote for a collection of clowns or indignant, angry people, who promise that somehow they will allow us to take your revenge on people who caused it.’

Mr Clarke dismissed UKIP as a protest party, saying: ‘It is against the political parties, the political classes, it’s against foreigners, it’s against immigrants but it doesn’t have any very positive policies, they don’t know what they’re for.’

He criticised UKIP for putting up candidates who have been exposed as former members of the racist British National Party or the English Defence League, who have been kicked out of the party in the past week.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ists-jibe.html
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 29th, 2013 #79
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
UKIP’s affiliated LGBT group has condemned two of the party’s local election candidates for their alleged public displays of homophobia and biphobia.

Last Friday, PinkNews revealed that a homophobic and biphobic election leaflet in Staffordshire was being posted through letter boxes on behalf of Stone Rural UK Independence Party candidate David Nixon.

The leaflet, which was sent to PinkNews by a reader, mocked bisexuals and blasted the government’s same-sex marriage bill, warning it would lead to explicit “Homosexual Sex Education”.

Revelations then surfaced regarding UKIP Gloucestershire County Council candidate John Sullivan, who has been accused of writing on Facebook that regular physical exercise in schools can “prevent homosexuality” and congratulated Russia for banning gay pride events by saying: “Well done Russia”.

The comments have now been removed.

Both Labour and the Liberal Democrats’ LGBT groups criticised UKIP over the revelations.

In a statement, LGBTQ in UKIP said on Facebook:

The LGBTQ in UKIP committee is extremely angry and disappointed by the comments made by a small number of UKIP local candidates, particularly David Nixon and John Sullivan.

These candidates, who haven’t been vetted and produce their own campaign literature, have let down the hundreds of outstanding UKIP candidates who in no way indorse the comments made, and the Party in general.

Whilst we believe in freedom of speech, this does not mean UKIP should therefore accommodate people with obnoxious beliefs such as suggesting LGBTQ people are inferior or abnormal.

We are informed by the Party that they are thoroughly investigating each of the cases raised by the media. It is unlikely these investigations will be concluded before Thursday.

It is our belief that these candidates should have the UKIP whip drawn from them, and that future candidates are properly vetted and literature officially approved before being published.

The candidates named above shall be receiving direct correspondence from us in the near future.
htt p://ww w.pinknews.co.uk/2013/04/29/ukip-lgbt-group-extremely-angry-and-disappointed-by-the-obnoxious-beliefs-of-david-nixon-and-john-sullivan/
Quote:
Labour and the Liberal Democrats’ LGBT groups have criticised UKIP over an election leaflet that mocks bisexuals and attacks same-sex marriage.

Seeking to promote UK Independence Party (UKIP) candidate David Nixon for the Staffordshire ward of Stone Rural in Thursday’s local elections, the leaflet, which was sent to PinkNews by a reader, lists several factually incorrect statements by the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child (SPUC), an anti-abortion lobby group which is opposed to equal marriage.

The statements include: “Explicit sex education is occurring in our children’s schools. When the ‘Gay Marriage Bill’ becomes law, explicit ‘Homosexual Sex Education’ will have to be taught to keep schools within the law of the 2010 Equality Bill.”

The leaflet illustrated a cartoon of a young boy holding a placard which said: “Rights for Bi-Sexuals We demand the right to marry With (at least) one man and one woman.”

Below it said: “Where will it end? – A child should have the right to a mother and a father.”

Adrian Trett, chair of LGBT+ Lib Dems commented: “The message on UKIP’s leaflet clearly expresses their contempt for universal human rights. The tired clichés regarding bisexuals are beyond insulting and highlight their complete and utter bigotry. Sex education helps young people understand LGBT issues, which is crucial in the battle to eradicate homophobia, biphobia and transphobia in our schools. UKIP’s leaflet undermines the efforts that are being made in this essential area.”

LGBT Labour co-chair, Hannah Blythyn added: “This week we’ve learnt that one of UKIP’s candidates is also a member of the BNP and now we find them distributing homophobic literature. If Nigel Farage wants his party to be credible he must apologise and make sure that his party knows this literature is completely unacceptable. They are totally out of touch with modern Britain.”

Meanwhile, UKIP Gloucestershire County Council candidate John Sullivan has been accused of writing on Facebook that regular physical exercise in schools can “prevent homosexuality” and has congratulated Russia for banning gay pride events by saying: “Well done Russia”.

Mr Sullivan’s comments were made on a Facebook group called “Traditional Britain Group.”

The party is investigating six candidates over links to the BNP and other far-right racist groups.

Ken Clarke, Conservative minister without portfolio, told Sky News on Sunday: “They of course have not been able to vet their candidates. Fringe right parties do tend to collect a number of waifs and strays…

“The trouble with UKIP really is it is just a protest party – it is against the political parties, it is against the political classes, it’s against foreigners, it’s against immigrants. It doesn’t have any very positive policies – they don’t know what they are for.”

Mr Clarke’s comments came after UKIP accused the Conservatives of running a “morally reprehensible” smear campaign against its would-be councillors by trawling through their Twitter and Facebook posts.
ht tp://ww w.pinknews.co.uk/2013/04/29/ukip-blasted-over-insulting-and-disturbing-homophobic-election-leaflet/
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 30th, 2013 #80
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,247
Bev
Default

Quote:
A UK Independence Party election candidate has been caught on camera apparently making a Nazi salute – bringing further scandal to the party ahead of Thursday’s local elections.

UKIP leader Nigel Farage admitted the latest revelations about members 'doesn't look very pretty' as he was again forced on to the back foot over the failure to vet people standing in this week's local elections.

The latest photo to emerge is of Alex Wood, candidate for Blackmore Vale in Somerset, which was posted on Facebook, along with racist comments. In another picture, part of a series of images, the 22-year-old clenches a knife between his teeth against a backdrop of the Union Flag.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...zi-salute.html
Quote:
Tory voters tempted to switch to the UK Independence Party in Thursday’s local elections are being warned they risk letting in Labour.

The Conservatives say a surge in support for Nigel Farage’s Eurosceptic party will merely help the pro-EU Ed Miliband.

They hope to quell the turmoil in their own ranks by stressing a ‘Vote Farage, get Miliband’ message to counter the growing support for UKIP, who are likely to win more votes than the Liberal Democrats.

The move follows Ken Clarke’s scathing attack on UKIP as a party of ‘clowns’ supported by racists and ‘indignant, angry people’. Senior Tory figures expressed dismay yesterday at the veteran Cabinet minister’s unscripted remarks.

They warned that attacking UKIP in such intemperate terms and insulting voters tempted to back them is likely to prove counterproductive. Tory strategists claim to be encouraged that voters fed up with the Government are not turning to Labour and are instead expressing a protest vote through a Right-wing alternative.
Quote:

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...IP-threat.html


Labour leader Ed Miliband wants to block the UK Independence Party from having a role in the TV leader's debates, it emerged today.

The Tories were already opposed to the idea of giving UKIP leader Nigel Farage equal status ahead of the 2015 general election.

Labour had thought UKIP would only damage the Tories' election hopes.
Block: Ed Miliband, pictured, wants to prevent UKIP's Nigel Farage from joining leaders of the main three political parties in the election TV debates
Block: Ed Miliband wants to prevent UKIP's Nigel Farage, pictured, from joining leaders of the main three political parties in the election TV debates

Block: Ed Miliband, left, wants to prevent UKIP's Nigel Farage, right, from joining leaders of the main three political parties in the election TV debates

But strategists now fear UKIP's 'brand of anti-politics could damage all three main parties in unpredictable ways,' The Guardian reported.


Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg enjoyed a surge in the polls in the 2010 polls as a relatively unknown figure alongside David Cameron and Gordon Brown.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-debates.html


and from Richard Littlejohn:

Quote:
The problem with Ken is that he doesn’t extend that courtesy to others. He has nothing but contempt for those who believe Britain’s future would be better outside the European Union.

He epitomises the arrogance of the political class who are convinced they, and they alone, are uniquely equipped to rule. Clarke was at it again over the weekend, echoing Call Me Dave’s description of UKIP supporters as ‘fruitcakes and closet racists’.

He went on to say: ‘It is tempting to vote for a collection of clowns or indignant, angry people.’ UKIP, he alleged, is ‘against political parties, the political classes, it’s against foreigners, it’s against immigrants,’ blah, blah, blah.

It was the typical, lazy response of traditional politicians towards anyone who threatens their cosy consensus.
If voters really are ready to - as Nick Clegg claims - back UKIP only because they want to say 'to hell with mainstream politics', who can blame them?

If voters really are ready to - as Nick Clegg claims - back UKIP only because they want to say 'to hell with mainstream politics', who can blame them?

Yes, UKIP does have its fair share of nutters. All political parties harbour a variety of extremists.There are plenty of Tories who could be described as ‘closet racists’. What are the Lib Dems if not a whole pantry full of ‘fruitcakes’?

As for Labour, the party is bankrolled by a neanderthal trades union leader who wants to take Britain back to the days of general strikes and public ownership and led by a weirdo last seen playing footsie with George Galloway, a freak show turn who has never met an Arab dictator he doesn’t like.

If voters really are ready to — as Nick Clegg claims — back UKIP only because they want to say ‘to hell with mainstream politics’, who can blame them?

To paraphrase the Monty Python ‘Romans’ sketch: what have the mainstream parties ever done for us?

So-called ‘mainstream’ parties monopolise politics and reject any opinion which doesn’t chime with their narrow orthodoxy.

OK, so UKIP may not have a forensically honed manifesto containing policies for everything from the funding of diversity workshops to transgendered toilet facilities.

But getting the hell out of the EU, scrapping the Yuman Rites Act and dismantling ridiculous, ruinous wind farms is a start.

Whoever thought that in the 21st century we’d have an energy policy which includes automatically turning off our fridges by remote control rather than building power stations or exploiting our untapped resources of shale gas? All so that politicians can burnish their ludicrous ‘green’ credentials and feel good about saving the polar bears?

Ask yourself this: who is the real extremist — the politician who wants to give Abu Qatada board and lodging for life or the one who would rather put him on the first plane to Jordan?

What’s extreme about wanting to make our own laws, set our own taxes, control our own borders?
Above all, most people just want politicians to listen to us for a change. Democracy in Britain is in a perilous condition.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...allot-box.html


They've really got it in for UKIP, haven't they?
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:45 PM.
Page generated in 0.20514 seconds.